comparison of American and British English

Explicit comparison populations

Record the actual varieties and contexts represented instead of assuming that national labels describe all speakers.

1. Which geographic areas, speaker groups and reference standards are included under American and British English here? definition
2. Which differences in period, medium, genre or population prevent the two samples from supporting a direct comparison? boundary

Assessable contrast evidence

Record whether a contrast comes from observed usage, reference description or a prescriptive style rule, together with its limitations.

1. Which inspected sources or datasets support each side of the contrast, and do they describe usage or prescribe it? provenance
2. What sample sizes, denominators and uncertainty estimates support any claimed difference in prevalence? measurement
3. What conflicting observations or counterexamples limit the contrast? boundary

Bounded spelling patterns

Record candidate spelling correspondences, their attested coverage and exceptions instead of treating suffix resemblance as a universal conversion rule.

1. Which spellings represent the same lexical item and sense in the two comparison contexts? definition
2. Which words, inflected forms, proper names or quotations must be excluded from a proposed spelling conversion? boundary

Attributed written conventions

Record punctuation, capitalization, abbreviation and date-format conventions with their governing context.

1. Which evidence attributes the convention to a variety, and which evidence attributes it only to a named style guide? provenance
2. Which target convention should govern an adaptation when the audience preference and house style differ? action

Sense-specific lexical counterparts

Record counterparts at the sense level, including partial equivalence and vocabulary tied to different institutions or practices.

1. Do the paired expressions denote the same referent or sense, or only roughly analogous concepts? definition
2. In which contexts would substituting one expression for the other change meaning, register or institutional reference? boundary

Construction-specific contrasts

Record candidate differences involving tense and aspect, agreement, prepositions or complementation as construction-level claims.

1. Which grammatical function and conditioning environment define the constructions being compared? definition
2. How often does each variant occur among eligible contexts in each variety, with register and period controlled? measurement
3. Does the evidence establish a preference, an acceptability restriction or a prescribed editorial choice? boundary

Accent-scoped pronunciation

Record sound contrasts at the relevant segment, word or prosodic level with limits on accent coverage.

1. Which named accents, phonetic environments and transcription conventions define the pronunciation comparison? definition
2. Which recordings or phonetic descriptions support the proposed sound or stress correspondence? provenance
3. Which regional or speaker-level variants prevent extending this observation to the whole national variety? boundary

Situated interactional contrasts

Record evidence about expressions, turn patterns or prosody in specific activities and participant relationships.

1. Which interactional purpose and participant relationship are held comparable across the observations? definition
2. What recorded interaction or participant-interpretation evidence supports the proposed pragmatic difference? provenance

Meaning-preserving adaptation

Record the target audience, applicable style requirements and semantic checks needed before changing an expression.

1. Does the task require a specific American or British standard, or is either usage acceptable to the intended audience? action
2. Which proposed changes require contextual review because they could alter meaning, voice, quotation fidelity or a named entity? action

Contrast review triggers

Record the evidence date and conditions that would justify revising or retiring a comparative claim.

1. Which observation periods and source editions support the current comparison? provenance
2. What new evidence would trigger narrowing, revising or retiring the contrast and its adaptation guidance? action

Check these first

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

1. Which of these check these first hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Kinds and varieties

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

1. Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Identifiers and schemes

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

1. Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Real-world use

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

1. Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Failure modes and hazards

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

1. Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Regional variation

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

1. Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance

Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart

Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.

1. Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of comparison of American and British English this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance