I have a random spelling question: I have a British narrator ordering Krispy Kreme products in the United States. Should I use the US spelling (Donuts) or the British spelling (Doughnuts)?
I'm inclined to use the US spelling, as he's ordering a US product in the US. But using the British spelling would emphasise his difference to the environment (which I've been doing with speech patterns and expressions).
Thoughts?
Is he speaking in his British accent or an American accent? A British speaker in the US would be speaking in a British accent.
To keep his British accent consistent with his british identity, it should be spelled Doughnut.
If the narrator is supposed to be explicitly British, I would stick with British spellings.
Interesting question. Waiting to hear what others think.
I would never have thought to do that. If I were writing for an American audience (and you have to choose one even if your readers are worldwide), I would use American spelling throughout no matter what nationality the character is.
I would use American spelling throughout no matter what nationality the character is.
As mentioned elsewhere, it's the sixth book in the series that has been primarily set in the Uk with British English up to now. Obviously, British English is easier for me as it's what I use every day. Suddenly having the narrator switch to US English would feel wrong. Instead, I'm trying to highlight the differences in narration and dialogue.
But then, I'm also trying a lot in this book that is 'not normal', and it'll be interesting to see eventually whether it works for the audience.
I have a random spelling question: I have a British narrator ordering Krispy Kreme products in the United States. Should I use the US spelling (Donuts) or the British spelling (Doughnuts)?
Unless you want to tie yourself in metaphorical knots, the story should be written in the language of the narrator. Having said that, 'donuts' is widely used in the UK nowadays so there should be minimal pushback if you use it.
Having said that, Tesco's website says eg 'Doughnuts ; Krispy Kreme Doughnuts 4 Pack · £8.99'. However I'm almost certain I've seen 'donuts' in-store.
AJ
the story should be written in the language of the narrator
I disagree. It should be written in the language of the targeted readers.
A novel that takes place in France with a French narrator published by a U.S. publisher for an American audience would not be written in French.
I would think spelling (Brit vs American) would follow the same logic.
I disagree. It should be written in the language of the targeted readers.
A novel that takes place in France with a French narrator published by a U.S. publisher for an American audience would not be written in French.
Good point.
I would think spelling (Brit vs American) would be the same.
That might be the exception that proves the rule. They're both English, but using British English would emphasise the narrator's Britishness. The same might apply to regional variants of French, too.
AJ
A novel that takes place in France with a French narrator published by a U.S. publisher for an American audience would not be written in French.
Case in point - The first Harry Potter book even had its title changed for the US market.
Unless you want to tie yourself in metaphorical knots, the story should be written in the language of the narrator. Having said that, 'donuts' is widely used in the UK nowadays so there should be minimal pushback if you use it.
This particular book is the 6th in the series. The first five were all set in the UK and used UK English, so the narrator suddenly switching to US English would feel weird. I've got him correcting himself at times (For example, he has corrected himself in the narrator from "to the car park--sorry, I mean 'parking lot.' So I *think* I'm dealing with the 'fish out of water' aspect of transplanting the story to the Southern States reasonably well. I hope. And I'm probably overthinking the donut/doughnut thing, but that's what I do. Overthink.
"to the car park--sorry, I mean 'parking lot.'
That's not a spelling difference. It's more a language thing, like "boot of a car" vs "trunk of a car".
By the way, what do you mean by "the narrator?" Do you mean a story written in 1st-person and it's the 1st-person narrator telling the story in the narrative part, or do you mean the dialogue that's within double quotes?
As to spelling, it doesn't matter. The spelling is for the reader. If the reader knows the narrator is British, spelling like a Brit wouldn't add anything. It might even detract. I remember thinking that "tyre" was a misspelled word until I found out it was the Brit spelling of "tire."
And let's compound the problem. There's spelling differences, but also punctuation differences. As I did in my earlier question about the narrator, Americans put the ? inside the double quotes. Brits put it outside (which, btw, I think is better). And Americans have a period for the abbreviation of "mister" ("Mr."). Things like that.
I would put spelling and punctuation in the same boat.
Now language and dialect are a different beast from spelling. Even in my example of a novel taking place in France with a French narrator, there would probably be a lot of French words sprinkled throughout for "flavor." Of course those would be italicized to indicate they're a different language. Using "boot" instead of "trunk" wouldn't be italicized. It's not a foreign word.
My opinion is that the story should continue to use the same spelling as the first five, for narration and quoted speech. If he reads something written by an American, it makes sense for that to use U.S. spelling.
Set in the South, of course you need to use the British spelling of "y'all."
By the way, what do you mean by "the narrator?" Do you mean a story written in 1st-person and it's the 1st-person narrator telling the story in the narrative part, or do you mean the dialogue that's within double quotes?
It's first-person POV, and the narrator frequently addresses the reader. So things like the car park/parking lot are him acknowledging the differences between what he's used to and what he's experiencing now.
Americans put the ? inside the double quotes. Brits put it outside (which, btw, I think is better)
Got to say, I'm 51 now, and I've never done this. It's not how I was taught at school, and it's not what I see in published fiction. In fact, the first time I ever saw anyone mention it was on here. When I looked it up, apparently, it's an academic thing, not a fiction thing.
Thoughts?
Far too many.
Incidentally,I don't know about the rest of the world, but doughnut is also a term of endearment in the UK*.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Edit:Added one or two dots.
*I might be lying about that. Ever so slightly...
Doughnut is also a vehicular manoeuvre associated with those who wear baseball caps the wrong way round.
AJ
The true joy of British English is that most Brits can turn pretty much any word into both a term of endearment and an insult. It's all in how you say it.
"You doughnut," I said with a warm smile = You're an idiot, but I love you.
"You complete and utter doughnut!" = You're a moron and resent having to deal with you.
"You complete and utter doughnut!"
"Bless your heart." Is the way a Southerner would politely say that.
The real joy is that it works with any word. Just put "Absolute", "utter", "total" or "Complete" in front of any word, and you've got a proper British insult.
You utter Haribo! You total Mousepad! You complete spanner! You absolute grape!
You utter Haribo! You total Mousepad! You complete spanner! You absolute grape!
The Daily mail calls Keir Starmer an utter lawyer ;-)
AJ
"Utter barrister" was a standard term for the junior lawyers at the Court of King's Bench before they consolidated the courts in the 1840s.
The Daily mail calls Keir Starmer an utter lawyer ;-)
Well, in fairness...
Hey, even the Daily Mail occasionally gets something right.
Here's an interesting article on differences between US and UK spelling from the perspective of publishing.
https://www.lisapoisso.com/2017/12/06/american-vs-british-english/
Here are some snippets from the article:
But in publishing, conventions of usage characteristic of regional language (whether that's American English, British English, Australian English, Canadian English …) are handled with more care. Amazon has been known to warn authors and even remove books from sale due to "errors" in books in cases of mixed American vs. British English. It's an important detail for professionally published books.
We don't want your readers calling the whole thing off either, but that's what can happen when a writer pulls the audience out of a story by peppering the sentences with unexpected inconsistencies.
And that's where spelling variations can be problematic.
Here's the thing. Your preferences and my nuances mean nothing. When it comes to novel craft, it's all about the reader.
I'm not saying readers aren't flexible. If a novel's written in British English, fine. American English, no problem. But a mixture of the two? The reader who doesn't know the variants or industry-recognized standards won't notice and won't care. They'll bend any which way.
The problem is the readers who do know. They won't see your preferences; they'll see mistakes. They'll think you didn't hire an editor, or you did but you didn't take the editor's advice, or you did but the editor was rubbish.
Ask yourself this—do you want your readers thinking about the degree to which you invested in quality control for your novel, or do you want them immersing themselves in the world you've built and the characters who move around in it?
If you're serious about building a loyal audience … Be consistent and respect convention. Spell in a way that'll keep their attention on your story.
Now since this is the 6th book in a series and the others use British spelling, why would you change that now? Just use British spelling throughout like the other books.
Now since this is the 6th book in a series and the others use British spelling, why would you change that now? Just use British spelling throughout like the other books.
Generally, I haven't changed. I'm just overthinking the donut (or doughnut).
I guess it's because it's a product. I couldn't have my narrator buy a pasty in Nashville. And the biscuits at breakfast are not Jammy Dodgers. So that box of sugary goodness from the Seven-Eleven must be a donut, mustn't it? From Tesco, it's a doughnut. But there isn't a Tesco in Nashville.
Like I said, I'm overthinking it.
From Tesco, it's a doughnut. But there isn't a Tesco in Nashville.
They're both the same thing, just spelled differently. They even are pronounced the same.
Remember the article saying: "The problem is the readers who do know. They won't see your preferences; they'll see mistakes. They'll think you didn't hire an editor, or you did but you didn't take the editor's advice, or you did but the editor was rubbish."