Hi, I have a question. Which English reflects more the English Literature...American or British English? Thanks a lot.
American English better reflects British literature, and vice versa.
In business it is entirely the other way around.
PS. I know I'll get in trouble for saying that. But in truth everyone has their own answer to your question.
Last edited by abaka; 16-Jan-2009 at 03:48.
English literature is by definition English. American literature is by definition American. There are many fine examples of both. To say that AmE reflects English literature better than BrE or that BrE reflects American literature better than AmE, is patently nonsense.
Nonsense, you say. The way I understood the question, evelio asked whether British or American literature represents the mainstream of English literatute as a whole. That is really a matter of opinion! And as for the cross-reflection, it was obviously a bad joke. But consider the obsession with the two forms of English that was so common a century or so ago -- mostly in the newspapers, true, but also in fiction to some extent. In detectives, for example. Remember the bizarre way Agatha Christie's American characters talked in the twenties and thirties, and how Raymond Chandler always pontificated about the pseudo-British speech of his servants and snobs?
Are you really suggesting that American literature best represents English literature as a whole? Frankly I am astonished and a bit insulted.
But there may well be some lovers of American literature who will argue, and will find better arguments than patriotic bombast, that the American literature represents a more linear evolution of the common literature pre-1776 than the subsequent British writings.
I had no intention to offend, believe me.
They may well argue that, but it is completely unfounded, would you like me to give you a list of British, Irish, Indian etc. writers since 1776?
The original question seems to question whether it is the form of English grammar used that can be the basis for judging the quality of the literature. As bhaisahab says, this is patently nonsense, and citing old whodunnits is not good evidence to the contrary.