Harry Potter: British vs. American

[scullyx101]

I was talking with one of my friends recently who told me that he had started reading the Harry Potter series before it even came out in the states because a friend of his took frequent trips to London. he then went on to describe how much different they were. it's nothing about the plot (don't worry, we americans are not missing anything in that regard) but the difference lies in the way they speak and the words they use. so, essencially, the american versions are translations.

i was thinking, since i'm going to re-read them all anyway, i'd get the british versions and read those instead.

any thoughts? has anyone been able to compare the two versions to see if they're really all that different? i'm wondering if it's worth it.

 

[BooknaMug]

Sounds like an interesting idea - I've been wanting to re-read them as well so maybe I'll do the same. Be sure and let us know what you discover.

 

[steelclaw32]

scullyx101 thanks for that, reminds me sadly of my late uncle who wasn't back wards in coming forward in being a rather nasty and a disgustingly racist al la

damned bloody yanks, can't speak English never mind spell it. Nation of f'ing immigrants

Yes, well, quite enough of that right?, anyway Scully you've got me intrigued now, you said :

but the difference lies in the way they speak and the words they use. so, essencially, the American versions are translations.

would it be possible to copy and paste showing the difference of one chapter from either of the Potter stories please.

Myself, I have the "proper" versions so I'd like just for pig-iron sake to see you're intriguingly called 'American translation', I know that, for some reason, they had another fellow Brit Jim Dale, narrating an American audio-book, as apposed to the British version had the brilliant Stephen Fry; but English into English has to be a first for me. :blush:

 

[LawnTamer]

scullyx101 thanks for that, reminds me sadly of my late uncle who wasn't back wards in coming forward in being a rather nasty and a disgustingly racist al la

Yes, well, quite enough of that right?, anyway Scully you've got me intrigued now, you said : would it be possible to copy and paste showing the difference of one chapter from either of the Potter stories please.

Myself, I have the "proper" versions so I'd like just for pig-iron sake to see you're intriguingly called 'American translation', I know that, for some reason, they had another fellow Brit Jim Dale, narrating an American audio-book, as apposed to the British version had the brilliant Stephen Fry; but English into English has to be a first for me. :blush:

Jim Dale did a bloody brilliant job.

 

[Occlith]

I would think it better to read the original UK version. I read about the UK/US English versions before. Some changes are obvious - Philosopher's to Sorcerer's Stone, then there are words like lift/elevator, crisps/chips, and the like.

 

[steelclaw32]

LawnTamer, I'm sure Jim gave very good account of himself, it's just that Stephen Fry's got it down pat (for me). Anyway their both Brits and no doubt both respective countries were thrilled to bits with EITHER blokes, I just happen to have the British version of both books and audio-books version, only my preference that's all. :lol:

Occlith, now wouldn't be a bad idea, these "copyright" thingies are confusing at the best of times aren't they.?

 

[Kupov]

In Canada we get the British versions of the book, we probably get the American versions too but I have never seen them.

All it is is British slang as opposed to our slang.

 

[scullyx101]

scullyx101 thanks for that, reminds me sadly of my late uncle who wasn't back wards in coming forward in being a rather nasty and a disgustingly racist al la

Yes, well, quite enough of that right?, anyway Scully you've got me intrigued now, you said : would it be possible to copy and paste showing the difference of one chapter from either of the Potter stories please.

Myself, I have the "proper" versions so I'd like just for pig-iron sake to see you're intriguingly called 'American translation', I know that, for some reason, they had another fellow Brit Jim Dale, narrating an American audio-book, as apposed to the British version had the brilliant Stephen Fry; but English into English has to be a first for me. :blush:

I haven't read both versions yet, so i don't even know if this is the case, i'm going by what my friend said. "american translation" were his words.

 

[sparkchaser]

I've read that the American version removed entire paragraphs. I'd like to read the UK version but, with my TBR pile not getting any smaller, it's not a pressing desire at the moment.

 

[Ryouko]

I've read both versions for all the books, and the only differences I've noticed are when there's an obvious difference in vocabulary. I don't think it really changes the quality of the story though. I don't even think I would have noticed the differences if I hadn't read them so many times, and knew what the exact word was in the Amercian versions.

 

[brookiedawn]

I read somewhere, can't remember the source, that after the 3rd book (Prisoner of Azkaban), Rowling stopped writing different versions, because she felt like it was unfair to her American readers that wanted to experience Harry in his "natural habitat."