The UK vers. Vs. the US vers.

[m0nkieE_x3]

i was just wondering..
HOW much more different if the Uk hp books from the US hp books?

i mean.. :smile: teehee.. i live in newyork
and i've read them good ol' harry potter books about 5 times each..
and err yea..
is the wording different in the 2 books?
like one i've noticed is "bogey"
when harry and ron take on the troll.

in my book it says "booger"

so.. yea.. i think i just answere dmy own question..



ANYWAY.. :eyebrows: haha.. any other differences? which vers do u perfer

;D

[miri]

This actually came up in a thread in the Great Hall... one more death? (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9415)

I'm sure there are lots of other differences you only pick up on when you start examining the text of one book closely, then realise the supposed hint is different in another version...

[lanifiel]

Hi there m0nkieE_x3,

First off, welcome to the Boards :welcome: It's always good to see a new face. But I'd like to mention that we have a great mix of people on the boards, some of whom English is not their first language, so please make an effort to write in proper non-abbreviated English to help them out. That means Capitalize the correct words and type out full words not just letters.

That being said, I find the differences to be extremely minor and only used on occasions where understanding would not happen.

lanifiel

[Doggy]

I've got the British version and I've read parts of the American version. Seriously, there doesn't seem to be much of a difference, just small parts (except the Philisopher's Stone/Sorcerer's Stone thing)

[JenBluffheid]

This (http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/strictly_british1.html) site should help you out -- it's the exact question you're asking.

[Puffskein]

There's another table on the Lexicon that details all the changes in each book - changes of wording as well as British/American words.

[Justin Etre]

I don't think that there are any major differences, asside from dumbing down the title to the first book, and culture based words liky booger/bogey

[Aldawen]

There really aren't any differences besides a few words that have been changed. Also, with each new book, there are fewer and fewer changes made.

[Justin Etre]

Question:Do Americans feel like they have grown to know and understnad Britain and the Britsih through the HP books?

[sarcasticx514]

Originally posted by Justin Etre (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=349003#post349003))
Question:Do Americans feel like they have grown to know and understnad Britain and the Britsih through the HP books?


Hm, I'm from New York, by the way. :clappy:

But, do I feel like I've grown to understand Britain? I've learned basic things, like your Bonfire Night holiday, and how some private schools work(Governers, and Governess, Headmasters, Headmistresses), somewhat about your government(Parliament, your Prime Ministers, Queens & Kings), your way of speaking, but other than that? Not, really. The only things I know firmly about you guys, is world history, and that is from American views, which also can be a little...erm, pre-judged? (Remember the American Revolution.)

I would love to go over there myself though. In fact, after I'm 18, and if I saved enough money, I always wanted to go over there for a year. Hopefully, in the next two years, that will happen. Also, hopefully I will learn some more in the next few books, and we all enjoy Harry Potter together. Until next time. :grouphug: :p

[Cat]

Originally posted by Aldawen (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=348977#post348977))
There really aren't any differences besides a few words that have been changed.


Actually, there are a couple of re-arranged and re-written sentences. Sometimes it is a case of US grammar being different. Other times it's a total mystery.

[WhiteSlash]

The grammer is a little different and the words are spelled a little different. Not all of them, but you know the favor is favour and center is centre. Not much different.

[Hermione]

The differences in the two versions are mainly phrase changes that if left the way they are in the British version wouldn't make sense to Americans. Like jumper which was changed to sweater.

[Justin Etre]

Originally posted by WhiteSlash (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=351241#post351241))
The grammer is a little different and the words are spelled a little different. Not all of them, but you know the favor is favour and center is centre. Not much different.


That really screwed me up when I first started posting here. I wanted to put the text in the centre of the page and I wondered why the thing wasn't working. Hours later I realised that I had been using the English spelling, and that this was an American site.poke:

And thanks sarcasticx514 for ansering my question. I am informed

[Schlubalybub]

if there are any hints in what has been said, you are more likely to find them in the UK version, which is what JKRowling has actually written, the US version has been written to suit the US market, and a lot of the clues, i have noticed from what has been said on these boards, have been omitted or edited or something. so it that respect, the UK version of the books is a lot more reliable, but not necessarily better

[tabby]

Originally posted by Justin Etre (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=351818#post351818))
That really screwed me up when I first started posting here. I wanted to put the text in the centre of the page and I wondered why the thing wasn't working. Hours later I realised that I had been using the English spelling, and that this was an American site.poke:


I've completely given up using centre and colour options on practically every board I've posted on because I always make that mistake. My memory for that sort of thing is terrible and it frustrates me to no end. Silly Americans, they need to change their entire outlook to suit aussies. :evil:

Isn't there a list of word changes in the back of the US books now? I read somewhere that there was for GoF. Not having an American version of the book I can't check for myself.

[Annerach]

Is it true that It's stated in the UK version of PoA that Sirius's Gringotts vault number is 711? I heard that they cut it out of the US version.

[Girl]

In the UK version that I have it says that Sirius's vault number is 711. I'm not sure about what it say in the US version but I think that it was cut out.

[Annerach]

It's totally cut out of the american version. It's not fair. That sounds important.

[Girl]

I know. I'm living in Norway and here we get the US version but I buy the UK versions from Amazon UK because they are not changed so that way I can get the real story.

[Katze]

I'll be buying the American hardbacks (I can get it on release night, and I like the cover art more so than the British versions), but once all 7 books are released in paperback, I'll buy a set from the UK.

You can read the changes made to the American edition comapred alongside the original text here (http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/help.html#british), at the top of the page. Each book is listed, so you won't be missing anything.

[EvilMeghan]

Originally posted by tabby (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=351972#post351972))
Isn't there a list of word changes in the back of the US books now? I read somewhere that there was for GoF. Not having an American version of the book I can't check for myself.

Not from what I have seen. And at this stage in the game, I really don't think it's necessary. I've grown accustomed to a lot of the British phrases (and find myself loving them!). Aside from the sweater-jumper thing, there really isn't much that needs to be translated. That would have confused me to no end!! As the series goes on, I think it is less important to change the wording, as the fans who have followed it all along got a slow introduction to British English.

My favorite quote from someone in another thread: The UK and the US are two countries separated by the same language. :D

[Arabella]

I grew up in a small fishing community in Newfoundland Canada, that was made up of pretty much all English descendants so I already knew much of the British terms and slang words since my home town in Newfoundland still speaks very much like the British. A sweater to me growing up was always called a jumper. I think that had Canada released the American versions I would have been confused on some things knowing the English have different meanings for some words.

[Puffskein]

There are some changes in the US version that just seem silly, such as:

UK: Black looked at Hermione as if being spoken to politely was something he had long forgottenm

US: Black looked at Hermione as if he had never seen anything quite like her.

What was the point of that??

[Willow Rose]

Question:Do Americans feel like they have grown to know and understand Britain and the Britsih through the HP books?

This is actually a very good question. I, myself, have learned things about Britain that I did not know before. But, I also have a hard time remembering simple things that are different, ex. the car in "Chamber of Secrets" and where those in the front would be situated. The reason for confusion of course is that it's on the opposite side in the U.S.

I was looking at the Harry Potter Lexicon and saw some of the differences between the two books there and am glad that some of the words had been changed since I wouldn't have understood them at all in their native English/Great Britain dialect.

These are a few examples from PS/SS:
bobble hats meaning bonnets
cooker meaning stove
rounders meaning baseball

That doesn't even include that I'd have to keep reminding myself that football means soccer in Great Britain. I would just keep thinking of football players and have to remind myself that it was soccer!

So, yes I've learned a little bit, but there is still a difficulty with remembering the differences. Of course, that might be easy to solve with a visit to Great Britain!

So, now my first post is done.

Brigitte

[Cat]

Willow Rose, bobble hats aren't bonnets! They're woolly winter hats.

Originally posted by Puffskein (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=354117#post354117))
There are some changes in the US version that just seem silly, such as:

UK: Black looked at Hermione as if being spoken to politely was something he had long forgottenm

US: Black looked at Hermione as if he had never seen anything quite like her.

What was the point of that??


There's another one (which I'll have to paraphrase) - 'Then Lupin spoke in an odd voice, a voice that shook with some suppressed emotion' is translated to 'Then Lupin spoke in a tense voice' for the US editions.

Also, when Ginny comes out of the main bit of the Chamber of Secrets and meets up with Ron, Ron goes to hug her. I've read that in the US editions, it misses out the fact that she pushed away from the hug. But I don't know if that's true or not.

[Alastor D]

Unfortunately it's an undeniable fact that some of these changes are pointless. Or even leading readers to wrong conclusions. Like the obstacle/murder change in GoF. However, it has been said that JKR has approved all these changes. I wonder..........

[Dedalus]

I know one of the few things she refused to let them change was "mum" into "mom", but I think a lot of the other word translations aren't important enough to worry about them being changed. It makes no difference to the books.

But the complete phrase changing ... that is stranger. I doubt J.K. Rowling specifically wanted them to change them, because if she did she would change all, but perhaps she a) doesn't know about them or b) doesn't mind because she doesn't think it makes a difference either way. Although in the two posted above I think the Bloomsbury version manages to convey more, but I don't have any copies of any books other than my Bloomsbury ones so I don't know what changes are true or not.

[Amadeus]

They have different covers..

UK and commonwealth versions have same cover



US and some other Asian countries have a different cover.


Personally, I prefer the UK/commonwealth covers....:wow:


text is same though (if there are different, I am guessing that they are some changes made by JK for later editions or printing errors.. etc.)

[Mad Macca]

Just out of interest, does anyone know who the picture of the guy on the back of Philosophers stone (UK edition) is?

[Dedalus]

Originally posted by lleugenell (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=356423#post356423))
They have different covers..

UK and commonwealth versions have same cover

US and some other Asian countries have a different cover.



Most countries have a different cover to another, some of which you can view here (http://www.mugglenet.com/bookcovers.shtml), if you like.

[JenBluffheid]

Originally posted by Mad Macca (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=356676#post356676))
Just out of interest, does anyone know who the picture of the guy on the back of Philosophers stone (UK edition) is?


Well, the person on the back of my PS edition is Dumbledore.

[Cat]

Originally posted by Alastor D (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=354730#post354730))
Unfortunately it's an undeniable fact that some of these changes are pointless. Or even leading readers to wrong conclusions. Like the obstacle/murder change in GoF. However, it has been said that JKR has approved all these changes. I wonder..........


I don't believe she sits there and goes through the US books word-to-word after they're completed. If she did that, the translator should start paying her personally.

Besides, the weirder changes might somehow be a mix up in the printing, not the translating. Only the 'murder' change looks like it must have been done on purpose, and that certainly wouldn't have been approved by JKR as it doesn't make any sense.

[Harrys_girl123]

*i feel like i know how they are a little and how they speak i am from Illinois ,Chicago if you heard of it

[Girl]

Originally posted by Mad Macca (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=356676#post356676))
Just out of interest, does anyone know who the picture of the guy on the back of Philosophers stone (UK edition) is?


It could be Dumbledore, I always thought it was him.

[Cat]

It IS Dumbledore. Hence the long white beard, weird clothing and unusual object that looks something like a cigarette lighter but isn't.

But a memory has just come back to me, telling me that different editions of the book have different people on them. One has Dumbledore the other... Quirrel? Anyway, my memory plays tricks so that might not be true in the slightest.

[Lupin Loopy]

I assume its Dumbledore (half moon glasses, long beard), but in the picture, the hair/beard is brown isnt it? , which would lead you to think that it may not be Dumbledore......

(sorry, I'm doing this from memory, I lent my book to my friend last november, and havent seen it since :( .........)

[Cat]

Originally posted by Lupin Loopy (original post (http://www.cosforums.com/a/showthread.php?postid=357239#post357239))
I assume its Dumbledore (half moon glasses, long beard), but in the picture, the hair/beard is brown isnt it?


No, it's white.

[rotsiepots]

The picture on the back of my PS is definitely Quirrell. Purple turban, brown beard, holding a book about the Dark Arts. Who else could it be? ;)

[Mad Macca]

I'm talking about this dude. I dont know if he is Quirrel. He looks too happy and jolly to me. But he is wearing a purple hat and a book. Hmmm.

[Alastor D]

Strange. The hat is not a turban. The only one smoking a pipe ever mentioned was a woman in The Leaky Cauldron (or have I missed someone?). And trousers and boots are the same that Dumbledore is wearing on the back of my book. And the overcoat has almost the same colour as Dumbledore's cloak.

[Amadeus]

I think he's supposed to be Dumbledore.....

[Lupin Loopy]

Mad Macca - thats not the picture I had on the back of my book (well, I'm pretty sure its not) *sigh* I REALLY need my book back.

I'm sure the one I had, had a long beard which was tucked into his belt. I'll try and get my book back soon so I can have a proper look............I may just be imagining the whole thing ;)

[Imperio! (Crucio!)]

no, in the old versions of the book there was a man with a short brown goatee and tash. that is nicholas flammel (spl?) i dont have the book but my friend does. then in the later prints out the piccy was changed to dumbledore.

[rotsiepots]

:yup: there were two editions of the book published -- earlier editions have the picture of "Quirrell" (the man with the brown beard, pipe and large book) and later editions have a picture of Dumbledore on the back cover.

I believe this is what the Dumbledore picture looks like (in part):

[Lupin Loopy]

ah yes, thats right, thats the picture thats on the back of my book. I must have been getting confused with the "Quirrel" picture, which DOES have brown hair/beard

[Mad Macca]

Hmm, now I think of it, it could very well be Nick Flammel

[rotsiepots]

Nicolas Flamel was 665 when he died. I'd be very impressed if he still had brown hair at that age.

Perhaps it's just a random magical person?

[Mad Macca]

But would have the elixir of life been able to make him look younger?
Yes We shall call him Ran Dom :lol:

[Fidelius]

On my copy of The Philosophers Stone" there is an illustration of Albus Dumbledore on the back.

[Schlubalybub]

or maybe Ram Don, just to give it a twist

[Jill]

The one difference that does annoy me some what is the length. The story is still the same and the words just a little different in places. Its the type set and length of book variation that bugs me. If someone only quotes a page number it does not always match what they are saying as there version is from another country. Its a nick pic I know but there was I think about a 200 page difference between the US version of OotP and the Uk version and that just makes cross referencing really difficult at times.

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

The one difference that does annoy me some what is the length. The story is still the same and the words just a little different in places. Its the type set and length of book variation that bugs me. If someone only quotes a page number it does not always match what they are saying as there version is from another country. Its a nick pic I know but there was I think about a 200 page difference between the US version of OotP and the Uk version and that just makes cross referencing really difficult at times.

Yes, that's why I like to name the chapter as well. It makes it easier.

[cleansweep11]

WIOK is right............we must put in an effert(I'm totally blanking out on the spelling of it.....argh!) to put chapter titles too.......

I love the british versions vs. the american ones...i love the british slang.......its really funky! Its really weird seeing the differences between the too books.....and just to tell y'all there's a part of Harry Potter Lexicon that shows the differences(very good!)

EDIT:And about the back of the PS book........I think its just a random guy....on the back of SS is and random picture too....it really bugs and I've never been able to figure out what it was........(then again it took me ages to figure out what the chapter picture for The Dueling Club(CoS) was......(In case you can't tell either its Sir Nick)

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

EDIT:And about the back of the PS book........I think its just a random guy....on the back of SS is and random picture too....it really bugs and I've never been able to figure out what it was........(then again it took me ages to figure out what the chapter picture for The Dueling Club(CoS) was......(In case you can't tell either its Sir Nick)

Do you mean that guy in the purple cloak? Because I always thought that was Dumbledore. Maybe I'm wrong. *thinks*

[cleansweep11]

I dno.....

[dobby_rocks]

Well JK said the chances where very small, only if a word ment something else , like Jumper, if she has used that in the US edition , she says americans would have seen Harry and weaslys in dresses

Has it made me understand british better

Hmmm a little bit like thier school systerm, Perfects which i had thought was just for the book, till i read that Prince William had been a perfect. I know a few more words then i did, and it has made me want to learn more about their slang , and customes, id love to go over there someday, and spend a few months

I plan on getting the Briitsh verison however i'll proabably wait till they are all out then i get the hardbounded set of all 7, i also want to get for US version (all 7 hardbound books)

[WeasleyIsOurKing]

Well JK said the chances where very small, only if a word ment something else , like Jumper, if she has used that in the US edition , she says americans would have seen Harry and weaslys in dresses

Heh... yes, my first thought would be, "Why did Mrs. Weasley make Harry a dress?"

[Dedalus]

It's confusing referring to the books as UK and US editions. It makes it sound like they're the only two varieties that there are. Perhaps people should refer to them as the Bloomsbury and Scholastic versions instead? Or maybe I just get easily confused.

[salem_phoenix]

Isn't there a list of word changes in the back of the US books now? I read somewhere that there was for GoF. Not having an American version of the book I can't check for myself.
Nope, I've never seen one. That would be kinda cool, though.

Is it true that It's stated in the UK version of PoA that Sirius's Gringotts vault number is 711? I heard that they cut it out of the US version.
It could be because in the USA, there is a large convenience store chain called 7-11 (Seven Eleven); so it would seem very jokey for USA readers to see that number, it would be a bit stupid. But I don't see why they couldn't just make it a different number.

I can see changing spelling and grammer for the British-English to American-English. Any more than that should not be allowed.

[Wab]

7-Elevens blight the landscape in the UK too.

The most annoying change is that from Philospher's Stone which means something and lets the alert reader pick up on things from the time Harry gets the Dumbledore card to Sorcerer's Stone which is meaningless.

I think HP Lexicon has a list of changes.

[salem_phoenix]

7-Elevens blight the landscape in the UK too.

Oh no!
I guess the change was senseless then.

I think I need to ask for the original versions as a Christmas present. There are many other books that the US editions are the same as the original UK... Roald Dahl is sticking out right now... If I could handle those books as a child, then there's no reason that HP should have be changed for Americans.

[Mundungus Fletc]

The most annoying change is that from Philospher's Stone which means something and lets the alert reader pick up on things from the time Harry gets the Dumbledore card to Sorcerer's Stone which is meaningless.
The really strange thing is that the Bloomsbury edition was already selling well in the states through Amazoon - I've heard HP described as the first internet driven best seller. So Scholastic should have known there was no need to change the title from something with great historical overtones to something meaningless.

[Emi]

I don't think they should bother changing just a few words for the American version. We have books over here in the UK that have American words in them and we don't have any trouble understanding them or anything. One thing that I really don't like is that they changed the actual title of the first book, I mean, if the publishers announced that the title for book 7 was going to be different in America, would we put up with it?

[TheGreatest]

Canada is better than either the USA or the UK.

[anabel]

In my experience British people have no trouble understanding Americans, because we get loads of American films and TV programmes. But when I was in the states people just didn't understand what I was saying when I used words such as "car park."

[Miss ERB]

well I live in Canada and we get the British versions( I have some of the books in american copies too) and I prefer the UK version because I get to learn all these British words.

Canada is better than either the USA or the UK.


ok but we have the exact same version as UK....or maybe you dont mean the books?

[anabel]

What British words didn't you know before, then?

Did they change slang words such as "git" and "pillock" (which both mean "idiot")?

[Miss ERB]

well not British words more like different words for different things..you know Headmaster/Principal. I could go on but I'd have to get my books..trust me I have no trouble at all understanding the UK copies even when I was little.

What British words didn't you know before, then?

Did they change slang words such as "git" and "pillock" (which both mean "idiot")?


I dont think they did but I dont often read my american copies...

[anabel]

Don't you have prefects in America? Or houses in a school?

[Miss ERB]

nope we dont have prefects in Canada or the United Stated( but I dont live there I just know) or houses..I had never heard of prefects until the HP books.

[Jordan]

Don't you have prefects in America? Or houses in a school?

I don't think there are prefects in the US. In fact, the boarding school idea isn't too popular in the US: most of the students get home everyday. I guess those things are more for boarding schools...

[TheGreatest]

well I live in Canada and we get the British versions( I have some of the books in american copies too) and I prefer the UK version because I get to learn all these British words.




ok but we have the exact same version as UK....or maybe you dont mean the books?

Exactly.

[hermy_weasley2]

In my experience British people have no trouble understanding Americans, because we get loads of American films and TV programmes. But when I was in the states people just didn't understand what I was saying when I used words such as "car park."

That's because here it's a "parking lot". I've only ever heard "car park" on British T.V. shows. EDIT: "Car park" makes me think of a piece of public property maintained for recreational purposes ( too many big words for winter break ) with cars in it.

Did they change slang words such as "git" and "pillock" (which both mean "idiot")?

Not that I remember, at least not "git" and neither in OoTP. Even if you didn't know what those words mean, the way they're used should give some clues. The context almost always gives it away.

I got a brochure asking if I was interested in a certain boarding school the summer after 8th grade. The girls' school had houses and prefects (the boys' portion was a military school). That's the only time I've ever heard of houses or prefects in an American school.

[xXillusion]

"car park" sounds a lot more obvious then Parking lot..
I'm not a native englis hspeaker, but like in U.S., and loads of stuff don't make sence to me here. But British makes lots of sence!

So the houses and prefects are real in U.K? Wow..you're so lucky.. I wish it was like that here, and the boarding school=Hogwarts hm? Awesome! I'd love to do that!

they left "git" in U.S. version..took me awhile to figure out what that was. I was too lazy to look it up.

[anabel]

It isn't only boarding schools in the UK that have houses and prefects. My school had both, and it was a state (US public) school. Prefect duty is boring. It just means supervising cheeky kids instead of having fun with your friends!

[Miss ERB]

well we dont have prefects or anything but in elementary school we had Safety Patrollers..I was one. Our job was during all the breaks on our day..I think mine was friday we'd have to make sure everyone was following the rules and such..The ages of my school were about 4 to 12 and my job was to look after the primary yard grades 1 to 3.


Well I'm getting off tipic but those were our "prefects" I suppose you could say.

[hermy_weasley2]

well we dont have prefects or anything but in elementary school we had Safety Patrollers..I was one. Our job was during all the breaks on our day..I think mine was friday we'd have to make sure everyone was following the rules and such..The ages of my school were about 4 to 12 and my job was to look after the primary yard grades 1 to 3.


Well I'm getting off tipic but those were our "prefects" I suppose you could say.


We had Safety Patrol-people in elementary school. You got to be one in fifth grade if your teacher chose you, and you got to wear an orange sash with a badge, stand in the hall and yell "walk" every now and then.

I have the US editions of all the books. OoTP is the least "Americanized" of all the American books, and one thing I noticed was a grammar thing. Maybe it's just my bad grammar but I noticed things like The Order were". i always thought it would be the "The Order was" because "The Order" is a collective noun and not a plural noun. Is that just me or is that a difference in US and British English?

[anabel]

I would say the Order were, because "the Order" is a group of people. But you would say either the Government is doing something or the Ministry is doing something, so either it is optional or lots of people get it wrong anyway. There are grammar rules that become obsolete for the simple reason that nobody bothers with them.

[shaggydogstail]

I have the US editions of all the books. OoTP is the least "Americanized" of all the American books, and one thing I noticed was a grammar thing. Maybe it's just my bad grammar but I noticed things like The Order were". i always thought it would be the "The Order was" because "The Order" is a collective noun and not a plural noun. Is that just me or is that a difference in US and British English?
The Order is not a collective noun it is a proper noun, as it refers to a specific, unique entity, The Order of the Phoenix. It is confusing because an "order" can be collective noun in itself, The Order (short for The Order of the Phoenix) isn't. However the use of singular verbs with collective nouns is more common in Britain than America, and it is often unclear which is correct regardless of which country you are in!

I've just realised it's nearly a quater past one in the morning and I'm writing about grammar! I really need to sort out my priorities! :rotfl:

[kenmarekestrel]

The best part about being an Aussie is that we have a firm grasp on both British and American terminology and slang. Our normal day-to-day speaking is very British in origin but our popular culture has a lot of American in it so we have no trouble reading either (plus every time we run spell check in Word it wants to put z in exercise, take the u out of flavour and change centre to center :grumble: ).

My cousin brought me a set of US HP books back from his trip to Florida about 4 months ago. I have gotten up to the start of GoF and have found heaps of differences. Its mostly grammatical and spelling but there are whole sentences missing from the UK version that were in the US version and vice versa. In CoS there is a whole paragraph missing from the UK version when Lucius Malfoy comes to the school after Harry killed the Basilisk.

Mr Malfoy almost knocked Harry over as he swept into the room. Dobby went scurrying in after him, crouching at the hem of his cloak, a look of abject terror on his face.
The elf was carrying a stained rag with which he was attempting to finish cleaning Mr Malfoy's shoes. Apparently Mr Malfoy had set out in a great hurry, for not only was his shoes half polished, but his usually sleek hair was disheveled. Ignoring the elf bobbing apologetically around his ankles, he fixed his cold eyes upon Dumbledore.
"So!" he said, "You've come back. The governors suspended you, but you still saw fit to return to Hogwarts." p334US

The bolded section is missing from p246UK.

That paragraph changed the entire scene for me and I now miss it from my bloomsbury edition. Other than that it was just small things in the first 3. I'll post more if I find them in the next 2.

[Spirit]

Don't you have prefects in America? Or houses in a school?
I haven't run into any schools with Prefects, but it's common for Middle Schools to have Houses.

I don't like the changes in the American and British versions... as the books go on, there are less and less changes though. When I first started hearing some British things, I didn't know what they meant, but I could figure them out. I mean, it really isn't that hard. How dumb do the publishers think we are?

[Erich]

IMHO, the "translated" versions for the US (UK > US english) felt too dumbed down for me. As silly as this may sound, I felt sort of robbed of part of the experience of reading the books when I saw how much was actualy changed. Take, for instance, the American term "Scotch Tape" used to replace the UK "Sellotape". Its because of the Americanization of the book that I didnt get the play on words for "Spellotape".

Now I know how the Spanish must feel anytime Diagon Ally is refered to.

[dragonlady]

For whether the Order "was" or "were" it would depend on what you're talking about.

If you're talking about "the Order" as the organization, it would be, for example, "The Order WAS a great organization." If you're talking about "the Order" as a reference to the MEMBERS of the organization, it would be, "The Order WERE preparing for a fight."

The first example is a singular, since it's talking about ONE subject, the organization called the OotP. The second is plural, since it's talking about more than one subject, the members of the Order.

Does that make more sense?

Erich, I agree that the US versions of the books are dumbed down. Look at the title of the first book... "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone". I mean... PLEEEEASE! We DO know what a Philosopher's Stone is in the US! LOL! I wonder whose brilliant idea it was to pull that one? (moan!)

[Bell_Packet]

I'd be annoyed if I had to read the altered version as well. I'd rather read the one the author wrote directly and the way they intended it. I mean I read American books, and I can usually figure out what they're talking about (eventually). Although I do have to admit I did get confused when they had peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. What you call jelly we call jam, and what you call jello, we call jelly (I think), so it was the equivalent of Americans reading 'Peanut butter and jello sandwiches'. When I first read that I was like, "They put jelly on sandwiches?!! Weird!" :rotfl: It took me a few years to figure that one out :p

We had prefects in my high school, but they were voted for by the senior students, so it was just a popularity contest anyway :rolleyes: We also had houses, but I didn't really pay any attention to them (I'm not one for 'school spirit' :grumble: ).

[Erich]

I wonder whose brilliant idea it was to pull that one?

Apparently, Arthur Levine:

http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/books/differences.html

Probably the most infamous change of all is that of the title of book one. Rowling reluctantly went along with the change, which was suggested by Arthur Levine of Scholastic Books. She now regrets her decision to allow the change, she has said, but at the time she felt that she had to go along with the advice of her editors. It never occurred to her that her books would be known the world over and that she would one day wish she could change it back. The change was made and now it's part of Harry Potter history.

:)

[Albusdaughter]

Is it true that It's stated in the UK version of PoA that Sirius's Gringotts vault number is 711? I heard that they cut it out of the US version. It's not fair. That sounds important.

Well the vault Hagrid took the Philosopher's Stone from was 713 which would have made it either next door to or across the corridor from Sirius' vault. :eyebrows: (Assuming that the vaults were sequentially numbered). Would that make Sirius' vault a high security one too? Could the proximity have any other significance? Or does Jo just like prime numbers in the 700s?! :huh:

[hermy_weasley2]

Take, for instance, the American term "Scotch Tape" used to replace the UK "Sellotape". Its because of the Americanization of the book that I didnt get the play on words for "Spellotape".

Huh? I have the US versions, and "Spellotape" was always used in mine.


And I've read several times that the reason the American books are "dumbed down" is that the American publishers are marketing the books more toward children than the British publishers. Scholastic is known for it's children's books isn't it? Or not, I may be wrong..

[weasley]

Huh? I have the US versions, and "Spellotape" was always used in mine.

I think the person ment that sellotape sounds like spellotape and scotchtape doesn't so they didn't get the joke as I think scotchtape is American.

I think it's probably better to have the UK version of the book as the words and clues haven't been tampered with.

[Da_Chinkster]

I think it's probably better to have the UK version of the book as the words and clues haven't been tampered with.

I would have to agree. If JKR was American, Im sure the American version would have to be read to get all the little hints and clues

[dirty_harry]

the english one doesn't have chapter picture surposse we can't have spoliers from them i'm australia and i get the english one i think the written in the english is better but the pictures and cover are better in america

[emily105]

I don't think there is much difference between the American version and the British version. To me, it just seems like there's just a few words that are different. From what I heard, the American version has the first book titled "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone" because of something about how Americans think that today's philosopher's would be offended by the title "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" or something like that. I don't know, I could be wrong. But anyways, there aren't very many differences between the two versions, just some different words and everything.

[Erich]

Huh? I have the US versions, and "Spellotape" was always used in mine.

... I said that the UK versions used the term "sellotape", notice the missing p, instead of the US equivilent "scotch tape". It's because of that differentation that I didnt understand the play on words "sPellotape" when I first saw it.

And I've read several times that the reason the American books are "dumbed down" is that the American publishers are marketing the books more toward children than the British publishers. Scholastic is known for it's children's books isn't it? Or not, I may be wrong..

It is, but Harry potter is known for being a chilrdens book as well, correct? seems silly to dumb down a chlildrens book for children.

[hermy_weasley2]

It is, but Harry potter is known for being a chilrdens book as well, correct? seems silly to dumb down a chlildrens book for children.

Exactly. I don't like that excuse either. The same goes for the one that says the title of the first book was changed because they thought kids wouldn't want to read about a philosopher. :shrug:

... I said that the UK versions used the term "sellotape", notice the missing p, instead of the US equivilent "scotch tape". It's because of that differentation that I didnt understand the play on words "sPellotape" when I first saw it.

I'm sorry, I'm confusing myself too much now.:scared: I read your post wrong, I think.

[Erich]

quite alright, all is well :)

[anabel]

I just discovered a major difference between the US and the UK editions of Goblet of Fire.
pg 10 American ed.
"All through our jouney I have gone over the plan in my head - My Lord, Bertha Jorkins's disappearance will not go unnoticed for long, and if we proceed, if I murder -"

"If?" whispered the second voice."if? If you follow the plan, Wormtail, the Ministry need never know that anyone else has died. You will do it quietly and without fuss... Come, Wormtail, one more death and our path to Harry Potter is clear. I am not asking you to do it alone. By that time, my faithful servant will have rejoined us--" Here is the British version.
pg 15 Bloomsbury paperback.
"All through our jouney I have gone over the plan in my head - My Lord, Bertha Jorkins's disappearance will not go unnoticed for long, and if we proceed, if I curse -"

"If?" whispered the second voice."If? If you follow the plan, Wormtail, the Ministry need never know that anyone else has disappeared. You will do it quietly and without fuss; I only wish that I could do it myself, but in my present condition ... come, Wormtail, one more obstacle removed and our path to Harry Potter is clear. I am not asking you to do it alone. By that time, my faithful servant will have rejoined us -"
That is a huge difference in meaning! What on earth were Jo and her editors thinking of! Is there a death in the US edition that was cut out of the British one? Is that bit a leftover from an earlier plotline? I'm baffled!

I always assumed the "one more curse" was the Imperio on Crouch senior. Could it be, that Jo intended to kill Crouch, then changed her mind at the last minute. Then when she sent the manuscript to her US publishers she forgot and left that passage there?

[_Lynz_]

I don't see why there has to be different versions, it just makes things more complicated

[anabel]

That's why I think this must have been an oversight. Dumbledore tells Harry that Bertha Jorkins, Barty Crouch senior and Frank Bryce are missing. Later Bertha and Frank come out of Voldemort's wand, along with Cedric, Lily and James. If there was another murder, wouldn't that victim have come out of the wand as well?

[hermy_weasley2]

I just discovered a major difference between the US and the UK editions of Goblet of Fire.
Here is the British version.

That is a huge difference in meaning! What on earth were Jo and her editors thinking of! Is there a death in the US edition that was cut out of the British one? Is that bit a leftover from an earlier plotline? I'm baffled!

I always assumed the "one more curse" was the Imperio on Crouch senior. Could it be, that Jo intended to kill Crouch, then changed her mind at the last minute. Then when she sent the manuscript to her US publishers she forgot and left that passage there?

Crouch Sr. was killed but by Crouch Jr. and not Wormtail. Voldemort says Wormtail would be doing it alone because his "faithful" servant will be returning soon enough. The faithful servant turned out to be Crouch Jr. So, I think the "death" and the "obstacle removed" are just Crouch Sr.

[shaggydogstail]

Crouch Sr. was killed but by Crouch Jr. and not Wormtail. Voldemort says Wormtail would be doing it alone because his "faithful" servant will be returning soon enough. The faithful servant turned out to be Crouch Jr. So, I think the "death" and the "obstacle removed" are just Crouch Sr.
Voldemort didn't plan to kill Crouch Snr, at least not until after his planned resurrection is completed. He wanted to keep Crouch Snr under the Imperius Curse and punishes Wormtail when Crouch Snr escapes. Crouch Jnr "had" to kill his father when he escaped and tried to contact Dumbledore.

This could be the origin for the "mistake" if that's what the discrepancy is though.

[anabel]

I believe that Jo had a tight deadline for GoF. I also think that the first chapter, which has confused more people than any other, was rewritten many times. In my opinion, if you look carefully you can see traces of bits that were edited out. Like the above discrepancy, or the fact that Frank Bryce thinks Voldemort is planning "more murders", when this is not mentioned in the British version.

We know that the opening chapter of PS/SS was written loads of times, and each was rejected by Jo for giving too much away too soon. The first chapter of GoF contains loads of hints that don't tell you much on the first reading. What does Voldemort look like? How did he get a body? Who is Bertha Jorkins? It starts 50 years ago, then jumps to the present, and then it's all a dream anyway! It must have been really complicated to write!

I suspect that when Jo was editing the US version she may have forgotton what it was she finally decided, or that a piece of an older version (in which there was another murder) slipped though.

[Firebolt_2007]

I've read the US and UK editions of all 5 books. I'm an American, so I'm partial to the US chapter art and covers, but I find the UK editions to be better because they are much more authentic. These books are set in the UK, about Britons and by a Briton. Therfore the UK editions in all their glory are the better and the way Harry Potter books are meant to be.

I think there shouldn't have been any American editions released. There really is no point to them, and in my opinion the American editions insult our intellegence. British editors must find us really stupid to think that we need our own set of these books in our own "language" with "translations" in them of only a few words and phrases that happen to be in our own native tounge. Even if you are the most uncultured American, you can still get the jist of what the British phrases, slang, and cultural referances mean if you have the abilty to read between the lines and have the capacity for abstract thought. The point still gets across even if you are not completely familiar with the words they choose. And chances are you have at least heard these phrases. We all don't lay on the couch all day watching Jerry Springer and eating like pigs.

[shaggydogstail]

anable - this whole discrepancy forms part of Blacks Beauty's theory that Voldemort was planning to kill Sirius, but failed to do so in GoF - it's over on the All About Sirius Black thread in the History of Magic if you are interested.

It could be a slip-up in the editing as you suggest - given the complexity of the scenes that is entirely possible. But it also gives room for plenty of conspiracy theories too - which are a bit more fun I think, even if they do end up in Mark Evans territory!

[anabel]

Hmmm! Food for thought! Thank you!

[Iceager]

Hmm... I've seen people wonder whose death Voldemort was planning in the beginning of GoF, and I remember being confused. Now I see that in the US version he is planning a murder, while this is not the case in the UK copy I have. I think this is a case of JKR correcting and updating the texts for the UK edition, but the corrections not being followed in the US and international editions.

As for me, I mix aspects of UK English and US English all the time! I think my English confuses friends from both sides of the Atlantic, especially as Americans think my accent is British and Brits think my accent is American... I must admit though that I didn't know what a 'jumper' was to Americans until reading this thread and doing some quick Googling. A jumper has always been a sweater to me...

[SnorkackCatcher]

Just out of interest, does anyone know who the picture of the guy on the back of Philosophers stone (UK edition) is?I'm fairly sure that's meant to be Dumbledore (with the Put-Outer in his hand).

[anabel]

It's definitely Dumbledore on my copy. It's this pic here:

[Unicorn21]

Someone said earlier (can't be bothered to find the quote) that rounders is the same thing as baseball which isn't true at all they are too different but similair games.

Also to me Jumper and sweater are not the same thing a Jumper is knitted and a sweater is made of synthetic material.

[GinnyLovesHarry]

ok, great, now I really need to read the uk version..... thanks.... thanks alot!!!!!! hehehe

[Magrat]

I think the man with the brown beard (in the picture someone posted a thumbnail of) was Dedalus Diggle - isn't he described as wearing a purple top hat? He's only mentioned briefly when Harry starts seeing wizards in Diagon Alley I think.
I really don't understand the title (SS/PS) change. Some changes are clearly important, like jumper/sweater, but I think changing the title was pointless. I take it they didn't change the film version for America, dubbing 'Sorcerer's' over 'Philosopher's'?!

[anabel]

I have seen a pic of someone in a top hat, who doesn't look like Dumbledore, but I wouldn't think Dedalus Diggle qualifies to star on the cover of the book - he's a very minor character!

Wasn't the film called Sorcerer's Stone? Did the kids call the stone the Philophers Stone even thought the title of the film was something else? Weird.

[Iceager]

They actually shot every scene that mentionned the philosopher's stone twice, with the actors saying 'philosopher's stone' for the international release and 'sorceror's stone' for the American release of the film.

[Claireyellen]

They shot the scenes where they say 'philosopher's stone' or 'sorcerer's stone' twice - saying each terms.

Being British (and having read the US versions too) I have to say I prefer the UK version. That's just cos I'm a traditionalist though. I have a copy of the US GoF and didn't like that it had terms like 'sneakers' in it.

I did notice (and laughed) when I read the US version and read the words 'trainers' and 'jumpers' used.

[anabel]

They actually shot every scene that mentionned the philosopher's stone twice, with the actors saying 'philosopher's stone' for the international release and 'sorceror's stone' for the American release of the film.What a waste of time! I have enough faith in American kids to think they could cope with the word Philosopher, especially when the text explains what the stone is. :rolleyes:

[Snidget66]

What does wotcher mean when tonks says to harry in OotP "Wotcher Harry"?

[Iceager]

It's just an equivalent of 'What's up' or 'Whatcha up to', like an informal greeting.

[anabel]

I always thought it was from "wotcha doing" or what are you doing, but it means Hallo. Does anyone (apart from Tonks) still use it? It was current slang in the 80's but I haven't heard it for years!

[Unicorn21]

Wotcha means hello in the same way alright means hello, when both are actually asking how are you as a hello! I don't think I've ever heard anyone say it though.

[RavenEye]

Wotcha=What cheer

My dad says it; he's from SE London.

[Isobel]

I am sure this has already been said, but isn't it ridiculous that Philosopher's stone had to be changed to the Sorcerer's Stone for the American version?

Because the Philosopher's stone is a real myth, used in a lot of books including One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez.

So did they change it because they thought that the US was too aware of this myth and so had to make it more fictional or did they just change it just to be awkward?

[Wab]

It was the idea of a senior editor at Scholastic and not objected to by JKR. In retrospect they all wish it hadn't been done.

[Emi]

I think that if they all would rather the name hadn't been changed, then they should change it back in future editions.

[FoxyKnoxy]

Well being from Canada it has been very confusing for me. The Canadian book version and movie is titled "The Philosopher's Stone" but all of the American's called it the "Sorcerer's Stone". When I seen the first movie on ABC they were calling it by their American name which was strange and very anoying!

I was worried they would have called the next HP books by different names as well. Maybe they will! Maybe HBP will actually be called "The Toenail of Icklibogg" :lol: Just kidding!

Yes I agree, they should change the American name in future editions!

[dawningoftime]

I live in the US, but my Mum is Canadian, so when I went to visit my grandparents I went and bought myself a set of the UK edition. Simply because I am use to the British terminology and tend to be a bit of a puriest when it comes to these kinds of things.