Talk:advertize
The following discussion has been moved from the page WT:FEED.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
According to http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/words/ize-ise-or-yse, this spelling is incorrect. However, the Wiktionary entry presents it as a valid spelling. I am reluctant to change anything because, while I know that "advertize" is not valid in BrE, I am less certain about AmE. The entry at advertise calls it "chiefly archaic (US)". Whatever caution or qualification is deemed necessary should be added to the entry at advertize too, because someone coming to simply check spelling validity may not bother to go to advertise. — This unsigned comment was added by 86.152.161.61 (talk) at 14:35, 23 December 2014 (UTC).
- Well William Cowper and Horace Walpole both used the z spelling, so it certainly counts as an archaic spelling in British English. It's not clear whether the z spelling is universally regarded as erroneous in US English (as it now is in British English). Merriam-Webster online doesn't include the z spelling, but Collins Dictionary does allow it as an American alternative. I agree that we need a qualification. I've added a usage note as a first suggestion, but it might need adjusting for the American position. What does the full M-W say? Dbfirs 19:45, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
- There are a few -ize spellings based on -ise spellings which are nonstandard even in American English. Surprize comes to mind, though that's also unetymological because the final -ise ending of surprise isn't a verbal suffix (supre suffixed with -ise) but based on Old French, Middle French prise, feminine form of pris (taken; seized). Renard Migrant (talk) 20:01, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
- The z is unetymological in advertize too, because it isn't advert + -ize. It's definitely not the usual spelling in American English, and if I came across it in something I was proofreading I'd certainly correct it to advertise, but the line between "misspelling" and "rare alternative spelling" is blurry. BGC Ngrams suggests advertise is and always has been about 200 times more common than advertize in US English. And advertisement is about 2000 times more common than advertizement. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:46, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- There are a few -ize spellings based on -ise spellings which are nonstandard even in American English. Surprize comes to mind, though that's also unetymological because the final -ise ending of surprise isn't a verbal suffix (supre suffixed with -ise) but based on Old French, Middle French prise, feminine form of pris (taken; seized). Renard Migrant (talk) 20:01, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Regarding the original discussion above (which says: in USA English the "s" based spelling has far greater usage than the "z" based spelling)....
(1st of two) The currently-displayed summary "chiefly archaic (US)" is phrased in an unusually cryptic manner.
But truly, the "z" spelling is: (within BrE = ) obsolete, and (within USA = ) a "target of far-away laughter" **
(2nd of two) Here is a bit of evidence which supports the original discussion.
Namely: the "s" spelling is used by a foremost USA news publication of the Ad Industry --> Wikipedia article for "Advertising_Age" trade magazine
(** Footnote: The source of this adjective phrase is song "Shine on You Crazy Diamond" by Pink Floyd)
North Alabama 000 (talk) 11:43, 11 March 2017 (UTC)