I wasn't trying to say a spelling was wrong or right, just different according
to culture.  By the way we have that book you suggest (Baugh and Cable's 'A
history of the English Language') and it really is an excellent read like you
say.  Anyone even faintly interested in word origins would find it a
fascinating read.

Nora
Calgary, AB
CANADA

Paul Callomon wrote:

> I suggest that anyone who has enough free time to be interested in the
> Mollusc/mollusk question nip out and buy themselves a copy of Baugh and
> Cable's 'A history of the English Language'. This has recently been revised
> and reissued as a paperback, and on top of its enormous value to anyone
> interested in English is also a superb read. In there you will find all the
> reasons why these semantic squabbles are a waste of time - and this from
> me, the most pedantic nit-picker of all - and eye-openers such as :
> - in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, most people who wrote anything
> in England used French, as did most educated people in conversation
> - the American forms of words such as 'color' and 'valor' are older (in
> usage) than the fake 'Frenchified' 'colour' and 'valour', which date from
> the Regency;
> - hundreds of words in English are objective synonyms of others, having
> come into English independently via Danish, Norse, French and German.
>
> All one can say is that one can't say much about what is and isn't correct
> in English. Could be worse - could be Japanese.