Why was the Roald Dahl book called 'Charlie and the Great Glass
Elevator' when Roald Dahl was British and therefore would have used
the term 'lift' instead of 'elevator'.

Hi beebware~

Dahl's original publisher was American--and publishing for the
American market. Not too many American children know what a "lift" is.
:)

The first edition was published by Knopf of New York in 1972. The
first UK edition was published by George Allen & Unwin in 1973. For a
bit of a look at the publishing history of the book, check out its
listings at ABE.com. (Apparently, the site won't allow me to send you
a direct link to my search results, so type in the author's name and
the title of the book at this page:
http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/BookSearch)

You may also enjoy this article about the author and his creations:
http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Academy/4613/dahl.html

Keywords Used:
"Roald Dahl" "Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator" "first edition"
://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22Roald+Dahl%22+%22Charlie+and+the+Great+Glass+Elevator%22+%22first+edition%22&btnG=Google+Search

Many thanks (just really confirming what I suspected). I wonder why it
wasn't changed for the UK market then as UK children might not know
what an 'elevator' is. (See the "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's
Stone" vs "Harry Potter and the Sorcerors Stone")

Beebware~

Re: Harry Potter. This is just an opinion, but I think times have
changed a bit, and Americans are more open to British-ism now than
they were in the 1970s.

As far as changing "elevator" to "lift" for the British edition,
typically foreign rights are sold by the original publisher, and
contracts are made that prohibit any changes.

Hope this helps still further,
Kriswrite

Beebware,

I don't know whether you're British or American or neither (that would
be an interesting background to the question), but speaking as someone
who is English and is two years younger than the book, I can say I've
never considered 'elevator' as an obvious or grating Americanism -
unlike, for example, 'trash' for 'rubbish', or 'sidewalk' for
'pavement'. Although in everyday speech I'd probably always use
'lift', if someone said 'elevator' instead I don't think I'd notice
it. So the first part of my answer is that British children, at least
of my generation, without a doubt knew what an elevator was and would
not have felt uncomfortable with the word.

The second point I'd make is that 'Charlie and the Great Glass Lift'
as a title just doesn't sound as good as 'Charlie and the Great Glass
Elevator'. Certainly the rhythm of the first version isn't as
satisfying as the second; also the tone: perhaps 'elevator', because
it has more syllables, sounds more grand than the more mundane 'lift'.
After all, this was a pretty special elevator.

Just my thoughts...