"The forces of linguistic evolution will be the only the judge that matters." I'll agree to that much, I don't like it in this instance but thats how language works - who hasn't been told off by a grandparent for "unacceptable" grammar etc. Oh, and I wasnt planing on entering, I write enough essays for uni, any spare time I'd rather ride my bike than write about it. Good luck to you too if youre going for it, I still disagree with you here but at least you seem to know what you're talking about and can string a sentence together.

That's true, language changes over time and I don't have a problem with that. New words become absorbed when more people begin to use them than object to them/simply dont use them, likewise words die out when they cease to be used. I wouldn't say "prizing" (used in this context) was a part of english - British, Canadian, US or otherwise - just yet (I had a quick google and no dictionary results brought up that meaning, in fact this page was among the first results, make of that what you will), and I guess I'm among those that would rather it stayed that way. If enough other people use it it will be absorbed into the language, but I cant see the point when as I said, its just unnecessary lengthening of a word. As yet though, it is very definitely not a "real" word - other than the present-continuous tense of the verb "to prize" meaning to treasure something. I don't think voila is a fair comparison either, thats just a shortening of "look there" in french, and is an entirely natural and sensible change. Unlike here, which just seems clumsy and inelegant. Having said that, your argument is valid - I just think that this word tends more towards "wrong" than "natural change". But thats only my opinion.