Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Education > Language English Spelling Reform > Why Reform?
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 1 of 4 Topic 60 of 144
Post > Topic >>

Why Reform?

by iain_inkster@[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Iain) Sep 3, 2004 at 07:24 AM

Why alter the spelling of the English language when it makes perfect
sense? The only flaw I have found is words that have two completely
different meanings such as "wind", and "tip".

Slightly ahead of French, and far ahead of Celtic languages, English
spelling does a nearly perfect job of conveying information.

It also looks nice.

As for the quibbles about phoneticisation, there is an issue of
futility and one of pointlessness to consider:

Trying to phoneticise English spelling in accordance with modern
pronunciations is like attempting to solve an impossible rubix-cube.
Certainly it is easy if the reformer considers the written word as
merely a concise form of sound recorsion, but that is not the
case(hence all aspects of spelling that are not manifest in speech
such as spaces between words, etcetera.

Pronunciation is fleeting in time and diverse in space. 

If everyone considered it correct to pronounce "ratio" as
"rai-tee-oh", then after a couple of generations the pronunciation
would have reverted back to "rai-shee-oh" because it is easier to
pronounce. In this sense, "ray-shee-oh" is contained nicely within
"R.A.T.I.O"

Therefore, most unphoneticness is emergent, rather than anomylous, and
tem****ary rather than permenant, and flucuant, rather than
standardised.

Modern spelling acts as a retainer for how far unphoneticness can go
and now scarcely changes, especially in the digital age.

If an American says "lab-ratory" and a Briton says "Lab-oratry", it's
fairly clear to everyone which sequence of letters he is referring to.
Some people say "evry" and some "every", but this is emphasis and not
a case for spelling reform. Modern spelling is now the medium via
which the English language is standardised.

I produced for myself "phoneticisation", without any memory of having
heard the word, but would consider it silly to replace the "C" with an
"S".

I'll reckon that even Latin, famous for its phoneticness, had it's
missing vowels and glottal stops amongst the people of Italy B.C..
Keeping the spelling proved worthwhile, however.

Also note that in Wales it is common to hear "question" said in the
letter-for-letter way, and in Scotland "heart" is sometimes "heert",
as the spelling suggests.

~Iain
 




 4 Posts in Topic:
Why Reform?
iain_inkster@[EMAIL PROTE  2004-09-03 07:24:37 
Re: Why Reform?
"Derek Jensen"   2005-01-12 15:35:46 
Re: Why Reform?
Michael Mendelsohn <in  2005-01-13 16:37:07 
Re: Why Reform?
David Barnsdale <daivi  2005-01-16 13:51:05 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Wed Jul 9 1:02:05 CDT 2008.