hey, derek, (by the way, now addressing some of the things you said in
your earlier post...)
i agree with you that the more spellings are changed they start to look
less and less english. i find that i'm favoring the germanic ways of
spelling rather than romanic. in my opinion germanic phonetics seem to
most clearly convey standard english pronunciations most of the time.
i also believe that in order to bring consistency into english spelling
we have to pretty much choose germanic or romantic as our basis and
then just go with it. one of the major things i think english spelling
is lacking is consistency. therefore, i think increasing the
consistency of english spelling should be a major priority in any
reform that is considered.
fone'tik translation:
hae, derek, (bie the wae, nou adre'sing sum ov the thingz ue sed in uer
erlee-er poest...)
ie agree' with ue that the moer spelingz ahr chaenjd thae stahrt too
luk les and les english. ie fiend that iem faevoering the jerma'nik
waez ov speling rather than roema'nik. in mie opi'nyen jerma'nik
fone'tiks seem too moest kleerlee konvae standerd english
pronunsee-ae'shenz moest ov the tiem. ie ahlsoe belee'v that in oerder
too bring konsi'stensee intoo english speling wee hav too pretee much
chooz jerma'nik or roema'nik az our baesis and then just goe with it.
wun ov the maejer thingz ie think english speling is laking is
konsi'stensee. thaerfoer, ie think inkree'sing the konsi'stensee ov
english speling shud bee a maejer prie-oe'ritee in anee refoerm that iz
konsi'derd.
|
