Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Not sure where to post this, but I suppose at some point it would have to be taught. I struggled through First and Second Grade Spelling, then in Third Grade we started learning dictionary respelling. I was dumbfounded. Why didn't we just write THAT way? Over the years I learned more and made a hobby of collecting alphabets. I learned how other languages managed to spell their words more or less the way they sounded with the same alphabet we have and realized English could do the same. While I was intrigued by various phonetic alphabets I came to realize these would require new typewriters with keyboards too big for the fingers of the human hand to reach all the keys. What we needed was to redefine some of the letters of the alphabet we already have. It would have to be a semiphonetic alphabet rather than a true phonetic alphabet as it would be necessary for each vowel to have two sounds, but many languages did the same. By High School I had it pretty well worked out, with the chief question being do we distingush between the two vowel sounds with accent marks--such as the Romance tongues use--or by following the Germanic languages and writing the long vowels double? I decided it would be more practical to write the long vowels double.
I will re-type the above paragraph in Semiphonetic. Here are the changes:
Vowels:
a = a in "man". aa = "ah".
e = e in "the". ee = e in "bed".
i = i in "in". ii = ee in "need".
o = "aw". oo = "oh".
u = oo in "good". uu = oo in "boo".
ai = y in "my". au = "ow".
ei = "ay".
oi = oy in "boy".
yu = u in "use".
er = "air".
Consonants:
c = "sh".
j = s in "measure".
q = th in "path".
x = th in "the".
tc = ch in "chatter".
dj = j in "jump".
ul = le in "little".
ur = er in "runner".
It would take some getting used to, especially since I have followed the rules of spelling sounds the way they actually are made rather than make exceptions like "ch instead of tc" or "ow instead of au". There will be differences in pronunciation/spelling that may need to be worked out. I've taken it as far as one person can. The rest is up to you. Here is the first paragraph of this post as a sample, and you might want to put your posts in current spelling and then respell as you think it ought to be:
Naat cur hwer tuu poost xis, bet Ai sepooz at sem point it wud hav tuu bii tot. Ai stcreguld qruu Furst and Seekend Greid Speeliin, xeen in Qurd Greid wii staarted lurniin diktcenerii riispeeliin. Ai wez demfaunded. Hwai didn't wii djest rait XAT wei? Oovur xe yiirz Ai lurnd mor and meid ei haabii ev keleektiin alfebeets. Ai lurnd hau exur langweidjez manedjd tuu spel xer wurdz mor or lees xe wei xei saunded wiq xe seim alfebeet wii hav and riilaizd Inglic kud duu xe seim. Hwail Ai wez intcriigd bai veriies faaneetik alfebeets Ai keim tuu riilaiz xiiz wud riikwair nuu taipraiturz wiq kiibordz tuu big for xe fingurz ev xe hyumen hand tuu riitc ol xe kiiz. Hwaat wii niided wez tuu riidiifain sem ev xe leeturz ev xe alfebeet wii olreedii hav. It wud hav tuu bii ei seemaifaaneetiik alfebeet raxur xan ei tcruu faaneetiik alfebeet az it wud bii neeseserii for iitc vaul tuu hav tuu saundz, bet manii langweidjez did xe seim. Bai Hai Skuul Ai had it purtii weel wurkd aut, wiq xe tciif kwestcen biiiin duu wii distignwic biitcwiin xe tuu vaul saundz wiq akseent maarks--setc az xe Roomans tengz yuz--or bai folooiin xe Djurmanik langweidjez and raitiin xe long vaulz debul? Ai diisaided it wud bii mor praktikul tuu rait xe lopng vaulz debul.
I agree with you somewhat. The English language is crazy and non-sensical, with more exceptions than examples that fit the rules. But I think your version is more difficult and complicated than it would need to be. If I were to respell your post, it would look something like this:
Not shur wer too post this, but I suppose at sum point it would have to be tawt. I struggled throo Furst and Secund Grade Spelling, then in Thurd Grade we started lurning dicshunerry respelling. I was dumfounded. Why didn't we just rite THAT way?
I have always felt sorry for anyone learning English as a second language. Here is a poem that highlights the inconsistency of our language:
And if the English hadn't gone around attacking other countries from so many different continents and taking them over, spreading English by force, the language would likely be a lot simpler.
On the contrary, I would say that most of the changes to English came about from England being invaded rather than the other way around. I am speaking specifically about the Norman Conquest of 1066.
If you want to have a little fun speculating on what English would be like without the French influence, take a gander at this: https://groups.google.com/forum/mess...0/_7p8bKwLJWkJ
It's a scientific discussion of "Atomic Theory" using only Germanic roots!
That's horrible! Very hard to read -- regular English seems okay to me.
What I think it is - we don't really read by sounding out words, our eyes scan entire phrases or pieces of sentences or whole sentences. Trying to read by sounding out each letter would be very slow reading.
Of course, all new orthografies wil be difficult to read – at first. Either we need time to become accustomed to them, or we introduce them gradually. I prefer the latter, and I also prefer that we base the new on the old.
We remedy the old, make it adhere to its rules, make it regular and predictable. This would help learners, a fifth of whom at present fail to become literat (sic). This is not the case in languages that ar regular and logical, eg, Finnish, Estonian, Korean. English speakers worldwide hav this unacceptable failing.
I agree with you somewhat. The English language is crazy and non-sensical, with more exceptions than examples that fit the rules. But I think your version is more difficult and complicated than it would need to be. If I were to respell your post, it would look something like this:
Not shur wer too post this, but I suppose at sum point it would have to be tawt. I struggled throo Furst and Secund Grade Spelling, then in Thurd Grade we started lurning dicshunerry respelling. I was dumfounded. Why didn't we just rite THAT way?
I considered that when I first started, but it still has most of the problems and complications of our current system. What sound does "oo" have, "good" or "noon"? What sound does "th" have, "that" or "path"? What sound does "c" have? What sound does "a" have? (You give it 5 sounds.) What sound does "i" have? What sound does "e" have? How do we know what sound to give a letter? You have two sounds for "ou".
Our alphabet has four unnessesary consonents: c, j, q, and x. It so happens we have four consonent sounds in English that have no letter: "sh", "zh", soft "th", and hard "th". It only makes sense to assign these four unrepresented sounds to these four unnecessary letters. There are two consonent blends that we are acustomed to thinking of as one sound and we currently write them as "ch" and "j" but really "ch" is "t" + "sh" and so it can be written as "tc". "j" is really "d" + "zh" so it can be written as "dj".
One of our biggest problems is that we load down our vowels with several different sounds. Other languages have only one or two sounds per vowel. It so happens we have only ten basic vowel sounds so if we assign just two sounds to each vowel and have a simple way of distinguishing the long and short and accept that some of what we think are vowel sounds are actually dipthongs the biggest problem in English spelling will be eliminated. What we now call "long I" is really "ah" + "ee" and most languages write this sound as "ai". What we now call "long A" is really "eh" = "ee" and many languages write this as "ei". What we now call "long U" is really "y" + "oo" and other languages write it as "yu".
Is my system complicated to read? Only because you're not used to it. With a month or so of practice you'd find it as easy to read as the current system that took you years to learn.
The problem with semi-phonetic spelling is that it completely breaks down when adapting for other regions/countries. Letter combinations will have slightly differing pronunciations and words will emphasise different parts. This sort of spelling would sunder written English a la Old Norse.
Your use of X to replace "th" is arbitrary, for example. Many centuries ago, English had two letters for the sound: Þ and ð. The first character, a borrowed rune called "thorn" was stylised in the medieval era into a character resembling the letter "y". From that, we get the anachronistic saying "ye olde".
A number of spelling conventions in English actually serve a purpose. You've decided to toss that and substitute it with your own arbitrary decisions.
I agree with you somewhat. The English language is crazy and non-sensical, with more exceptions than examples that fit the rules. But I think your version is more difficult and complicated than it would need to be. If I were to respell your post, it would look something like this:
Not shur wer too post this, but I suppose at sum point it would have to be tawt. I struggled throo Furst and Secund Grade Spelling, then in Thurd Grade we started lurning dicshunerry respelling. I was dumfounded. Why didn't we just rite THAT way?
I have always felt sorry for anyone learning English as a second language. Here is a poem that highlights the inconsistency of our language:
Here's a snippet of it:
Finally, which rhymes with enough,
Though, through, plough, or dough, or cough?
Yours I can read with no issues. I would make one change. "dikshunerry" instead of "dicshunerry".
I don't have an issue with spelling words the way they sound but it would still have to be standardized so you could look a word up in the dictionary or use a spell checker.
I agree with you somewhat. The English language is crazy and non-sensical, with more exceptions than examples that fit the rules. But I think your version is more difficult and complicated than it would need to be.
The English language does hav a few quirks, such as irregular verbs, eg, run/ran, instead of run/runned.
But it is no mor crazy and nonsensical than most other languages.
Except in spelling. Studies show that English has the worst spelling "system" of any European alfabetical language. Its the irregular, unpredictable, illogical spelling that makes it the bane of youngsters learning to read and rite. Some master it, some manage it, and some – about 20 percent – giv up.
ALL English-speaking nations hav this one-fifth long tail of functionally illiterat citizens. We spend money, time, and effort trying to find ways to remediate this unnecessary problem. Its time we began to upgrade our spelling, the basic tool for learning literacy. Make it a frend, not a fiend, for learners.
I hope this is a joke... Do they know that billions of people would have to re-learn how to read the language ( that includes teachers who will have to teach it, and also non native speakers like me, by the way).
And the money they would have to spend to reprint books (yes, that still exists!), or redo websites... and how about signs in the streets? subtitles on existing DVDs? Song lyrics on CDs? etc
By the way, a similar thing was tried with French spelling in France many years ago... it never worked! (and the changes were not that drastic!)
Here's a snippet of it:
Finally, which rhymes with enough,
Though, through, plough, or dough, or cough?
No issues reading that poem, and I'm French. No issues learning English either.
Of course, it's not easy for everyone, but if things are explained it's not that hard. Why? Because on top of grammar and vocabulary, we learn phonetics! So for each word learnt, we get the phonetic equivalent.
(most of the time, foreigners who pronounce another language really badly haven't been taught phonetics, haven't studied it very long, have issues pronouncing sounds that don't exist in their mother tongue, or have what we call "a bad ear").
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
q and x for "th"?? 
