Axiem wrote: ↑
Mon 16 Jul 2018, 18:06
This statement makes no sense to me. With every language, you have to learn both the phonetics and the writing system. Some writing systems are more adaptable to handling dialectical differences in pronunciation.
Im italianishe cannst du die spikee lingua lerne (sei wir mal 10 000 wörder), dazu el alfabet, den el informacion, dass /a/ na sinne de 'haben' or /o'tEl/ mit H scribee werd, plus a par wörder mit cea/cia, ki ha la same prononcirung. Dat is, adicionali to la 10 000 wordes you must lerne meibi 50 pieces af information, altogether 10 050. Si tu representa 10 000 com une unitee, une lingua, faut ke tu apprens 1,005 lingua. In inglishe tu can aprender centenas patrones ortograficos, así tu can scribe 50% de las palabras correctli, mas nunca tu sas si una palabra obedece la patrón o no. O ki signifi ki si você ker reali scriver bes medo, você tem ki aprender el ortografie das 10 000 palavras decor, ou seja, você tem ki aprender 20 000 informaciones, o ki result in 2 linguas. Du zale la prais de 2 linguas, ma krigst nur aine.
In italian you can lern the spoken language (lets say 10 000 words), plus the alfabet, then the information that /a/ in the sense of 'hav' or /o'tEl/ hav an H, plus a few words with cea/cia, that hav the same pronunciation. That meens that aditionaly to the 10 000 words you hav to lern maybe 50 peeces of information, altogether 10 050. If you represent 10 000 as a unity, one language, than you hav to lern 1.005 language, one language and a little fraction. In inglishe you can lern hundreds of spelling patterns, so you can spell 50% of the words correctly, but you never know if a certan word obeys to the pattern or not. Wich meens that if you want to write without feer, you hav to lern the spelling of the 10 000 words by hart, and so you hav to lern 20 000 peeces of information, wich is the same as lerning 2 languages. You pay the price of lerning two languages, but you just get 1.
still they hav a standard language and a spelling
I'd say that's a pretty debatable statement. I'm not aware of any body that establishes a standard in Portuguese, for example.
In Brazil it is the Academia Brasileira de Letras, in Portugal the Academia Portuguesa de Letras. Cand elles decident changer algu en el ortografie, elles font una conference, aussi avec des oficial organes af el autres landes de lingua portugalian. Si las otre academies y órganos no ist de acuerdo, un academie can todavía decide si su land fa la reforma solo o deja de far la.
In Brazil it is the Academia Brasileira de Letras, in Portugal the Academia Portuguesa de Letras. Wen one of them decides to change something in the spelling, they make a conference, also with the oficial organs of other countries ware portuguese is spoken. If the other acaddemies and organs cant agree, one acaddemy stil can decide if they make a reform for thare country only or just forget about it.
English has two standards, southern british standard and genral american
Are you talking about major dialects of English? Off the top of my head, there's RP, Cockney, Canadian, Australian (I'm given to understand there's a difference between Northern Australian and Southern Australian, but I'm probably misremembering), South African, and ESL—and that's not even including the American dialects! Of which there's distinctly General American and Southern American and North Eastern American, and increasingly a Northern American and a Western American. And let me tell you, there have been plenty of times where I, as a speaker of GA, have attempted conversations with people who speak Southern American where we could not understand each other verbally.
Mi tiv in 146 landes, generali de caron (e assim mi had multi contacto co la populacion). In 40 von inen is die oficiale lingua inglish: Australia (nord, middle e soud, werking in 3 diferente places), Belize, Botswana (wer mi had a horrible malaria), Cameroon, Canada, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana (de wer mi was deportee), Guyana, China/Hongkong, India, Ireland, Kenya (wer mi was thrown from a bridge), Kiribati, Lesotho, Liberia (wer mi was robee), Malta, Malawi, Malaysia, Mauritius, Namibia (wer mi got lost na desert), Nauru, New Zealand, Pakistan, Pilipina, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Singapor, Somalia (wer mi was in prison bene frecuentli), Soud Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Tonga, Tuvalu, UK, USA (in 28 states in ale direcciones). Donc mi sas ki ai plus dan un inglishe dans ce mond. Mas si tu miras con atención a lo ki e dicho, vas vi ki estoy ablando de standardes. Standard é o ki la pessonal lerne na scol e fala na TV. Manche britis mei sei ''one and twenty, two and twenty, three and twenty', as lis wer in Deutshland. Or "i be, you be, he be, we be, you be, they be', in Naijiria they mait sei "Wi go pei fud fo moto a so sofi-sofi wi go chop', in Papu Niugini they mait sei 'pusim' e 'pus-pus', but na scool or na niws, no matter wer in Britain, Naijiria or Papu Niugini they lerne 'twenty one, twenty two, twenty three', 'i am, you ar, he is' etc, e dat sentence is tought as "We'r going to buy tires and then slowly we'l go for eeting", and in Papu Niugini they lerne 'push' for 'pusim' e 'fuck' for 'pus-pus' - in case dat stuf is tought na scool.
I'v been in 146 countries, mostly hitchhiking (so i had a lot of contact with the population). In 40 of them the oficial language is inglish: Australia (nord, middle and soud, working in 3 difrent states), Belize, Botswana (ware i got a nasty malaria), Cameroon, Canada, Fiji, Gambia, Ghana (from ware i was deported), Guyana, China/Hongkong, India, Ireland, Kenya (ware i was throen from a bridge), Kiribati, Lesotho, Liberia (ware i was robd), Malta, Malawi, Malaysia, Mauritius, Namibia (ware i got lost in the desert), Nauru, New Zealand, Pakistan, Pilipina, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Singapor, Somalia (ware i was in jale quite offen), Soud Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Tonga, Tuvalu, UK, USA (in 28 states in all directions). So i know that thare ar mor than 2 inglishes in this world. But if you look with mor attention to wat i sed, you'l see that i'm speeking of standards. Standard is wat peeple lern in scool and speek on TV. Some britis mite say 'one and twenty, two and twenty, three and twenty', as if they wer germans, or "i be, you be, he be, we be, you be, they be', in Naijiria they mite say "Wi go pei fud fo moto a so sofi-sofi wi go chop', in Papu Niugini they mite say 'pusim' and 'pus-pus', but in the scool or in the news, no matter ware in Britain, Naijiria or Papu Niugini they lern 'twenty one, twenty two, twenty three', 'i am, you ar, he is' etc, and that sentence is taut as "We'r going to buy tires and then slowly we'l go for eeting", and in Papu Niugini they lern 'push' for 'pusim' and 'fuk' for 'pus-pus' - in case that stuf is taut in scool.
Also, your "reformed" spelling of "general" makes no sense. You're dropping the vowel that I clearly pronounce between the "n" and the "r".
Couper la shwa nist pas obligatoire, mas si tu le lasses, faut lécrire 'genneral' avec 2 N (in HS, evidentli).
Cutting the E isnt compulsory, but if you dont cut it, you hav to spel with 2 N (in HS, of course).
That's because the spelling of English words reflects how they were transliterated into English at the time the word was imported into the language.
Certli no las palabras ki los anglis e la sajonis traeron af Alemania, Países Bajos e Danmark, ki pasaron por muchas modificaciones. Mas mi supone ki você teja falando das palavras ki vieram do francian, latin e grek. Nur, auch solche wörder wurden modifikee, mi wette dass es ni formas wi 'reflects, transliterated' or 'imported' in francian, latin o grekian. Or compulsory, vowel, pronounce, reform (new francian reforme, old french and latin reforma). Kelkes mots ha conservee see formas originales, mas la majoritee ha changee.
Certanly not the words the anglos and the saxons braut with them from Germany, the Nederlands and Danmark, wich went thru menny changes. But i guess you'r talking about words from francian, latin and grekian. Now, eeven such words went thru changes, i bet thare wer never forms like (looking bak in our discussion) 'reflects, transliterated' or 'imported' in francian, latin or grekian. Or compulsory, vowel, pronounce, reform (new francian 'reforme', old francian and latin 'reforma'). Some words hav conservd thare original forms, but most of them changed at leest a little bit.
you can hav a mor logical sistem brits and americans can liv with
Not really. And the Americans tried that once upon a time; it didn't exactly work.
Los funccionaron mas o minos pra los EUA. El inglisis si negaram ou cuasi sempri si negaram, claro. Mas no porkee 'color' ou 'thru' no funcciona pra el inglisis, lis no seguiriam el amerikis in nenhum aspecto, assim como el espaniolis nunca acceitariam una novidee af America Latin. E trotzdem: it took ages, but in the end they switched to la metric sistem - dat is not american, but as you see, sometaimes changes come mem in landes dat ar bene resistale to change.
They usualy workd for the US. The britis didnt follow, sure (or rarely followed). But not becaus words like 'color' or 'thru' dont work for the britis, they just wouldnt follow the amerikis in ennything, as the espaniars would never follow enny modification coming from Latin America. And stil: it took ages, but in the end they switchd to the metric sistem - this is not american, but as you see, sometimes changes come eeven in countries that ar quite resistent to change.
Spelling 'eeven, u, spel, caracter, hav'
These are illogical spellings.
Also, there's a difference between "you" and "oooh" in meaning and intonation that collapsing both of them to "u" would completely elide, which seems deeply problematic to me.
Una vocal final e no átona solo can bi larg: 'pi' tem un I longo, 'go' un O longo, 'u' un U longo (como la nome da letra ja diz). Wenn es /u:/ bi sollte, müsste es 'oo' scriben werd.
A final stressd vowel can only be long: 'pi' has a long I, 'go' a long O, 'u' a long U (as the name of letter alredy ses)(and long U = /ju:/). If it was /u:/, it would hav to be speld 'oo'. Although, of course, in inglish evrything is possible...
This makes no sense in context. "Witch" is a noun, and you're not using a noun there.
Oh! You meant "which"!
Uh, you _do_ realize that "which" and "witch" are pronounced differently, right? Why does your "reform" break that?
Mi suppone dat you miene la pronunciacion /hw/. La majoritee dee diccionaris da cuna prononciacion, avec /w/, diccionaris americans parfois aussi la prononciacion avec /hw/, mas cist la prononciacion af una minoritee, mi suppone ki super mini. Na scuela mi had unos 10 profesis, viajé par mucho tempo y unos 10 anos después mai primero contacto con el inglishe lingua aprendi ki uni can pronunce WH también como /hw/. Er un professor in California, ki fazia multíssima cuestion de falar absolutli "correcto". Ainmal mi hörte a ganze stunde CNN, e kain ainziges mal mi hörte a /hw/, e la mega merhait in TESS is der mainung ki das is en uralte prononcierung, ki bai manche künstlich noch am leben gehalten wird. Besaides, "which" doesnt suggest dat olde pronunciacion either, if you wanted it "correct" you'd hav to spel "hwich".
I suppose that you meen the pronunciation /hw/. The majority of dictionaries giv but one pronunciation, with /w/, american dictionaries sometimes also the pronunciation with /hw/, but it is the pronunciation of a minority, i guess a very small minority. In scool i had something like 10 teechers, i traveld a lot and maybe 10 yeers after i had my first contact with the inglishe language i herd it - it was a teecher in California, who told me that he does evrything to speek the words "correctly". Once i herd CNN for one our, and i didnt heer /hw/ a single time, and the grate majority in TESS, no matter wat country they come from, hav the opinnion that this is an obsolete pronunciation some peeple try to keep alive artificialy. Besides, "which" doesnt suggest that old pronunciation either, if you wanted it "correct" you'd hav to spel "hwich".
Apropos, la prochene critic pourrait etre sur "nord, sud". Eso no tiene nada a ver co la House Stile, mas como mi bi por un internacionalizacion de nombres geograficos, e muchos nombres tienen un 'nord' o un 'sud' (norde korea, sude sudan), decidí tamben internacionalizarlos. E in esse caso claro ki can no bi co TH como no inglish, un son dificile pra la majoree da populacion do mundo. El internationalste formas is 'nord' e 'sud'. In inglish i'm stil writing 'soud', but na nexte messag i come to O and it becomes 'sud/e'. Prononcee /sud/.
By the way, the next criticism could be about 'nord' and 'soud'. That doesnt hav to do with the House Stile either, it is my wish to internationalize geografic names, and quite a few geografic names hav a 'nord' or a 'soud' (norde korea, soude sudan), i decided to internationalize also thees words. And in this case it cant hav inglishe TH, a dificult sound for the majority of the world population. The most international forms ar 'nord' and 'sud'. In inglish i'm stil writing 'soud', but in the next message i come to O and it becomes 'sud/e'. Pronounced /sud/.