English Orthography Reform

A forum for discussing linguistics or just languages in general.
Zé do Rock
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jul 2018 17:22

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Zé do Rock » 24 Jul 2018 21:10

Salmoneus wrote:
24 Jul 2018 11:46
OK, since all his posts are trolling, and the trolling-to-content quotient is increasing, at what point can we just ban him?
EU

Mi scriv in reformat ortografie od mi was 15, in ale situaciones (exepto na scol) e somi laike lu, somi no, ma mi can no memore ki somi ha sei lu was troling. E la pople ki laicou no was confrontee co super plu difisile variantus ki wat mi uzou hir til nau - in tale cazos mi reduse la linguistik acrobatie tu mai maxi meki reform, dat in inglishe vou bi la house stile, e nixi mo reclam. Ma hir pople - interesee tu conlanges, normali super plu difisile de comprend - ja ha problemas co dat. Difisile tu comprend, ma si dat is la cazo mi va mus adapta tu lu.

Wat abaut George B. Shaw, ki investou multi moni pro la developu de su shavian alfabet, e - oni sei - scrivou 'ghoti' pro 'fish' - dat was oso troling?

ENGLISH

I write in reformed spelling (in the languages i know) since i was 15, in all situations except in school, and some people like it, some dont, but i cant remember having heard that it was a sort of trolling. And the people who didnt like it were confronted with much harder versions than what i've been using here so far - in such cases i reduce the linguistic acrobatics to my softest version - that would be the house stile in english - and nobody complains anymore. But here people - interested in conlangs, mostly much harder to understand - have already problems with that. For me this is not easy to understand, but since it seems to be a fact, i'll try to adapt to it as best as i can.

How about George B. Shaw, who invested a lot of munny for the devellopment of his shavian alphabet, and - reportedly - wrote 'ghoti' for 'fish' - was that trolling too? Well, somehow it was, but provoking people to make them make a u-turn in their thinking cant be that bad, in my opinion. Thats what innovative artists usually do.

User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1463
Joined: 15 May 2010 23:25

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Xonen » 25 Jul 2018 12:40

Zé do Rock wrote:
24 Jul 2018 21:10
I write in reformed spelling (in the languages i know) since i was 15, in all situations except in school, and some people like it, some dont, but i cant remember having heard that it was a sort of trolling.
For what it's worth, I don't think spelling in a reformed orthography, as such, counts as trolling. Deliberately misspelling everything after a mod politely asks you to include a plain English transcritpion in your posts, however, does.

And the people who didnt like it were confronted with much harder versions than what i've been using here so far - in such cases i reduce the linguistic acrobatics to my softest version - that would be the house stile in english - and nobody complains anymore. But here people - interested in conlangs, mostly much harder to understand - have already problems with that. For me this is not easy to understand, but since it seems to be a fact, i'll try to adapt to it as best as i can.
Well, I don't think most people here would appreciate someone posting solely in their conlangs without providing English translations, either.

How about George B. Shaw, who invested a lot of munny for the devellopment of his shavian alphabet, and - reportedly - wrote 'ghoti' for 'fish' - was that trolling too?
Yes it was, and as Zompist puts it, "a word which illustrates only Shaw's wiseacre ignorance". Seriously, that page should be required reading for everyone interested in this subject (even if I'm not quite sure why he thinks <ghoti> can only be pronounced like goatee and not go-tie, but that's a minor point).

Well, somehow it was, but provoking people to make them make a u-turn in their thinking cant be that bad, in my opinion. Thats what innovative artists usually do.
Ignorant arrogance tends to provoke people, yes, but that's all it will accomplish. At least Shaw was trying to be somewhat funny while he was at it, but even then, I'd probably tell him to keep his trolling off this board as well. Innovative artist or not, everyone plays by the same rules here.

Zé do Rock
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jul 2018 17:22

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Zé do Rock » 25 Jul 2018 22:22

Xonen wrote:
25 Jul 2018 12:40

Yes it was, and as Zompist puts it, "a word which illustrates only Shaw's wiseacre ignorance". Seriously, that page should be required reading for everyone interested in this subject (even if I'm not quite sure why he thinks <ghoti> can only be pronounced like goatee and not go-tie, but that's a minor point).
RE

Jimagina ke Shaw savè ke lee lettra podè pas etre prononsee com sa, dan la pozicion ou el etè. Creo que fué mas una question de retoric. Mais eu num ta bem seguru ki 85% das palavra pode se pronunciada sertu nu ingleis, eu uma veis fis uma contage, i, claru, é mais faciu pronunciar ingleis ki screver, mais 85% é um bocadu... und wi auch imma, du kannst die aussprache richtig hinkrigen, aba du waisst ni ob du richtig bist, wenn du's aussprichst.

EN

I imagine that Shaw knew that these letters cant be pronounced that way, in the position that they are. I guess it was rather a matter of rhetorics. But i'm not quite sure that 85% of the words can be pronounced correctly in english, once i made a counting, and, of course, it is easier to pronounce english than to spell it, but 85% is a lot... and anyway you can get the pronunciation right, but you never know if you're right or not, when you pronounce them.


Well, somehow it was, but provoking people to make them make a u-turn in their thinking cant be that bad, in my opinion. Thats what innovative artists usually do.
Ignorant arrogance tends to provoke people, yes, but that's all it will accomplish. At least Shaw was trying to be somewhat funny while he was at it, but even then, I'd probably tell him to keep his trolling off this board as well. Innovative artist or not, everyone plays by the same rules here.
[/quote]

RE

and theodore rooselvelt (together with the wite house by the beginning of the last century) would hav his problems too...

EN

and theodore rooselvelt (together with the white house by the beginning of the last century) would have his problems too...

User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6234
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by eldin raigmore » 26 Jul 2018 03:50

I really object to pronouncing “white” as “wight”, as if every English speaker has the “which witch” merger, or those who don’t are somehow inferior or behind the times.
So I could be offended, if I so chose, with the idea of spelling that color’s name as “wite”.

If your spelling reform were undertaken by a non-rhotic speaker, would many <r> graphemes be omitted?
Would it be mandatory to pronounce “d’yer make’er” the same as “Jamaica”?

We can’t reform English spelling to match English pronunciation, until we’ve settled on a single pronunciation for every English word, and forced all other accents of English out of existence.

That sounds a lot more (historical, not modern) French than English, to me.

It’s just another way to get most English speakers angry at most of the rest.

I advise anyone attempting to reform English spelling to just drop it.

User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1463
Joined: 15 May 2010 23:25

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Xonen » 26 Jul 2018 10:47

eldin raigmore wrote:
26 Jul 2018 03:50
I really object to pronouncing “white” as “wight”, as if every English speaker has the “which witch” merger, or those who don’t are somehow inferior or behind the times.
Uh... someone pronouncing "white" and "wight" the same implies neither of those things. Even declaring that to be the standard pronunciation implies neither of those things. If anything, the suggestion that something being non-standard automatically makes it "inferior or behind the times" is itself kind of offensive. [:S] Granted, some people do think so, but y'know, prescriptivists gonna prescriptivize, and we ain't letting them get to us now, so why should we start in the event of a reform? (And while we're at it, you seem to be implying that "white" and "wight" have the same vowel, so by your own logic, wouldn't that be offensive to people who don't merge them? :wat:)

So I could be offended, if I so chose, with the idea of spelling that color’s name as “wite”.
Well, if you're going to choose to be offended based on a complete non sequitur, that's kind of your own problem.

We can’t reform English spelling to match English pronunciation, until we’ve settled on a single pronunciation for every English word, and forced all other accents of English out of existence.
Right, because that's what's been done with all languages with phonemic orthographies.

That sounds a lot more (historical, not modern) French than English, to me.
Yeah, the history of prescriptivism in French is pretty extreme, but even they didn't fully succeed in wiping out all regional dialects. And of course, the purpose was never to enforce a phonemic orthography (which French doesn't have to begin with, even if spelling-to-sound correspondences are more regular than in English); my understaning is that it was more about some weird nationalistic obsession with national "unity" that required everyone to speak the same way.

I advise anyone attempting to reform English spelling to just drop it.
I advise anyone attempting to argue the subject either way to do some reading on it. Plenty of languages have managed to gain more or less phonemic or at least regular orthographies without eradicating all dialectal variation. You can have a standard pronunciation that you use in formal contexts but keep speaking your native dialects otherwise (i.e. diglossia), or you can have a diaphonemic orthography which allows for multiple pronunciations, but in a regular way. The latter of which is kind of what English already does, it would just take some fairly minor modifications to get fully there.

Then again (as I'm sure I've explained a number of times on this board already), reading about spelling reforms in other languages can also teach you about how difficult it is to implement them, even for fairly minor stuff such as removing a few circumflexes. A full reform of English spelling is, in that sense, a totally unrealistic pipe dream. But as a thought experiment, I see nothing wrong with it.

And linguistic thought experiments are kind of what this board is all about, so the hostility some of its members have towards this particular topic is something I find rather baffling. If you're not interested in the subject, nobody's forcing you to read this thread, people.

Zé do Rock
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jul 2018 17:22

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Zé do Rock » 27 Jul 2018 07:54

eldin raigmore wrote:
26 Jul 2018 03:50
I really object to pronouncing “white” as “wight”, as if every English speaker has the “which witch” merger, or those who don’t are somehow inferior or behind the times.
So I could be offended, if I so chose, with the idea of spelling that color’s name as “wite”.
EU

In Norde Deutshland lis sei 'ik' pro 'mi', in Centro Deutshland lis sei 'isch' /iS/, in Sude Deutshland 'i' /i:/. Lis reclam abaut la facto ki la deutshis scriv 'ich'? No, coze la standard pronunciacion in hochdeutsh (hai deutsh) is /ic/, et 'ich' is la corect ortografie pro dat. Et oni canau sei ki deutshe hav a plus o minu reglar ortografie. Italiano hav oso multi dialectos, super diferente dialectos, e meme so lis hav a standard lingua, e wen yu veni tu Italia, dat is wat lis va spik co yu, e yu va sei, grand, oni scriv as oni spik et oni spik as oni scriv. La lombardis e sicilis reclama ki standard italiano kere non abaut su dialectos? No, coz un ding is standard lingua, un otru is a dialect.

La diferens in inglish is dat ai 2 standardes, la british e la nordamerican. La nordamericano funcciona pro Nordamerica, la britishu funcciona pro la Commonwelth (exepto Canada, clar).

La facto ki somi sei /hwOt/ e /hwai/ pro 'what' e 'why' is a bit diferent, lorske dat is no dialect, meme si wen i cuestiona pople si lis hav audi /hwOt/ e /hwai/, nepoco cuestiona si dat is a dialect. Somi, specialik in USA, lernou ki /hw/ is la corecto manera tu pronunse lu e fa so. Mi had nowen audi lu in scol, mas in California, dopo mi cruzou 7 US-statos bai autostop, mi hav audi lu in el unale vez. Mi cuestionou la conducto si dat was a tipe de dialect, e lo ha sei lu is no - lo was a profeso, e fazou al efortu tu spik "corectli". Mouste diccionaris (incluzive la diccionaris ki tradui de e tu otre linguas) sei dat is is simpli /w/, ma pro exemplo Merriam Webster inclui /hw/ as a posible pronunciacion. Eniwei dat is la fenomen af a minoritee, e minoritees shalau bi respectee, ma si linguas alwen considerau ale minoritees wen lus changou (ou changou no) su ortografie, el inglish e deutshis scrivau encor in stos dialectos af el oude germanico tribus, et in France, Italia et Espania lis scrivau in latin, o proto-latin, etc. Linguas e scrivu sistemas is a materia de consens, et oni solo finde consens in majoritees.

In el end af al, nixi sei yu como yu shal spik o scriv, yu can fa como yu laik (exept in linguistico forumes, lu sim, tam yu mus da a consensu scrivu, o scrive diferentli ma da a trauduicion na consensu scrivu). Normali reformas solo forse profesis e stato werkis tu uza la same scrivu.


EN

In Northern Germany they say 'ik' for 'I', in Central Germany they say 'isch' /iS/, in Southern Germany 'i' /i:/. Do they all complain about the fact that german spells 'ich'? No, because the standard pronunciation in High German is /ic/, and 'ich' is the correct spelling for it. And one could say that german has a fairly regular spelling. Italian has many dialects too, very different dialects, and still they have a standard language, and when you come to Italy, thats what they will speak with you, and you'll say, great, you spell as you speak and you speak as you spell. Do lombardians or sicilians complain that standard italian doesnt cater for their dialects? No, because one thing is a standard language, something else is a dialect.

The difference in english is that there are two standards, the british and the american one. The american one works for North America, the british one works for the Commonwelth (except Canada, of course).

The fact that some people say /hwOt/ and /hwai/ for 'what' and 'why' is a bit different, since it is not dialect, although, when i ask people if they have heard /hwOt/ and /hwai/, quite a few ask "Is that a dialect?" Some people, especially in the USA, have learned that /hw/ is the correct way to pronounce it and do so. I had never heard it in school, but in California, after crossing 7 states hitchhiking, i heard it for the first time. I asked the driver if that feature is some kind of dialect, and he said it is not - he was a teacher, and made any possible effort to speak "correctly". Most dictionaries (including the dictionaries translating from and to other languages) say it is simply /w/, but Merriam Webster for instance includes /hw/ as a possible pronunciation. Anyway it is the phenomenon of a minority, and minorities should be respected, but if languages always considered all minorities when they changed (or didnt change) their spelling, the english and germans would still write in a system reflecting hundreds of dialects from the old germanic tribes, and in France, Italy and Spain they would write in latin, or proto-latin, etc. Language and writing systems are a matter of consensus, and you just find consensus with majorities.

And after all, nobody is telling you how to speak or to spell, you can do it the way you want (except in linguistic forums, it seems, there you have to provide at least a translation into the consensus spelling, if you do it). Usually reforms only force teachers and state officials to use the same language and spelling.

Zé do Rock
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jul 2018 17:22

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Zé do Rock » 27 Jul 2018 19:59

Xonen wrote:
26 Jul 2018 10:47
Yeah, the history of prescriptivism in French is pretty extreme, but even they didn't fully succeed in wiping out all regional dialects. And of course, the purpose was never to enforce a phonemic orthography (which French doesn't have to begin with, even if spelling-to-sound correspondences are more regular than in English);
RE

Una foi je ha fai un contag: pra quen scrive franciano, la lingua no é mas facil qui inglish. Mas a diferens é grande pro ledor: im franciano waiss ma fast imma wi man ain wort ausspricht, one hundate musta zu lernen, und das kann ma fom inglishe nich sagen...

EN

Once i made a counting: for someone who writes in french, the language isnt easier than english. But the difference is big for the reader: in french you almost always know how to pronounce a word you read, without learning hundreds of patterns, and you cant say that of english...
Then again (as I'm sure I've explained a number of times on this board already), reading about spelling reforms in other languages can also teach you about how difficult it is to implement them, even for fairly minor stuff such as removing a few circumflexes. A full reform of English spelling is, in that sense, a totally unrealistic pipe dream. But as a thought experiment, I see nothing wrong with it.
RE

A radical reform is very unlikely in enny language, unless u hav a strongman in power with a political message and a cuntry in a moment ware evrything is changing, as Atatürk a century ago. En inglish è virtualmen impocible, parse cavec una reforma radical inglishe ne semblerai plu inglish. Y mesmo una reforma suave como la House Stile seria bene dificile de realizar, ya qui no ay un órgano concevido pra farlo, y mas qui 40 países tenerie qui star de acuerdo... a unica soluciaum seria uma reforma popular, comu é feitu em frazes comu "i luv u" o palabras comu 'overnite', 'nite', 'thru' (si bem ki essa ja seja mediu antig). Das probleem is das es nur bai ain par wörtan ferwendet wird, ni wird aine regel durchgehend für wörta derselben sorte ferwendet. Wel, sum of us in TESS do it and hope that it spreds...

EN

A radical reform is very unlikely in any language, unless you have a strongman in power with a political message and a country in a moment where everything is changing, as Atatürk a century ago. In english it is nearly impossible, because with a radical reform english wouldnt look like english anymore. And even a soft reform like the House Stile would be very difficult to get thru, because there is no body conceived to do it, and more than 40 countries would have to agree... the only way out would be popular reform, as it is done with "i luv u" or words like 'overnite', 'lite', 'thru' (even if this one is rather old). The only problem is that it gets stuck with a few words, never a rule is applied for all words of a certain type. Well, some of us in TESS do it and hope that it spreads...

Keenir
runic
runic
Posts: 2528
Joined: 22 May 2012 02:05

Re: How deranged is the English spelling system?

Post by Keenir » 01 Aug 2018 22:46

I was trying to read over the past {recent} posts of this thread, and something glaring came to mine eyes:
Zé do Rock wrote:
18 Jul 2018 01:46
Axiem wrote:
17 Jul 2018 16:41
HS
I'm brazili. Wen i say that the russki cappital should be calld Maskva in the whole world (braziliano portugaliano Moscou), as the russis call it, and that Norway should be calld Norge, as the norgis call it (brazilis call it Noruega), yu say i'm trying to brazilianize the world? Wat kind of sik logic is this?
Original name according to whom? I'm thinking of things like Taiwan, where the name of the place is contested, and picking one means picking sides in large geopolitical debates.
HS
Cuntries that dont use the roman alfabet ar named as the old colonial power calls it. If thare was no colonial power, take the inglishe name. As Taiwan doesnt hav a colonial past, it remanes as in inglish: Taiwan, and as a less used alternativ, Republic of China. If yu dont agree, try to modify the oficial inglish and i'l follow.
wait, China and Japan don't count as colonial powers?
Zé do Rock wrote:
22 Jul 2018 12:30
The House Stile isnt my creation, it is the result of a referendum in TESS, The English Spelling Society, ware i guess that mor than 95% of members ar inglishe nativ speekers from all over the world. So they ar alowd to make a campane for improving inglishe spelling, but not non nativ speekers? Wy the nativ speeking members chose a forener to be in thare comittee, was this a stupid thing to do? Wat about naijiris or malaysis, ar they alowd to criticize the inglishe language - or eeven to be activ for its reform - or only the cuntrys ware inglish is the only language?

I rote all my books in reformd deutsh (and "brazileis"), reforming spelling and sumtimes taking all grammar from the deutshe language (no gender, no cases, no conjugations), and i was nomminated by the deutshe president for the Prize of Inovation, and i wun sevral litrature prizes. Ar deutshis mor tollerant than anglis? Hard to imagin, since i rite in uther non linguistic forums (in inglishe language) and no one has problems with my spelling and my uther changes. I'd expect protest in a "forum for the usage of correct english", but in a forum about conlangs this dus sound strange to me.
could you please provide references and-or links to all these books and awards/societies that you keep mentioning?
Last edited by Keenir on 01 Aug 2018 22:56, edited 1 time in total.
At work on Apaan: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4799

Zé do Rock
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jul 2018 17:22

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Zé do Rock » 02 Aug 2018 07:58

clawgrip wrote:

I'm sure it's been discussed endlessly, but a major sticking point that I mentioned but you failed to reply to is that any move toward a phonetic spelling necessarily begins to remove English's relative region-neutrality. Should caught and cot be merged? Should sword and sawed be merged? How do you determine which pronunciation should be the basis of the spelling?

REFORMEE

Com je ha ja di, la majoritee dee membris de la TESS è dacord ki ai 2 standard en inglish: southern british standard y general american. I num si pode reformar im areas ond eces 2 standard num taum de acordu, pur esu 'caught' pode perder u GH, ki nadi pronuncia mezmu, mas num si pode screver caught i cot da mezma maner, ja ki esu contradiria la pronúncia britanic - i de muintus americanus, mezmu ki talveis lis num sea maiorie. Dasselbe gilt für sword und sawed, ma kann si nich glaich sraiben wail USis, canadis und iris das R aussprechen, was wir tun können is das ferainfachen, wo baide ainferstanden sind: sord and sawd.

I'l talk about the advantages and disadvantages of spelling reform later, i stil want to cycle to the north. O momen je è na citad austrishe de Braunau, ou la Führer etee ne, ma je è pa la a côs de sa - staba simplement en mi camino. Um lugar legalzinhu, akie.

ENGLISH

As i had said before, most TESS members agree that there are 2 standards for english: southern british standard and general american. And you cant reform in areas where these two standards dont agree, which is why we can drop the GH in 'caught' (that nobody pronounces, except maybe for some scots in the highlands), but we cant merge both forms, since this would contradict the british pronunciation - and even the pronunciation of many americans, even if they're probably not a majority. The same applies for sword and sawed, we cant merge them becaus americans, canadians and the irish pronounce the R. What we can do is to simplify ware both standards agree: sord and sawd.

I'll talk later about the advantages and disadvantages of spelling reform, i still want to cycle to the north. At the moment i'm in the austrian city Braunau, where the Führer was born, but i'm not here because of that - it was just on my way. A nice place here.

User avatar
eldin raigmore
fire
fire
Posts: 6234
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 18:38
Location: SouthEast Michigan

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by eldin raigmore » 02 Aug 2018 13:44

Why not reform English spelling, by using, instead of an alphabet, a radical-and-determiner logography like Egyptian hieroglyphics or Kanji? That would circumvent all the objections posted so far.

Zé do Rock
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jul 2018 17:22

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Zé do Rock » 02 Aug 2018 21:22

EUROPAN

A personi con a bon ortografie win no multu con a reform, e dat is wai anti-reformis ha moustlik a gud ortografie. Lis efortou mult, meibi lis dobro vizualizis, meibi la do. So lis hav a ventage wen oni compara lis con a minu bon ortografie o meme con a mau ortografie.

Pople co minu gud ortografie o mau ortografie o lernis - scolis o L2 lernis - havau super plu tu win. Suomiano scolis nesesit un ano tu riche la same nivel af alfabetizacion pro ki inglishe scolis nesesita tris ano. So lu depende de yu as a milionari ki sei li ha la moni e li vote pro la partie ki luta pro su dreto tu stei super plu rike dan el otris, o si yu as a milionari ki vota pro a partie ki luta pro plu sociale justitee.

Clar: si oni creat a sistem in ki pople can lern alu dat a doctor sa in pro exemplo un mez, la doctoris va no laike lu absolutli, coze la ventage ki lis ha comparli co la plebe vou bi awei, e lis perdau su job. Solo super poco ki pens el okeitee duhumanitee is plus importante ki su oun aprovau lu.

Mas ai un otre ventage pro ali, meme si lu rada mega pro pople co mau ortografie e mini pro pople co bon ortografie: i vidou multi pople ki spik inglish e fa pronunciacion falsitees. Somu de lus hapen coze su lingua ha no la sones dat inglishe ha, mas otris fa falsitees coz el ortografie is dislidar. Clar, dat hapen moustli tu L2 lernis, mas i lernou frecuentli dat i was pronunse certo vordes na falso wei in mai toto viv, e mem universitee profesis dat is nativo spikis verifi somwen ki lis pronunsou some vordes falsli - e como lis constatou dat? In grupas dat uza reformat ortografies.

Salutus de Wegscheid, nir el austrish e la ceski fronter.



ENGLISH

A good speller doesnt have much to win with a reform, which is why anti-reformers are mostly good spellers. They've put lots of effort on it, maybe they're good word visualizers, maybe both. So they have an advantage comparing with less good spellers and bad spellers.

Less good spellers, bad spellers and learners - be they school children or L2 learners - would have much more to win. Finnish pupils need one year to attain the same level of literacy for which english pupils need 3 years. So it's up to you if you're like a millionaire who says he has the money and he votes for the party that fights for his right to remain much richer than the others, or if you are like a millionaire who votes for a party who fights for more social justice.

Of course: if you create a system in which people can learn all a doctor knows in say one month, doctors wont like it at all, because the advantage they have comparing with the riff-raff would be gone, and they'd lose their jobs. Only very few who think the welfare of humanity is more important than their own would approve of it.

There is another advantage for everyone, tho, altho it is rather big for bad speakers and small for good speakers: i've seen many people speaking english and making pronunciation mistakes. Some of them happen because their language dont have the sounds english has, but others make mistakes because the spelling is misleading. Of course this happens mostly to L2 learners, but i learned often that i was pronouncing certain words the wrong way all my life, and even university professors that are native speakers find out sometimes that they have been pronouncing a word the wrong way - and how they've found that out? Because they are in groups that use reformed spelling.

Greetings from Wegscheid, near the austrian and the czech border.

Keenir
runic
runic
Posts: 2528
Joined: 22 May 2012 02:05

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Keenir » 02 Aug 2018 22:36

Zé do Rock wrote:
02 Aug 2018 21:22

Of course: if you create a system in which people can learn all a doctor knows in say one month, doctors wont like it at all, because the advantage they have comparing with the riff-raff would be gone, and they'd lose their jobs. Only very few who think the welfare of humanity is more important than their own would approve of it.
and who are these "doctors" in this analogy? it smells like you're making a strawman, what with the riffraff.
At work on Apaan: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4799

Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 1534
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 18:37

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Salmoneus » 03 Aug 2018 01:20

The difference in the case of spelling, of course, is that 94% of people are already "millionaires", 4% will become millionaires soon with minimal effort, and 1% of people will never be rich no matter what reform you introduce. That leaves 1% who might actually benefit somewhat from spelling reform, and 94% who are going to lose out massively (because they'll have to learn to spell again). Therefore, such a reform will not happen.


[in other news: "the Fuehrer". What a surprise. I'd never have guessed you were one of those people from your earlier rant about not being allowed to call black people the n-word anymore...]

Zé do Rock
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jul 2018 17:22

Re: How deranged is the English spelling system?

Post by Zé do Rock » 03 Aug 2018 06:37

Keenir wrote:
01 Aug 2018 22:46
wait, China and Japan don't count as colonial powers?
REFORMIRT (wunschdeutsch > ultradoitsh)

Ich würde sagen, das is aine frage der definizion, aba es würd uns nich waita helfen, da wir fertige namen brauchen, und chinan und japaniano ferwenden das roman alfabeet nur ser begrenzt.

ENGLISH

I guess this is a matter of definition, but it wouldnt help us any further, since we need ready made names, and chinese and japanese just use the roman alphabet in a very limited way.

could you please provide references and-or links to all these books and awards/societies that you keep mentioning?
REFORMIRT (HS > RITE, ULTRAFRANSAI > PANLATINO, ULTRASPANIO > PORTUNIOL CIENTIFICO, BRAZILEIS > PORTUNIOL CIENTIFICO)

If u google 'zé do rock' u'l see quite a few articles about me (or from me, ritten in reformd spelling), including a wikipedia article and prizes. Ma il sont en deutsh, tu va nececitar la google traducteur ou kelc cosa similar, sôf si tu parla deutsh. No creo ki vas incontrar una mención sobre la nominación pra la Preis des Bundespräsidenten für Innovation und Technik, eso fué face unos 20 anos, y fué una nominación, ki es algo ki no aparece en biografies. Eu contei akelu pra mostrar ki hav ai i ai um sertu reconecimentu oficial pra reform ortografic, pelu menus em otras linguas.

Der link zur TESS is: http://www.spellingsociety.org/.


ENGLISH

If you google 'zé do rock' you'll see quite a few articles about me (or from me, written in reformed spelling), including a wikipedia article and prizes. But they're all in german, you'll need google translator or something else, unless you can speak german. I dont think you'll find a mention about the nomination for the Preis des Bundespräsidenten für Innovation und Technik, it was around 20 years ago and it was a nomination, which is something that doesnt appear in biographies. I told that to show that there was and there is some official recognition for spelling reform, at least in other languages.

The link to TESS is: http://www.spellingsociety.org/.

clawgrip
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2399
Joined: 24 Jun 2012 06:33
Location: Tokyo

Re: How deranged is the English spelling system?

Post by clawgrip » 03 Aug 2018 09:58

Zé do Rock wrote:
03 Aug 2018 06:37
Keenir wrote:
01 Aug 2018 22:46
wait, ... Japan [doesn't] count as a colonial power?
I guess this is a matter of definition
Ask Korea if it's a matter of definition. Ask China. Ask Indonesia. Ask Vietnam. Ask Cambodia. Ask Thailand. Ask Myanmar. Ask Laos. Ask Malaysia. Ask Philippines. Ask Manchukuo...wait, don't ask them.

Keenir
runic
runic
Posts: 2528
Joined: 22 May 2012 02:05

Re: How deranged is the English spelling system?

Post by Keenir » 03 Aug 2018 12:44

clawgrip wrote:
03 Aug 2018 09:58
Zé do Rock wrote:
03 Aug 2018 06:37
Keenir wrote:
01 Aug 2018 22:46
wait, ... Japan [doesn't] count as a colonial power?
I guess this is a matter of definition
Ask Korea if it's a matter of definition. Ask China. Ask Indonesia. Ask Vietnam. Ask Cambodia. Ask Thailand. Ask Myanmar. Ask Laos. Ask Malaysia. Ask Philippines. Ask Manchukuo...wait, don't ask them.
*nods*
also, I'd like to know when the Japanese failed to use/have names for people, places, foods, etc in their language.
Zé do Rock wrote:
03 Aug 2018 06:37
, but it wouldnt help us any further, since we need ready made names,
At work on Apaan: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4799

Zé do Rock
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jul 2018 17:22

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Zé do Rock » 04 Aug 2018 17:51

Keenir wrote:
02 Aug 2018 22:36
Zé do Rock wrote:
02 Aug 2018 21:22

Of course: if you create a system in which people can learn all a doctor knows in say one month, doctors wont like it at all, because the advantage they have comparing with the riff-raff would be gone, and they'd lose their jobs. Only very few who think the welfare of humanity is more important than their own would approve of it.
and who are these "doctors" in this analogy? it smells like you're making a strawman, what with the riffraff.
REFORMD

The doctors in this analojy ar the good spellers, the rifraf ar the less good spellers or bad spellers.

Je sa pa se ke tu veu dir avec "making a strawman".


ENGLISH

The doctors in this analogy are the good spellers, the riffraff are the less good spellers or bad spellers.

I dont know what you mean with "making a strawman".

Keenir
runic
runic
Posts: 2528
Joined: 22 May 2012 02:05

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Keenir » 04 Aug 2018 18:04

Zé do Rock wrote:
04 Aug 2018 17:51
Keenir wrote:
02 Aug 2018 22:36
Zé do Rock wrote:
02 Aug 2018 21:22

Of course: if you create a system in which people can learn all a doctor knows in say one month, doctors wont like it at all, because the advantage they have comparing with the riff-raff would be gone, and they'd lose their jobs. Only very few who think the welfare of humanity is more important than their own would approve of it.
and who are these "doctors" in this analogy? it smells like you're making a strawman, what with the riffraff.
REFORMD

The doctors in this analojy ar the good spellers, the rifraf ar the less good spellers or bad spellers.

Je sa pa se ke tu veu dir avec "making a strawman".


ENGLISH

The doctors in this analogy are the good spellers, the riffraff are the less good spellers or bad spellers.
but doesn't the shorter words of this reform, actually make it easier to misspell words? if most words are only two or three letters long...
At work on Apaan: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4799

Zé do Rock
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 114
Joined: 12 Jul 2018 17:22

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Zé do Rock » 04 Aug 2018 22:48

Salmoneus wrote:
03 Aug 2018 01:20
The difference in the case of spelling, of course, is that 94% of people are already "millionaires", 4% will become millionaires soon with minimal effort, and 1% of people will never be rich no matter what reform you introduce. That leaves 1% who might actually benefit somewhat from spelling reform, and 94% who are going to lose out massively (because they'll have to learn to spell again). Therefore, such a reform will not happen.
EUROPAN

Segon a stud af el USano Departament af Educacion, 32 milion USis can no le. Meme si la definiciones de funccional analfabetismo is bene relativ, mi supon oni can no nomiz a funccional analfabet, importa no como la definicion is, a personi co bon ortografie. Et inter pople co gud e mau ortografie mus ai oso la medio scrivis. Scolis can acuir a bon ortografie, mas unali lis mus go dru la martiritee, e den oni ha la stos miliones - meibi meme miliardes - pople in minu developee landes ki spik inglish e L2 lernis.

Sondages in Deutshland mostrou ki 50% du populacion is pro (or auminu was pro) un ortografie reform, e dat in a lingua dat is super minu nereglare dan inglish. Mi spicou co nepok inglishe nativo spikis abaut lu, e mi had non el imprecion ki lu is super diferent in inglishe spicale landes. El unico land vo cuazi ali reacte super negativlik et agresivli was Franse.


ENGLISH

According to a study of the US Department of Education, 32 million americans cant read. Even if definitions of functional illiteracy are quite relative, i guess you cant call a functional illiterate, no matter how the definition is, a good speller. And between good and bad spellers there must be medium spellers. School children can get good spellers, but first they have to go thru the ordeal, and then you have the hundreds of millions - perhaps even billions - of people in less developed english speaking countries and L2 learners.

Polls in Germany showed that 50% of the population favor (or favored at least) a spelling reform, and this in a language that is much less irregular than english. I have talked to quite a few english speaking people about that, and i didnt have the impression that it is any different in english speaking countries. The only country where the reaction to it is really aggressive from nearly anyone was France.


[in other news: "the Fuehrer". What a surprise. I'd never have guessed you were one of those people from your earlier rant about not being allowed to call black people the n-word anymore...]
[/quote]

EUROPAN

Mi sa no wat yu vole sei hir: ki pople dat ama no la nani stat e la lingua polis is nazis?

ENGLISH

I dont know what you want to say here: that people that dont like the nanny state and language police are nazis?

Keenir
runic
runic
Posts: 2528
Joined: 22 May 2012 02:05

Re: English Orthography Reform

Post by Keenir » 04 Aug 2018 23:18

Zé do Rock wrote:
04 Aug 2018 22:48
ENGLISHAccording to a study of the US Department of Education, 32 million americans cant read. Even if definitions of functional illiteracy are quite relative, i guess you cant call a functional illiterate, no matter how the definition is, a good speller. And between good and bad spellers there must be medium spellers. School children can get good spellers, but first they have to go thru the ordeal, and then you have the hundreds of millions - perhaps even billions - of people in less developed english speaking countries and L2 learners.
this isn't because of the problems with the English writing system...its because we pay our teachers crap & are falling behind in education. it would remain a problem no matter what writing system we had.
[in other news: "the Fuehrer". What a surprise. I'd never have guessed you were one of those people from your earlier rant about not being allowed to call black people the n-word anymore...]
ENGLISH
I dont know what you want to say here: that people that dont like the nanny state and language police are nazis?
There are two options:
a. you don't know what is being said...in which case, is it a good idea to reform a language you don't understand?
b. you do know what was just said...in which case, you're playing dumb.
At work on Apaan: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4799

Post Reply