Hammerstein Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Having trained as a primary school teacher I'm aware of the absolute ballache of trying to explain the logic behind our spellings to children. I've been wondering recently though - if writing is largely for communication then is there any issue involved in changing our written language so that there is a consistent correspondence between letters and sounds? That is, every time a certain sound appears in our language it is expressed using the same letters. I figure that way children can begin to work out how to spell words based on logic rather than what is largely rote. I'm aware that any change would involve a slow process, but any thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harestone Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 No, we shouldn't change our written language for the feckless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Having trained as a primary school teacher I'm aware of the absolute ballache of trying to explain the logic behind our spellings to children. I've been wondering recently though - if writing is largely for communication then is there any issue involved in changing our written language so that there is a consistent correspondence between letters and sounds? That is, every time a certain sound appears in our language it is expressed using the same letters. I figure that way children can begin to work out how to spell words based on logic rather than what is largely rote. I'm aware that any change would involve a slow process, but any thoughts? Sorry but no, it would be another case of dumbing down. Yes I was puzzled as a kid as to why words weren't spelt as they sounded but I got over it in around 5 minutes. I don't think the language should be rewritten to accommodate those who are slow to learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Having trained as a primary school teacher I'm aware of the absolute ballache of trying to explain the logic behind our spellings to children. I've been wondering recently though - if writing is largely for communication then is there any issue involved in changing our written language so that there is a consistent correspondence between letters and sounds? That is, every time a certain sound appears in our language it is expressed using the same letters. I figure that way children can begin to work out how to spell words based on logic rather than what is largely rote. I'm aware that any change would involve a slow process, but any thoughts? How do you propose to compensate for the regional differences in pronunciation of sounds and words? For example, some Sheffielders pronounce right as reet and night as night. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammerstein Posted December 13, 2012 Author Share Posted December 13, 2012 How do you propose to compensate for the regional differences in pronunciation of sounds and words? For example, some Sheffielders pronounce right as reet and night as night. jb Accents would be a grey area but I think it's fairly simple to explain to children that not everybody says things in the same way that they do. In that sense I don't think it would be any different from how it is now. The difference would be that local dialect would be the only reason something would ever be spelt differently from how it is spoken. Sorry but no, it would be another case of dumbing down. Yes I was puzzled as a kid as to why words weren't spelt as they sounded but I got over it in around 5 minutes. I don't think the language should be rewritten to accommodate those who are slow to learn. Why not? If the main function of writing is to communicate, why would we not want as many people to be able to read and write as possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Accents would be a grey area but I think it's fairly simple to explain to children that not everybody says things in the same way that they do. In that sense I don't think it would be any different from how it is now. The difference would be that local dialect would be the only reason something would ever be spelt differently from how it is spoken. Why not? If the main function of writing is to communicate, why would we not want as many people to be able to read and write as possible? Is there any evidence to show that the number of people able to read and write is reduced by the lack of phonetic/symbolic consistency in English? If that was the case, you'd expect countries with even less phonetical logic to their language, like Finland or Sweden, to have lower literacy rates, but in fact the opposite is true. Which makes me think it has more to do with state investment in education, rather than words being difficult to spell. In English, if you can't spell a word, just use a different expression, after all you've got between four and ten times as many words to choose from compared to other languages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Accents would be a grey area but I think it's fairly simple to explain to children that not everybody says things in the same way that they do. In that sense I don't think it would be any different from how it is now. The difference would be that local dialect would be the only reason something would ever be spelt differently from how it is spoken. So for your system to work all children would have to be taught to speak in Queens English to ensure they can spell correctly (not a bad thing) and then remember when writing which version of a word it is they have to spell. Not to mention having to rewrite all current works of literature in order to make them readable to the little darlings. Far easier just to teach them to spell the words that we have, it's not difficult, all it takes is a bit of practise. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 So for your system to work all children would have to be taught to speak in Queens English to ensure they can spell correctly (not a bad thing) and then remember when writing which version of a word it is they have to spell. Not to mention having to rewrite all current works of literature in order to make them readable to the little darlings. Far easier just to teach them to spell the words that we have, it's not difficult, all it takes is a bit of practise. jb hehe indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barleycorn Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Is there any evidence to show that the number of people able to read and write is reduced by the lack of phonetic/symbolic consistency in English? If that was the case, you'd expect countries with even less phonetical logic to their language, like Finland or Sweden, to have lower literacy rates, but in fact the opposite is true. Which makes me think it has more to do with state investment in education, rather than words being difficult to spell. In English, if you can't spell a word, just use a different expression, after all you've got between four and ten times as many words to choose from compared to other languages. We also have those lexicographical marvels known as dictionaries and spell checkers. Other simple methods of learning to spell include reading books and completing crosswords. jb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Why should we? No other language does this or would even consider it. Why not try Russian, the handwritten characters are different to the typed characters for one thing. They also have variations whereby letters change their sound depending where they are in a word. It's worked perfectly well for rather a long time so why should we change it now? Stop being lazy. If you think it's a ballache trying to teach kids the correct way to spell/speak then you really shouldn't be teaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.