Fivetide Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 language changes all the time, including the spelling. the oed is a historical document of spelling in the last year, not a guide for spelling in future years. [edit - i possibly shoulda read op huh? hell. nah.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 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? Absolutely not. Generations of children have mastered the language the way it's spelt so why would it suddenly be a problem today unless todays school kids are just a bit thicker than their forebears The French and German languages also have word spellings that dont correspond with the sounds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*_ash_* Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 Absolutely not. Generations of children have mastered the language the way it's spelt so why would it suddenly be a problem today unless todays school kids are just a bit thicker than their forebears The French and German languages also have word spellings that dont correspond with the sounds Many of which we pinched, and used/use Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garbo Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 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 you mean reet and neet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 If there was only one spelling of the word "practice" and you used it thus: "He is a practicing dentist" You wouldn't know whether he hadn't quite got the job right or if he was a working dentist..? Contrived. One doesn't practise to be a dentist, one trains; or studies. ---------- Post added 14-12-2012 at 01:56 ---------- Contrary view: wrong spelling misleads. Consider: A. Solicitors' practice for sale. B. Solicitors practise in Sheffield. Why is it misleading? The correct use of apostrophes renders misunderstanding unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nanrobbo Posted December 14, 2012 Share Posted December 14, 2012 NO I am still getting it right. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Absolutely not. Generations of children have mastered the language the way it's spelt so why would it suddenly be a problem today unless todays school kids are just a bit thicker than their forebears The French and German languages also have word spellings that dont correspond with the sounds Unfortunately (as I know you're US based), the Americans have already gone their own way with spelling. For instance using the 'Z' in many words that in English we would use an 'S' (realize - realise). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfish1936 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 I read a lot (past tense) from childhood and still do. My children thought reading was a normal activity for adults, so they read. Their children copied them. Because they read a lot, they see a lot of words on the printed page. So they recognise the words, and therefore have little difficulty spelling them. Now if they got most of their words from radio and TV, they wouldn't see the spelling, and therefore wouldn't recognise the words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 No. A little eccentricity is a wonderful thing. Children can learn the language, like what I done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 Doubleplusbad idea. (Yeah I know "idea" isn't really an expressible concept in what newspeak is supposed to become, couldn't think of another way to say it) ---------- Post added 15-12-2012 at 13:37 ---------- I think it is worth pointing out that it is us who have changed - the "z" is the old English spelling which became "s" over here but was maintained as "z" over there. That's true of quiet a few words arrogantly regarded as "Americanized" by the British. The fact is that the spelling of many of these words hasn't changed since the 17th century (when there was no standard spelling of anything) when English settlers arrived, meanwhile back in England, attempts were made to gentrify and romanticise the language and the spelling drifted. Just remember , American English is a different language to our own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.