Forums > Social Discussion > Simplified Spelling....diskuhs
Login/Join to ParticipateBRONZE Member
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA
Posted:
see heer
see heer
Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK
member
40 posts
Location: Adelaide
40 posts
Location: Adelaide
Posted:
He he... i like the idear! My speling is reely bad and this wood make life much eesier. Beter stil we cood just make up wot we wont and hav no rools. Then nowun wood larf at me wen i rite things like - I like twerling fiyer on a peece of chane.
He he... i like the idear! My speling is reely bad and this wood make life much eesier. Beter stil we cood just make up wot we wont and hav no rools. Then nowun wood larf at me wen i rite things like - I like twerling fiyer on a peece of chane.
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
would make things easier for people who learn English!
would make things easier for people who learn English!
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Against it. Unfortunately, the university semester is over, so I don't have acess to the online lecture notes to quote for you, but we actually covered this in linguistics.
Basically, as it says in the article. It's not feasible. There are just so many sounds in the English language that to have a different symbol for every one of them would just be highly difficult. Has anyone seen the phoenetic alphabet? Where the symbols (still arbitrary in design) describe not the sound, but the physical way in which we create the sound. You really don't want to to spell that way, by thinking about the position of your tongue when you say it.
Also, with things like word meaning, and related words, if we start spelling words in simplified spelling, we will lose the connections between related words. For example, we know words begining in "circ" refer to the shape that as only one singular and smooth side. It distinguished from other words begining with "sir".
It wouldn't necessarily make it easier for those learning English as a foreign language because of the above reasons.
Furthermore, simplified spelling is somewhat of a myth anyway. Sure, "creation" sounds like "kreashon" but that is exclusive to the English language. We may use the same characters as German, Spanish, French, etc, but we don't pronounce the letters in the same way. "ce" in Romanian is different to Spanish (Castillian) is different to Italian is different to English. The sounds relating to the letters we see is arbitrary, therefore simplified spelling is really just changing from one arbitrary thing to another.
That is not to say I am against evolution of language and spelling. But sudden and forced change is another thing and I think that forced changes to a language are very unlikely to work.
I honestly don't think it will solve too much.
Against it. Unfortunately, the university semester is over, so I don't have acess to the online lecture notes to quote for you, but we actually covered this in linguistics.
Basically, as it says in the article. It's not feasible. There are just so many sounds in the English language that to have a different symbol for every one of them would just be highly difficult. Has anyone seen the phoenetic alphabet? Where the symbols (still arbitrary in design) describe not the sound, but the physical way in which we create the sound. You really don't want to to spell that way, by thinking about the position of your tongue when you say it.
Also, with things like word meaning, and related words, if we start spelling words in simplified spelling, we will lose the connections between related words. For example, we know words begining in "circ" refer to the shape that as only one singular and smooth side. It distinguished from other words begining with "sir".
It wouldn't necessarily make it easier for those learning English as a foreign language because of the above reasons.
Furthermore, simplified spelling is somewhat of a myth anyway. Sure, "creation" sounds like "kreashon" but that is exclusive to the English language. We may use the same characters as German, Spanish, French, etc, but we don't pronounce the letters in the same way. "ce" in Romanian is different to Spanish (Castillian) is different to Italian is different to English. The sounds relating to the letters we see is arbitrary, therefore simplified spelling is really just changing from one arbitrary thing to another.
That is not to say I am against evolution of language and spelling. But sudden and forced change is another thing and I think that forced changes to a language are very unlikely to work.
I honestly don't think it will solve too much.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
Good Ol' Yarn For Hair
422 posts
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
422 posts
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posted:
.... it makes me sad.
I'm sorry, but I keep feeling a strange sense of failure at the thoughts of the education system in place these days that would come up with such things and the students who encourage it.
I understand, I have very little room to speak on this matter. I originally went to a pre-engineering high school and left that after deciding that both mechanical and civil engineering were filled with too much red tape and regulations to truly enjoy designing. So, I went to art. I'm considered to be a rather grand failure and a quitter by my high school's standards. However, are we really encouraging a failure of basic education to the point that we feel the need to entirely rework the English language to accomodate this?
However, this all is a truly old argument for me (compromising our educational system, language, or any other standard to make things easier for poor students). I really believe it is a cop-out, for lack of a better term, for teachers and the education system to pass students who perform poorly. Perhaps this is because the vast majority of educators who I have had the extreme pleasure of studying under, were all creative and dedicated to their students to an excessive degree. I've been rather spoiled in this aspect.
I am for the evolution of language and of thought in general. In fact, I've been rather fascinated by communication arts (who else has heard the infamous NOVA, "No va" joke about the failed sales of the Chevy Nova with Spanish speaking nations?) However, according to the article, this change is meant to make it easier to learn the English language and to learn to read and write.
And I do have to agree with the logic of it won't help solve much. Understanding a language has a lot to do with familiarity with the phonetics for both the written and spoken parts of the language, but, without a sound comprehension of what the sounds actually mean or how they go together appropriately, it doesn't mean anything.
*deep breath*
*calms down*
Sorry. Like I said, it's rather a pet peeve of mine. I had this same problem in two different classes at school. A lot of students in both my History of Graphic Design and my Science of Light classes bickered and complained about why they had to take those classes. History of Graphic Design is a requied class for graphic design students (in my eyes, you have to know where the field has been to know where it's going). Science of Light is a required course for animation students (a fellow GD student and myself were in there as an elective course, who both couldn't understand why animation students could not see the importance of understanding fully how light reacts and behaves with objects in the environment).
*steps away from soapbox*
.... it makes me sad.
I'm sorry, but I keep feeling a strange sense of failure at the thoughts of the education system in place these days that would come up with such things and the students who encourage it.
I understand, I have very little room to speak on this matter. I originally went to a pre-engineering high school and left that after deciding that both mechanical and civil engineering were filled with too much red tape and regulations to truly enjoy designing. So, I went to art. I'm considered to be a rather grand failure and a quitter by my high school's standards. However, are we really encouraging a failure of basic education to the point that we feel the need to entirely rework the English language to accomodate this?
However, this all is a truly old argument for me (compromising our educational system, language, or any other standard to make things easier for poor students). I really believe it is a cop-out, for lack of a better term, for teachers and the education system to pass students who perform poorly. Perhaps this is because the vast majority of educators who I have had the extreme pleasure of studying under, were all creative and dedicated to their students to an excessive degree. I've been rather spoiled in this aspect.
I am for the evolution of language and of thought in general. In fact, I've been rather fascinated by communication arts (who else has heard the infamous NOVA, "No va" joke about the failed sales of the Chevy Nova with Spanish speaking nations?) However, according to the article, this change is meant to make it easier to learn the English language and to learn to read and write.
And I do have to agree with the logic of it won't help solve much. Understanding a language has a lot to do with familiarity with the phonetics for both the written and spoken parts of the language, but, without a sound comprehension of what the sounds actually mean or how they go together appropriately, it doesn't mean anything.
*deep breath*
*calms down*
Sorry. Like I said, it's rather a pet peeve of mine. I had this same problem in two different classes at school. A lot of students in both my History of Graphic Design and my Science of Light classes bickered and complained about why they had to take those classes. History of Graphic Design is a requied class for graphic design students (in my eyes, you have to know where the field has been to know where it's going). Science of Light is a required course for animation students (a fellow GD student and myself were in there as an elective course, who both couldn't understand why animation students could not see the importance of understanding fully how light reacts and behaves with objects in the environment).
*steps away from soapbox*
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
you could change the pronunciation then so that words are actually said like they're written
I wasn't actually too serious, I do believe it wouldn't work, but if it did that would make things a lot easier. Or at least get people to stop laughing at foreigners mispronouncing a word that sounds different from one with a similar combination of letters
you could change the pronunciation then so that words are actually said like they're written
I wasn't actually too serious, I do believe it wouldn't work, but if it did that would make things a lot easier. Or at least get people to stop laughing at foreigners mispronouncing a word that sounds different from one with a similar combination of letters
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
didn't this aready happen...?
analog, anesthesia, archeology, catalog, center, color, curb, defense, dialog, donut, encyclopedia, favorite, gage, gray, hauler, honor, humor, jewelry, maneuver, meter, mold, mustache, nite, omelet, pajamas, program, specialty, tire, vise...
cole. x
didn't this aready happen...?
analog, anesthesia, archeology, catalog, center, color, curb, defense, dialog, donut, encyclopedia, favorite, gage, gray, hauler, honor, humor, jewelry, maneuver, meter, mold, mustache, nite, omelet, pajamas, program, specialty, tire, vise...
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
I don't recognise some of those words! Some I can recognise, but others I had no idea the spelling had even changed! like, "mold" is that "mould"? like the green stuff?
I don't recognise some of those words! Some I can recognise, but others I had no idea the spelling had even changed! like, "mold" is that "mould"? like the green stuff?
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
SILVER Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,172 posts
Location: Hastings, United Kingdom
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,172 posts
Location: Hastings, United Kingdom
Posted:
"Simplified Spelling....diskuhs"
It's taken 2 hours for me to click what the latter word actually was
Since leaving school and enrolling in an art college my writing practice has literally gone out the window due to the curriclum..it means spelling is so much harder, as I'm out of practice, and keeping handwriting neat and eligable (some of my words are written backwards sometimes
) is extremely hard..
Having said that I'm completely against making English spelt phonetically.
The whole thing looks similar to abbriviated 'text' speak, which irritates me beyond belief. It has a way that it is spelt..so I (try to) spell it how it is spelt, not what I think it sounds like..
That's the way is it
Words evolve and change individually through time, yet a complete overhaul, in my opinion, would cause confusion for those practising English, and those learning it...
"Simplified Spelling....diskuhs"
It's taken 2 hours for me to click what the latter word actually was
Since leaving school and enrolling in an art college my writing practice has literally gone out the window due to the curriclum..it means spelling is so much harder, as I'm out of practice, and keeping handwriting neat and eligable (some of my words are written backwards sometimes
) is extremely hard..Having said that I'm completely against making English spelt phonetically.
The whole thing looks similar to abbriviated 'text' speak, which irritates me beyond belief. It has a way that it is spelt..so I (try to) spell it how it is spelt, not what I think it sounds like..
That's the way is it
Words evolve and change individually through time, yet a complete overhaul, in my opinion, would cause confusion for those practising English, and those learning it...
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
i got the list from here rouge.
the reason i was being flippant is just cos i have nothing more of value to add - i agree with everything rouge said in her first post
cole. x
i got the list from here rouge.
the reason i was being flippant is just cos i have nothing more of value to add - i agree with everything rouge said in her first post
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
SILVER Member
Momma Bear
4,525 posts
Location: Telford, Shrops, United Kingdom
Momma Bear
4,525 posts
Location: Telford, Shrops, United Kingdom
Posted:
I like our English spellings. I like being pedantic when people spell things wrong. I like being able to help Sym spell stuff (he's got dyslexia). mainly because I'm good at spelling and it makes me feel big and clever.
I like our English spellings. I like being pedantic when people spell things wrong. I like being able to help Sym spell stuff (he's got dyslexia). mainly because I'm good at spelling and it makes me feel big and clever.
Hoppers are angels who lift us to our feet when our wings have trouble remembering how to fly.
GOLD Member
hehe, 'Member' huhuh
6,120 posts
Location: Behind you. With Jam
hehe, 'Member' huhuh
6,120 posts
Location: Behind you. With Jam
Posted:
It's quite infuriating because it seems that people, including really intelligent people use txt tlk as a means of rebelling against the established sense of what it means to be intelligent - i.e. well read, gramatically articulate and have an extensive vocabulary.
I agree that idea that language and communication aren't the same thing and that one doesn't have to have the literary skills of a poet laureat or the vocabulary of the most cunning linguist to be intelligent.
But establishing text talk as something to aspire to smacks of a sense of resignation by the board of education. That they feel like leveling the playing field in order to get pupils interested in certain subjects instead of making an effort to teach them proper english before giving them the choice to use it or not...
Just imagine how impenetrable Legal Documents, which are the epitome of tedium to read, write and decipher would be if they were written in text talk...
It's quite infuriating because it seems that people, including really intelligent people use txt tlk as a means of rebelling against the established sense of what it means to be intelligent - i.e. well read, gramatically articulate and have an extensive vocabulary.
I agree that idea that language and communication aren't the same thing and that one doesn't have to have the literary skills of a poet laureat or the vocabulary of the most cunning linguist to be intelligent.
But establishing text talk as something to aspire to smacks of a sense of resignation by the board of education. That they feel like leveling the playing field in order to get pupils interested in certain subjects instead of making an effort to teach them proper english before giving them the choice to use it or not...
Just imagine how impenetrable Legal Documents, which are the epitome of tedium to read, write and decipher would be if they were written in text talk...
"I used to want to change the world, now I just wanna leave the room with a little dignity..." - Lotus Weinstock
BRONZE Member
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
had her carpal tunnel surgery already thanks v much
4,145 posts
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland (UK)
Posted:
Neon, if there was a way it would work it would be unintelligible for now, but people would get used to it.
Speaking out of experience, we've had a big argument about a reform of writing in Germany, partly to make it easier for children (especially 2nd generation migrants and those with reading/writing difficulties). Some words that were spelt differently from all others with the same word stem were changed, and there were changes to exceptions in capitalisation and all that.
The result was that there were so many new exceptions to make amends for everyone involved in planning it that it's not much of a difference now. But then, we've always spelt most things the way they are pronounced...
The only big change was in punctuation, which in my opinion, by allowing more variety, has made things less clear.
But in the end, most people who moaned really loudly have shut up now, and life goes on
Also, historically speaking, people have ALWAYS changed spelling and pronunciation, it's just that now it can't happen "naturally" but needs to be done by law. I don't see a problem with changing some words, even if I think British English looks prettier and classier than the American version, in school I appreciated that we were allowed to use either and not be too worried about missing out a silent "ue" after a g and getting a bad mark for it.
Neon, if there was a way it would work it would be unintelligible for now, but people would get used to it.
Speaking out of experience, we've had a big argument about a reform of writing in Germany, partly to make it easier for children (especially 2nd generation migrants and those with reading/writing difficulties). Some words that were spelt differently from all others with the same word stem were changed, and there were changes to exceptions in capitalisation and all that.
The result was that there were so many new exceptions to make amends for everyone involved in planning it that it's not much of a difference now. But then, we've always spelt most things the way they are pronounced...
The only big change was in punctuation, which in my opinion, by allowing more variety, has made things less clear.
But in the end, most people who moaned really loudly have shut up now, and life goes on
Also, historically speaking, people have ALWAYS changed spelling and pronunciation, it's just that now it can't happen "naturally" but needs to be done by law. I don't see a problem with changing some words, even if I think British English looks prettier and classier than the American version, in school I appreciated that we were allowed to use either and not be too worried about missing out a silent "ue" after a g and getting a bad mark for it.
"vices are like genitals - most are ugly to behold, and yet we find that our own are dear to us."
(G.W. Dahlquist)
Owner of Dragosani's left half
BRONZE Member
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA
the henna lady
6,193 posts
Location: WNY, USA
Posted:
First of all...sorry Aimee, that made me laugh though!
Next, beyond this being stupidly impossible for all the reasons listed, it would have to take dialect into account.
I had a text book once that was written in Texas. The grammar in it was completely foreign.
Now, knowing that there are about as many dialects to the American-English as there are townships here it would make this nearly impossible. The word 'new' alone would be pronounced Nuh, Noo and Neh..as a start.
Quite frankly, as someone who has taught elementary school, the kids didn't have issues nearly as much as most adults I know do.
First of all...sorry Aimee, that made me laugh though!
Next, beyond this being stupidly impossible for all the reasons listed, it would have to take dialect into account.
I had a text book once that was written in Texas. The grammar in it was completely foreign.
Now, knowing that there are about as many dialects to the American-English as there are townships here it would make this nearly impossible. The word 'new' alone would be pronounced Nuh, Noo and Neh..as a start.
Quite frankly, as someone who has taught elementary school, the kids didn't have issues nearly as much as most adults I know do.
Pele
Higher, higher burning fire...making music like a choir
"Oooh look! A pub!" -exclaimed after recovering from a stupid fall
"And for the decadence of art, nothing beats a roaring fire." -TMK
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
I dunno. I definately think that English spelling is so nonsensical as to be humorous. Our language is absurdly hard for foreigners to pronounce (Spanish has exactly five vowel sounds, we have lord-knows-how-many) and it's so hard to spell that the letters really don't even stand for sounds anymore. It's more like Chinese characters. I mean, "phlegm."
People are opposed to the change because they're accustomed to having their spelling a certain way. But ultimately I think it's an idiotic system that we have and we should change it.
Unfortunately, we won't. We won't for the same reason that we're still using English units of measurement and QWERTY keyboards. Tradition.
I dunno. I definately think that English spelling is so nonsensical as to be humorous. Our language is absurdly hard for foreigners to pronounce (Spanish has exactly five vowel sounds, we have lord-knows-how-many) and it's so hard to spell that the letters really don't even stand for sounds anymore. It's more like Chinese characters. I mean, "phlegm."
People are opposed to the change because they're accustomed to having their spelling a certain way. But ultimately I think it's an idiotic system that we have and we should change it.
Unfortunately, we won't. We won't for the same reason that we're still using English units of measurement and QWERTY keyboards. Tradition.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
member
37 posts
37 posts
Posted:
I bellyfeel ingsoc newspeak. Simplied spelling should crimestop thought crime.
double plus good.
https://www.newspeakdictionary.com/
EDITED_BY: astar2 (1152201798)
I bellyfeel ingsoc newspeak. Simplied spelling should crimestop thought crime.
double plus good.
https://www.newspeakdictionary.com/
EDITED_BY: astar2 (1152201798)
SILVER Member
Brown
288 posts
Location: Behind You!, United Kingdom
Brown
288 posts
Location: Behind You!, United Kingdom
Posted:
I agree that our way of spelling is very hard for foreigners to pronounce, In other languges (Gujarati to name one) words are spelt as the are spoken. This makes it easy for anyone reading it pronounce the words.
But im sure tradition however will ensure that our kooky way of spelling is kept!
I agree that our way of spelling is very hard for foreigners to pronounce, In other languges (Gujarati to name one) words are spelt as the are spoken. This makes it easy for anyone reading it pronounce the words.
But im sure tradition however will ensure that our kooky way of spelling is kept!
Official Nutella Fan Club
Go Nutella!
BRONZE Member
Mistress of Pink...Multicoloured
6,140 posts
Location: Over There, United Kingdom
Mistress of Pink...Multicoloured
6,140 posts
Location: Over There, United Kingdom
Posted:
I'm with Rouge on this one,
Also Pele brings up a very good point. I know in England we have so many different accents and dialects, it would be impossible to spell words how they sound for everyone. At least with how the language is spelt at the moment we can read it how it is said in our own accent/dialect.
I'm with Rouge on this one,
Also Pele brings up a very good point. I know in England we have so many different accents and dialects, it would be impossible to spell words how they sound for everyone. At least with how the language is spelt at the moment we can read it how it is said in our own accent/dialect.
Never pick up a duck in a dungeon...
GOLD Member
hehe, 'Member' huhuh
6,120 posts
Location: Behind you. With Jam
hehe, 'Member' huhuh
6,120 posts
Location: Behind you. With Jam
Posted:
Thing is this is SORT OF how it is in China - Mandarin, Cantonese and Hak Ka are all actually regional dialects but different enough from each other to be classed as actual languages. But the written language for all these dialects are EXACTLY the same... and they cope very well with that system...
Once you start phoneticising every dialect it's just gonna get confusing!
Thing is this is SORT OF how it is in China - Mandarin, Cantonese and Hak Ka are all actually regional dialects but different enough from each other to be classed as actual languages. But the written language for all these dialects are EXACTLY the same... and they cope very well with that system...
Once you start phoneticising every dialect it's just gonna get confusing!
"I used to want to change the world, now I just wanna leave the room with a little dignity..." - Lotus Weinstock
newbie
6 posts
6 posts
Posted:
Dumbing down a language is.. stupid. Why are there so many stupid kids out there who can't read? Well, they wouldn't happen to be the kind of kids who become 13 year-old alcholic drug-abusers, would they? Surely they don't come from families with no father figure and a single mother who works all day to support them, right?
The only thing we need is for people, both children and adult, to take some responsibility. To be honest, if some delinquent child doesn't want to cooperate in school, and his/her parents aren't disciplining him/her so s/he can learn how to read and write properly, screw them. I hate assholes who get everything handed to them on a silver platter, who are showered with resources, and just simply don't take the opportunity in front of their eyes.
Dumbing down a language is.. stupid. Why are there so many stupid kids out there who can't read? Well, they wouldn't happen to be the kind of kids who become 13 year-old alcholic drug-abusers, would they? Surely they don't come from families with no father figure and a single mother who works all day to support them, right?
The only thing we need is for people, both children and adult, to take some responsibility. To be honest, if some delinquent child doesn't want to cooperate in school, and his/her parents aren't disciplining him/her so s/he can learn how to read and write properly, screw them. I hate assholes who get everything handed to them on a silver platter, who are showered with resources, and just simply don't take the opportunity in front of their eyes.
activist for HoPper liberation.
1,643 posts
Location: ffidrac
1,643 posts
Location: ffidrac
Posted:
i can't read that at all, those examples they gave, it's too hard, it all depends what you're used to i guess. Living in wales means i know how to pronounce (welsh) words without vowels even though i can't speak welsh, other people can't. then i look at gaelic and i have no idea how to sound a bh together...
I don't think english is too hard, it is already seems to have one of the least strict grammatical structures, which i have been told by many people learning english as a second language is the hardest part for them to learn. In the same way i found it hard to understand the grammatical elements of learning german in school because i had hardly any understanding of what the english equivalent would be. Although i did have a very good and scary teacher in primary school who drummed in the things like too, to, two, there, their, they're and also that 7 x 8 is 56. if it wasn't for her i'm not sure i would've known what a noun was...
Simplifying spelling is just going to make it more difficult for people to learn... especially those learning it as a second language. And probably english speakers will become even more lazy and retarded when it comes to learning other languages, because they will seem far too complex.
i can't read that at all, those examples they gave, it's too hard, it all depends what you're used to i guess. Living in wales means i know how to pronounce (welsh) words without vowels even though i can't speak welsh, other people can't. then i look at gaelic and i have no idea how to sound a bh together...
I don't think english is too hard, it is already seems to have one of the least strict grammatical structures, which i have been told by many people learning english as a second language is the hardest part for them to learn. In the same way i found it hard to understand the grammatical elements of learning german in school because i had hardly any understanding of what the english equivalent would be. Although i did have a very good and scary teacher in primary school who drummed in the things like too, to, two, there, their, they're and also that 7 x 8 is 56. if it wasn't for her i'm not sure i would've known what a noun was...
Simplifying spelling is just going to make it more difficult for people to learn... especially those learning it as a second language. And probably english speakers will become even more lazy and retarded when it comes to learning other languages, because they will seem far too complex.
Aurinko freedom agreement reached 10th Sept 2006
if it makes no sense that's because it's NOn-sense.
activist for HoPper liberation.
1,643 posts
Location: ffidrac
1,643 posts
Location: ffidrac
Posted:
from the article >
"Lurning English reqierz roet memory rather than lojic, he sed."
what's roet?? i have absoluely no clue....
from the article >
"Lurning English reqierz roet memory rather than lojic, he sed."
what's roet?? i have absoluely no clue....
Aurinko freedom agreement reached 10th Sept 2006
if it makes no sense that's because it's NOn-sense.
SILVER Member
Brown
288 posts
Location: Behind You!, United Kingdom
Brown
288 posts
Location: Behind You!, United Kingdom
Posted:
Found this while mooching around Clicky Clicky
EDIT:
This ones good too, from the same site Click ME
EDITED_BY: say_cheese (1152264407)
Found this while mooching around Clicky Clicky
EDIT:
This ones good too, from the same site Click ME
EDITED_BY: say_cheese (1152264407)
Official Nutella Fan Club
Go Nutella!
BRONZE Member
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,191 posts
Location: Sihanoukville, cambodia
Carpal \'Tunnel
4,191 posts
Location: Sihanoukville, cambodia
Posted:
Theres always one in there somewhere Dave!
But yes i agree 100% with Miss Rouge Dragon!
Written by: Neon_Shaolin
cunning lunguist
Theres always one in there somewhere Dave!
But yes i agree 100% with Miss Rouge Dragon!
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Who's dumbing down? And are all Spaniards stupid? They have a phonetic language. So do the Israelis. And Portugese. And Hindi. And Japanese. If making a language phonetic is "dumbing it down" then you'd better assemble quite an army because a whole bunch of countries could take serious offense to what you just said!
Learning English is HARD. I have three degrees and I still make the occasional spelling mistake. I was in my 4th year of medical school before I finally got the spelling of "maintenance" down pat. My written Spanish, on the other hand, is about an 8th-grade level and I almost never make a spelling mistake. Why? The language is completely phonetic other than words it's borrowed from...you guessed it...English.
If I had to pick an international language, I'd go with Spanish.
Written by: AnDien
Dumbing down a language is.. stupid. Why are there so many stupid kids out there who can't read?
Who's dumbing down? And are all Spaniards stupid? They have a phonetic language. So do the Israelis. And Portugese. And Hindi. And Japanese. If making a language phonetic is "dumbing it down" then you'd better assemble quite an army because a whole bunch of countries could take serious offense to what you just said!
Learning English is HARD. I have three degrees and I still make the occasional spelling mistake. I was in my 4th year of medical school before I finally got the spelling of "maintenance" down pat. My written Spanish, on the other hand, is about an 8th-grade level and I almost never make a spelling mistake. Why? The language is completely phonetic other than words it's borrowed from...you guessed it...English.
If I had to pick an international language, I'd go with Spanish.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
SILVER Member
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
big and good and broken
7,330 posts
Location: lunn dunn, yoo kay, United Kingdom
Posted:
i think you misinterpreted that quote mike.
a language that develops phonetically is great.
but forcibly turning a language into a phonetic form is a simplification that will result in a reduction of the language's nuances and complexities which in turn reduces the number of explicit ways in which one can express an idea.
phonetic languages tend to end up having phrases that can be used to express more than one idea depending on context.
this seems fine when it comes to everday communication but presents a problem when it comes to situations that require expicit, unambiguous definitions (e.g. law).
cole. x
Written by: Doc LightningWritten by: AnDien
Dumbing down a language is.. stupid. Why are there so many stupid kids out there who can't read?
Who's dumbing down? And are all Spaniards stupid? They have a phonetic language. So do the Israelis. And Portugese. And Hindi. And Japanese. If making a language phonetic is "dumbing it down" then you'd better assemble quite an army because a whole bunch of countries could take serious offense to what you just said!
i think you misinterpreted that quote mike.
a language that develops phonetically is great.
but forcibly turning a language into a phonetic form is a simplification that will result in a reduction of the language's nuances and complexities which in turn reduces the number of explicit ways in which one can express an idea.
phonetic languages tend to end up having phrases that can be used to express more than one idea depending on context.
this seems fine when it comes to everday communication but presents a problem when it comes to situations that require expicit, unambiguous definitions (e.g. law).
cole. x
"i see you at 'dis cafe.
i come to 'dis cafe quite a lot myself.
they do porridge."
- tim westwood
old hand
898 posts
Location: Binstead, Isle of Wight
898 posts
Location: Binstead, Isle of Wight
Posted:
I fully agree with Rouge.
I fully agree with Rouge.
Ask a question and be a fool for a minute...don't ask and be a fool your whole life.
Good Ol' Yarn For Hair
422 posts
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
422 posts
Location: Atlanta, GA, USA
Posted:
I would agree with picking Spanish over English any day (who doesn't love having a simple formula for verb conjugation and being able to tell EXACTLY where the appropriate stress goes on a word?)
However, the subject at hand really seems to about not only the change itself, but the actual process of the change. No one is saying that other languages are dumb. However, we are saying that forcing an entire language to suddenly and abruptly change to a simplified format, rather than allowing the language to naturally evolve along it's own accord, is what's stupid.
Well, at least, that's what a lot of other people are saying. Me, I just don't like cutting corners to make things easy when it won't help as much in the long haul (like I said, reading/hearing vs. understanding/listening).
Like I said, I love Spanish. A friend of mine used to speak so beautifully, but so utterly demonically. Something about his voice combined with the syllable set he was working with in a poem. I like the pace and sound combinations that arise from well-spoken Spanish. However, this doesn't mean I think blugeoning another language to make it similar is the way to go.
I would agree with picking Spanish over English any day (who doesn't love having a simple formula for verb conjugation and being able to tell EXACTLY where the appropriate stress goes on a word?)
However, the subject at hand really seems to about not only the change itself, but the actual process of the change. No one is saying that other languages are dumb. However, we are saying that forcing an entire language to suddenly and abruptly change to a simplified format, rather than allowing the language to naturally evolve along it's own accord, is what's stupid.
Well, at least, that's what a lot of other people are saying. Me, I just don't like cutting corners to make things easy when it won't help as much in the long haul (like I said, reading/hearing vs. understanding/listening).
Like I said, I love Spanish. A friend of mine used to speak so beautifully, but so utterly demonically. Something about his voice combined with the syllable set he was working with in a poem. I like the pace and sound combinations that arise from well-spoken Spanish. However, this doesn't mean I think blugeoning another language to make it similar is the way to go.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Law? Unambiguous?
Now... Spelling is what it is. However, why not change spellings to get rid of some of the more absurd letter combinations? Like...for example... "phlegm" (my favorite). Should be "Flem."
Written by: coleman
this seems fine when it comes to everday communication but presents a problem when it comes to situations that require expicit, unambiguous definitions (e.g. law).
cole. x
Law? Unambiguous?
Now... Spelling is what it is. However, why not change spellings to get rid of some of the more absurd letter combinations? Like...for example... "phlegm" (my favorite). Should be "Flem."
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
member
37 posts
37 posts
Posted:
from phlegm to flem, like sulphur to sulfur, one of my least faviroute american lead butcherings of a word.
from phlegm to flem, like sulphur to sulfur, one of my least faviroute american lead butcherings of a word.
BRONZE Member
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Insert Champagne Here
13,215 posts
Location: without class distinction, Australia
Posted:
Spanish and Japanese are written phoenetically because of the nature of the languages. Japanese only has 5 vowel sounds, as does Spanish. Therefore they have the capcity to be written phoenetically, however because English has a lot more than 5 (sorry, going to work soon and no time to look up my notes) and therefore lacks the capacity to be written phoenetically. As I said earlier, to write English as it sounded, would require writing it using the phoenetic alphabet, or to completely change the language to one where it was spoken using a much leser amount of vowel sounds.
Not to mention the horrible decision someone would have to make about which dialect of English becomes the basis for new spelling. And I believe there is enough elitism in the dialects of English as it is without something like this being forced onto the population.
Spanish and Japanese are written phoenetically because of the nature of the languages. Japanese only has 5 vowel sounds, as does Spanish. Therefore they have the capcity to be written phoenetically, however because English has a lot more than 5 (sorry, going to work soon and no time to look up my notes) and therefore lacks the capacity to be written phoenetically. As I said earlier, to write English as it sounded, would require writing it using the phoenetic alphabet, or to completely change the language to one where it was spoken using a much leser amount of vowel sounds.
Not to mention the horrible decision someone would have to make about which dialect of English becomes the basis for new spelling. And I believe there is enough elitism in the dialects of English as it is without something like this being forced onto the population.
i would have changed ***** to phallus, and claire to petey Petey
Rougie: but that's what I'm doing here
Arnwyn: what letting me adjust myself in your room?..don't you dare quote that on HoP...
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com