Spelling is ruining the English language

[Aliantha]

Originally Posted by Kingswood

A rather big helping of hyperbole and emotive language, but nobody's going to buy it. Why do you think that the world is going to go to hell just because someone suggests that we choose to fix something that's demonstrably in need of repair? In France they recently chose to cut the surplus I from oignon (onion) in a spelling reform (among other changes), and these changes didn't cause the Eiffel Tower to crash to the ground nor cause buildings in Paris to crumble.

I don't think the world will go to hell if people decide to change the english language to suit themselves. Obviously either it's already gone to hell, or changing it to suit ourselves doesn't have that effect.

France chooses to blow things up left, right and centre. Should the rest of the world do that too?

Some kids only struggle with spelling because people believe that spellings are immutable and must be learnt no matter how haphazard they are. Yet that is not so for other languages. There is hardly a major language in the world that does not systematically revise its spellings from time to time.

I guess you should send the queen a note about doing a revision of the english language. My guess is she wont be favourable, but I guess you never know.

Would you want to end up with a language like Tibetan, where the written language has not been revised for 2000 years and about one-third of the letters in every word are silent or phonologically incorrect?

I guess we'll just have to wait another 1500 years or so and see what happens to the english language. My guess is there'll be no vowels left at all if the teenagers have anything to do with it.

As for kids having difficulties with reading and spelling, did you know that they need special tests with brain scanners to identify dyslexics among Italian speakers? Italian orthography is regular, and dyslexia is not a disability when the orthography is regular.

Aren't we talking about english?

More emotive language, and this "wringer" argument would be the better for some elaboration.

Incidentally, Americans spell "bastardise" differently, with a -ize suffix. That came about because Noah Webster, founder of the Webster dictionary, was a spelling reformer who sought to establish American language standards after the American Revolution. Much of the difference between British and American spellings came about due to spelling reforms in America that were not adopted in Britain.

Your assertion that languages evolve is inconsistent with your view that spellings should not be changed. Spellings evolve, too.

As for anarchy, English already has that.

My assertion that languages evolve is not related to my view that spellings should not be changed. One is a fact and the other is my opinion. Whether I like it or not, the english language has changed and will continue to change. I simply believe that the fact that some kids have trouble with the rules of language or find it boring is not a good enough reason to go and change things just to make it easier for them.