English Language Reforms

[Aedes]

I'm sort of a conservative as well when it comes to language reforms. On the other hand, for whatever historical reason, you write "colour" and I write "color" and it doesn't really matter in the end if they're both regarded as acceptable. There needs to be some sort of rule system. Otherwise how can you ever run a spelling bee?

[xris]

Originally Posted by Aedes

I'm sort of a conservative as well when it comes to language reforms. On the other hand, for whatever historical reason, you write "colour" and I write "color" and it doesn't really matter in the end if they're both regarded as acceptable. There needs to be some sort of rule system. Otherwise how can you ever run a spelling bee?

I object to the piece meal changes without consideration. It does not consider the consequences, flour , flower are not chosen because the consequences are blatant. So why select silly examples of a complex language that has had centuries of subtle development. Any fool can change a word by phonetic reasoning, it takes learned souls, more than I, to examine a language and realise its consequences.

[soz]

Nicely stated, Aenas, I agree.

[Emil]

Originally Posted by Aedes

I'm sort of a conservative as well when it comes to language reforms. On the other hand, for whatever historical reason, you write "colour" and I write "color" and it doesn't really matter in the end if they're both regarded as acceptable. There needs to be some sort of rule system. Otherwise how can you ever run a spelling bee?

But obviously "color" is the better way to spell it. It is shorter, which allows for faster communication and it is closer to the sound of the word than "colour" is.

Cut Spelling, the spelling (and nothing else) reform proposal that I know the best, is really just removing letters that are redundant for pronunciation such as the "u" in "colour" (CS "colr"), the "u" and "h" in "psychology" (CS "sycoloji") etc.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Emil

But obviously "color" is the better way to spell it. It is shorter, which allows for faster communication and it is closer to the sound of the word than "colour" is.

Cut Spelling, the spelling (and nothing else) reform proposal that I know the best, is really just removing letters that are redundant for pronunciation such as the "u" in "colour" (CS "colr"), the "u" and "h" in "psychology" (CS "sycoloji") etc.

And now that reason has examined the question, what is chosen lies with the passions. That's what Hume said.

[Emil]

Originally Posted by kennethamy

And now that reason has examined the question, what is chosen lies with the passions. That's what Hume said.

I know. I read Hume already. (So I did read something old!)

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Emil

I know. I read Hume already. (So I did read something old!)

Yes. I would say, off hand, that your age-criterion for what you should read is not a resounding success. They say that "truth is the daughter of time".

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by Emil

But obviously "color" is the better way to spell it. It is shorter, which allows for faster communication and it is closer to the sound of the word than "colour" is.

It doesn't matter -- do you speak French? Do you have any idea how many written characters go unpronounced? Travaillent is pronounced "travai". They seem to be doing ok.

[kennethamy]

Originally Posted by Aedes

It doesn't matter -- do you speak French? Do you have any idea how many written characters go unpronounced? Travaillent is pronounced "travai". They seem to be doing ok.

What you write does not seem to be inconsistent with what Emil wrote. It is the sort of thing he advocates changing.

[Aedes]

I agree it's cumbersome. I don't agree it's worth changing.

For a native speaker it's not cumbersome at all -- it is what it is.

For someone learning the language, it's a different matter. If you know another Romance language, then the current French spelling is extremely easy because the conjugation is basically the same as in Spanish, Italian, etc, and it might be harder to learn if you just "simplified" the words. If you don't know another Romance language, it sure seems cumbersome.

But whom are we trying to help by simplifying words? "Lite" has become somewhat standard; does that mean we'll all have a "rite" hand? Sometimes just letting things take their own course is better than trying to force them.