Why Do Protesters Gather at the Spelling Bee?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pattonias
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around a protest by a small group advocating for phonetic spelling outside the Scripps National Spelling Bee. Critics argue that this movement promotes a "dumbing down" of language, suggesting that it undermines the importance of learning traditional spelling. They express concerns that simplifying spelling could hinder literacy and job prospects, while also questioning the motivations of the protesters, some of whom may have personal stakes in the spelling bee's outcomes. The conversation touches on the complexities of language evolution, the challenges of English spelling, and the implications of adopting phonetic systems. Participants also debate the merits of language simplification versus maintaining traditional forms, with some humorously suggesting extreme measures to address perceived educational shortcomings. Overall, the thread reflects a tension between the desire for accessibility in language and the value placed on linguistic tradition and complexity.
Pattonias
Messages
196
Reaction score
0
There are protesters for everything now-a-days.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/04/AR2010060403296.html"

A tiny group of activists for phonetic spelling gathered again Friday outside the Scripps National Spelling Bee at the downtown Grand Hyatt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I saw that, rihdickyoulus!

Sure, let's not try to make people learn, let's just dumb everything down. While we're at it, I say no numbers higher than ten or lower than 0 'cause I've only got ten fingers and I wear shoes.
 
I think this is ridikyoolus.
 
yeah lol

If they got their way, "you" would become "yoo," "believe" would become "beleeve" and "said" would become "sed."

The cost of clinging to traditional spellings, they say, is millions of illiterate English speakers who struggle to read signs or get good jobs, and billions of dollars in lost productivity.
 
How much would spelling change from one accent to another?
 
to make things as simple as possible, i propose that each word have it's own character.
 
If they are too dumb to spell, I don't think dumbing down the language will make them a candidate for a good job.
 
They're saying it's too difficult to learn to spell English words? Then why would they protest outside of a building that's full of elementary school kids who have mastered it?
They must all be parents of kids who couldn't cut it in the spelling bee.
 
Ai em from abroth.
Hau dus det impect my spelling?
 
  • #10
Proton Soup said:
to make things as simple as possible, i propose that each word have it's own character.
Kind of like Chinese? now, that's an easy language. :bugeye:
 
  • #11
What's wrong with making communication as simple as possible? Think organic chemistry.
 
  • #12
Evo said:
I saw that, rihdickyoulus!

Sure, let's not try to make people learn, let's just dumb everything down. While we're at it, I say no numbers higher than ten or lower than 0 'cause I've only got ten fingers and I wear shoes.

Heh! It's summer! Take your shoes off!
 
  • #13
Evo said:
Kind of like Chinese? now, that's an easy language. :bugeye:

exactly like chinese, yes. :wink:

as for problem speelers, sometimes it's a reflection of the laziness of the student. other times, i think it may show a lack of some brain hardware. I've got a neighbor who can't read at all, and another guy who was salutatorian at my high school was a terrible speller, but now teaches college math, so...
 
  • #14
Pattonias said:
There are protesters for everything now-a-days.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/04/AR2010060403296.html"

We call them attention whores.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #15
Wouldn't that be attention hores? Or however else it should be spelled :rolleyes:
 
  • #16
I don't think that spelling is an important skill. As for phonetic spelling, I have posted this several times already. It is not for sure that Twain actually wrote it, but it is usually ascribed to him.

A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling
by Mark Twain

For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all.

Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" -- bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez -- tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli.

Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.
 
  • #17
If they are going for phonetics, why not just have text speak? I mean why spell won/one whatever when you can put 1.

then u cn talk lk this & no1 cud say itz rong
 
  • #18
xxChrisxx said:
If they are going for phonetics, why not just have text speak? I mean why spell won/one whatever when you can put 1.

then u cn talk lk this & no1 cud say itz rong

I would move to China or India. If we made that change to our vocabulary, no one could argue that the United States was no longer the world's most powerful country. We would be living in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy" .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
My only 2 main irrational peeves with US words are.

Airplane. It's aeroplane. And aluminium. I know both spellings are accepted equally now)

I'm fine with you lot using z where s should be used, or omitting the u from colour and armour etc. But the above 2 really wind me up for some reason.

Oh and whilst I'm at it it's a pain in the bloody arse that you all still use ******* imperial units for engineering work, makes my job so much harder.[/rant] I know it's off topic, but meh.

EDIT: I'm very sorry about this, I seem to be venting a lot today.
 
  • #20
xxChrisxx said:
My only 2 main irrational peeves with US words are.

Airplane. It's aeroplane. And aluminium. I know both spellings are accepted equally now)

I'm fine with you lot using z where s should be used, or omitting the u from colour and armour etc. But the above 2 really wind me up for some reason.

Oh and whilst I'm at it it's a pain in the bloody arse that you all still use ******* imperial units for engineering work, makes my job so much harder.


[/rant] I know it's off topic, but meh.


I find it slightly amusing that you rail at the US for changing the spelling of words, and for not changing the units of measurements.


Also

"I think right now the young people are sending us a text message," said protester Roberta Mahoney, a former Fairfax County school principal who was dressed in a yellow-and-black-striped bumble bee costume. "They're saying enough of this foolishness."

Really dude? You have an opportunity to say anything through the national media and that's what you choose? Way to discredit your cause
 
  • #21
Office_Shredder said:
I find it slightly amusing that you rail at the US for changing the spelling of words, and for not changing the units of measurements.

I don't mind you changing words I acutally have no problem with any of it. Airplane and aluminum just grate on my nerves for some reason. It's totally irrational I know and I don't know why they do.
 
  • #22
Pattonias said:
I would move to China or India. If we made that change to our vocabulary, no one could argue that the United States was no longer the world's most powerful country. We would be living in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy" .

You'll regret the "1s" soon enough after living in Communist regime. Appreciate what you have, idiocracy or not :P
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #23
xxChrisxx said:
My only 2 main irrational peeves with US words are.

Airplane. It's aeroplane. And aluminium. I know both spellings are accepted equally now)

I'm fine with you lot using z where s should be used, or omitting the u from colour and armour etc. But the above 2 really wind me up for some reason.

Oh and whilst I'm at it it's a pain in the bloody arse that you all still use ******* imperial units for engineering work, makes my job so much harder.


[/rant] I know it's off topic, but meh.

EDIT: I'm very sorry about this, I seem to be venting a lot today.


Well I do agree with you on the units :smile:.
 
  • #24
xxChrisxx said:
My only 2 main irrational peeves with US words are.

Airplane. It's aeroplane. And aluminium. I know both spellings are accepted equally now)

I'm fine with you lot using z where s should be used, or omitting the u from colour and armour etc. But the above 2 really wind me up for some reason.

Oh and whilst I'm at it it's a pain in the bloody arse that you all still use ******* imperial units for engineering work, makes my job so much harder.


[/rant] I know it's off topic, but meh.

EDIT: I'm very sorry about this, I seem to be venting a lot today.


I disagree with your idea that we should use aluminium over aluminum. First, aluminum is easier to say than the awkward-sounding aluminium. Second, it's easier to write. Third, it's older, and fourth, we're the world's superpower, so what we say goes (commonly known as the "Bullying Argument").

Four reasons, and the first three are even logical!
 
  • #25
Char. Limit said:
I disagree with your idea that we should use aluminium over aluminum. First, aluminum is easier to say than the awkward-sounding aluminium. Second, it's easier to write. Third, it's older, and fourth, we're the world's superpower, so what we say goes (commonly known as the "Bullying Argument").

Four reasons, and the first three are even logical!

IUPAC has adopted aluminium as the official name for the element.
The suffix for many other metals are almost universally -ium. It's not lithum, beryllum. Sodum is it? Why is this different? I think the only others are molybdenum and platinum.

It's easier to say? An extra syllable can't be that perplexing :P
 
  • #26
xxChrisxx said:
IUPAC has adopted aluminium as the official name for the element.
The suffix for many other metals are almost universally -ium. It's not lithum, beryllum. Sodum is it? Why is this different?

It's easier to say? An extra syllable can't be that perplexing :P

Because aluminum is cool and wanted to be different. He gets to keep beer cold too.
 
  • #27
Pattonias said:
Because aluminum is cool and wanted to be different. He gets to keep beer cold too.

Agrument... ACCEPTED! A trendy element that breaks from convention.:approve:

I'm goign to have to be mega sad now and google the periodic table to see what ether elements break the convention.
 
  • #28
-ize is the original spelling for verbs borrowed from Greek (-ise appears in a few words that are NOT from Greek). British spelling was later changed to -ise, possibly because the Brits couldn't keep their etymology straight and wanted to appear more French.
 
  • #29
Ben Niehoff said:
Brits couldn't keep their etymology straight and wanted to appear more French.

Probably becuse we were invaded by them. It's why English is such a horrid mess of languages, we were constantly invaded.
 
  • #30
xxChrisxx said:
It's not lithum, beryllum.
How about platinum, molybdenum, lanthanum, and tantalum? You want to rename those also? How about renaming bismuth, cobalt, copper, iron, manganese, nickel, silver, tin, tungsten?

Aluminum is the older of aluminium and aluminum (but lumium predates both).
 
  • #31
D H said:
How about platinum, molybdenum, lanthanum, and tantalum? You want to rename those also? How about renaming bismuth, cobalt, copper, iron, manganese, nickel, silver, tin, tungsten?

Aluminum is the older of aluminium and aluminum (but lumium predates both).

Kind of killed the jovial overtones there DH.

In reality I couldn't care less.
 
  • #32
Do these people use signs with correct spelling or...?
 
  • #33
xxChrisxx said:
Kind of killed the jovial overtones there DH.

In reality I couldn't care less.

internet-serious-business-cat.jpg


Remember... of all of the intellectual arguments in the world, one of the most important and possibly one of the most incendiary (but that's not saying much) is the aluminum/aluminium debate. It's serious business...

(Or I may just be messing with you. But I wouldn't do that... and aluminium really doesn't roll off my tongue like aluminum does. Plus, the PF spell checker is calling "aluminium" wrong... and PF is the highest authority.
 
  • #34
Noxide said:
What's wrong with making communication as simple as possible? Think organic chemistry.

There are pros and cons to everything, but now that I've struggled my whole life to try and learn all the crazy English rules for grammar and spelling, it's not fair that anyone else should get off easy while I have to then work even harder to unlearn what I already learned. :cry:

If only we could start over from scratch an devise a logical language system, but that's not how language typically works.

I'm probably going to screw this story up badly because I know almost nothing of Korean history. Maybe there are some Koreans here that can correct me. But, years ago a Korean friend of mine told me that centuries ago a King reinvented the Korean alphabet and made it simple and logical. Many scholars objected and were executed for that, and the result is that today, Korean is one of the easier Asian systems to learn. This seems like a relevant story to the topic. Hopefully a Korean expert can tell a more accurate version for our edification.
 
Last edited:
  • #35
Char. Limit said:
Plus, the PF spell checker is calling "aluminium" wrong... and PF is the highest authority.

PF has a spell checker? You sure it's not just your American spellchecker on firefox?

And finally, to end this debate once and for all, I ask you what is the name of the language you're speaking, or the name of the class where you learned (yes, that's a word) said language in school? That's why what we say goes! :-p
 
  • #36
cristo said:
PF has a spell checker? You sure it's not just your American spellchecker on firefox?

And finally, to end this debate once and for all, I ask you what is the name of the language you're speaking, or the name of the class where you learned (yes, that's a word) said language in school? That's why what we say goes! :-p

You mean "AMERICAN"?
 
  • #37
cristo said:
PF has a spell checker? You sure it's not just your American spellchecker on firefox?

And finally, to end this debate once and for all, I ask you what is the name of the language you're speaking, or the name of the class where you learned (yes, that's a word) said language in school? That's why what we say goes! :-p

ah, the British, still teaching---we still think of you as a mother over here
 
  • #38
Char. Limit said:
(Or I may just be messing with you. But I wouldn't do that... and aluminium really doesn't roll off my tongue like aluminum does. Plus, the PF spell checker is calling "aluminium" wrong... and PF is the highest authority.

everybody knows that the more syllables or letters you use, the smarter and more enlightened you are. heck, whoever named tin was obviously a bigot.
 
  • #39
Proton Soup said:
everybody knows that the more syllables or letters you use, the smarter and more enlightened you are. heck, whoever named tin was obviously a bigot.

I call aluminum tin. I thought they were interchangeable. Tin foil, aluminum foil, same thing.
 
  • #40
Ignoring all the discussion about whether or not aluminum should be spelled this way or that way... does anyone else think that this article is just another example of how there are indeed people that want to just make everything in life easy?
 
  • #41
You say that like you want to make things in life harder?
 
  • #42
I think that we should just assign all words to the system of Word1 Word2 Word3 etc. eventually most everyone that bothers will memorize them and spelling will never again be a problem. Illiteracy may sky-rocket though. We may also have to make other writing illegal otherwise those people who took the time to learn to spell may resist or start suicide bombing or something.
 
  • #43
Actually I think it would be best if we just stopped using words all together. I mean really what do they do for us anyhow?
 
  • #44
magpies said:
You say that like you want to make things in life harder?

No... actually yes, good idea.

In all seriousness though, you get the point. Next thing you know, people won't even be required to take tests in school. It's almost becoming an annual tradition for me to look back and realize how the poor standard of education has hindered me in the past that makes things more difficult now.
 
  • #45
LOL JIMMY That post was amazing! HAHAHAHA

But in all seriousness, I don't see how changing the way words are spelt in English will make people better spellers. I have NO troubles spelling new words even if they have hidden letters in them. Unless they are extremely difficult words that you would only ever know how to spell by using a dictionary or goolgle :-p. People sit there all the time asking me how to spell out words, normally I have to write them out or I get confused but it just comes out and it makes perfect sense how the letters are placed and how the various other letters around it make it sound a specific way. I feel confident that as long as I can say the word, I can spell it.
 
  • #46
zomgwtf said:
LOL JIMMY That post was amazing! HAHAHAHA
I feel confident that as long as I can say the word, I can spell it.

Truthfully now zomgwtf, did you have a Catholic school education?
 
  • #47
Has it occurred to anyone that these protesters may have been being deliberately ironic?

If they had protested for proper spelling, would they be all over the news?

And what is the outcome of their spectacle? Here we all are, talking about how important proper spelling is...
 
  • #48
Noxide said:
What's wrong with making communication as simple as possible? Think organic chemistry.

You mean, every high school student's nightmare ("draw the following molecule: 18-bromo-12-butyl-11-chloro-4,8-diethyl-5-hydroxy-15-methoxytricos-6,13-dien-19-yne-3,9-dione").

Uhhu, that will make things easier, definitely.
 
  • #49
English spelling is a juggernaut promoted by English professors with misplaced enthusiasm for their arcane art. No cause or conviction can defeat the atrocity. Only the nimble thumbs of those who text have half a chance. :-p
 
  • #50
I'd be more sympathetic if they were protesting against uncontrolled immigration. How many foreign words are we going to allow in the English language?

Why do we use the Italian word for zucchini when we already have an English word for it - courgette?

And why do we allow words in the English dictionary such as rodeo, coup, or putsch? That just leads to half breed words such as television.

If we want to make English the official language in the US, shouldn't the English language be composed of American words?
 

Similar threads

News Navy serviceman accused of trying to sell classified military documents
Replies
39
Views
6K
News Is the Recession Really Over? Experts Declare End in June 2009
Replies
35
Views
6K
News WikiLeaks & Anonymous: "Hacktivism" & Freedom of the Internet
Replies
24
Views
5K
News Carter: Not mincing words about Bush
Replies
9
Views
3K
News How Did a Sham Marriage Enable Security Breaches at the FBI and CIA?
Replies
5
Views
3K
News Iran nuke program stopped in 2003
Replies
48
Views
8K
News Data stolen from National Nuclear Security Administration
Replies
11
Views
3K
News Should Jury Selection Be Based on Ethnic Quotas?
Replies
14
Views
5K
News Job Creation - the Key To Protecting Entitlements
Replies
6
Views
3K
News Why is McCain facing restrictions on campaign spending?
Replies
19
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top