Wikipedia is the differences in spelling

[Monique]

Interesting. When I learned spanish, I was taught stuff like "6 in the evening" rather than "1800"

You don't say 18:00 in spoken language, only on displays or in writing.

 

[WarPhalange]

Well, we can keep on like this, but at the end we will find out why such changes have not been made: because they are bound to cause contradictions.

Oh, I guess I'll just take your word for it. (by the way, I love how that's the first smiley on the list)

We already have massive contradictions. Getting a few and throwing them on rarely used words is a lot better than having something like "meat" and "great".

Were you not taught these things in school? A 'c' has a lighter pronunciation than a 'k.' Again, if you want to change this, go ahead, but you won't be speaking or writing English anymore!

Not once have I heard or read about that, nor do I ever hear people make a distinction. I can't even fathom how you'd make a lighter "k" sound.

So what? My point isn't loving English and wanting to fornicate with it, it's with the stupid rules it has and wanting to change them. It will still be spoken the same way.

That is not how the word drawing is supposed to be pronounced: anyone you hear pronouncing it that way is pronouncing it incorrectly.

I know, you Brits pronounce it incorrectly.

Another thing that happens when you change the words, and the spelling of words is that you lose the distinction between words. For example, consider the words 'meter' and 'metre.' In English, the former is something that is used to measure something (a gas meter, say), but the latter is the SI unit of length.

So what do you do about speaking English? All these problems you are finding with WarPhalangese already exist in spoken English and people manage fine.

Pretty much any country outside North America.

Even going back to this, nobody gets confused when you use a 12 hour clock, because you can supply context (pm or am would count as context I think, too).

 

[WarPhalange]

The Japanese have a phonetic writing system, and if they used it then it would true that writing follows pronounciation exactly. However, they don't use it. The system they do use is the eighth wonder of the world. The characters that make up the name Suzuki could also be pronounced Reimoku and there is no visible cue which is correct, you just have to know. For example, my wife's name is Mei-Ling in Chinese. Some Japanese call her Misuzu while others call her Birei because both pronounciations are possible given the characters in her name.

No, you're thinking of Kanji, which I said was totally different. That's not an alphabet, it's derived from hieroglyphs essentially. I'm talking about Hiragana and Katakana. If you write it out in those alphabets, you get phonetic writing. You're right that it's not used much (they lack a "v" and "l" sound in Japanese, so you get much longer words), but when it is everybody knows how to pronounce it.

Moreover, a lot of times they will use Furigana over the Kanji, which is small Hiragana writing over the characters to tell you how to pronounce it.

 

[WarPhalange]

By-the-by WarPhalange, what is your native language? If it is English, I'd love to know which accent you speak with.

I moved to the US when I was 3 months old, so yeah, English would be a native language. I speak with the normal accent, i.e. no accent. Like news anchors do. The not-idiot ones.

And yeah, people have accents, but like I said, that shouldn't stop you from reading it how it's spelled and writing it how you hear it. The only difference would be your association with the given letters, i.e. a normal person pronounces "car" like "k-ah-r". A Bostonian or Rhode Islander would pronounce it more like "k-AH-" with almost no "r" in there. That just means they associate r with a softer sound when speaking to their own kind. When communicating with normal people, they'd have to remember how to say it properly. Vice versa, of course, if there is any communication to be done.

 

[Mk]

One thing that really gets me whilst reading sites like Wikipedia is the differences in spelling (US English vs. British English) that are o various Wikipedia sites. One of the main differences is the use of -ize in US English compared to -ise in British English. South African English does use both of these with a preferences towards the British spelling. I, honestly, prefer the British spelling and if I really get irritated, I edit the Wikipedia pages and change the American spelling to British.

A few years ago some things you're talking about were in discussion and voted on, but now the points are mostly settled and have been incorporated into part of the Manual of Style entry on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#National_varieties_of_English

Although I haven't read it for a while, if the article was originally written in British English and didn't fall into any of the categories, such as having strong national ties (like the "Department of Defense," instead of "Defence") then to be conscious of keep it in that style for continuity.

 

[ekrim]

I like the american way, it's so much zazzier. Actually I prefer the way companies spell words. i.e.
light --> lite
quick --> kwik
etc.

 

[GeorginaS]

They're not superfluous :grumpy:

Absolutely they are, dear neighbour. We fling the poor letter around as if we think it's free. (And that, of course, is my sad attempt at word-spelling humour.)

I list towards preferring (see? Doubled the "r" on the end of that word. Works for me.) different spellings for homophones so that I know, immediately, with no extra thought involved, what you are referring to. I far prefer the spelling of the piece of paper that represents money written as "cheque" because "check" is something I do to the oil in my car. I stop to sort it out when I read, "I'll send you a check". Check what? Nope.

 

[yeeyee]

for this thread is about english
I have a question

What is the english adjective term to describe the feeling caused after scattering some salt over an open wound ?

 

[WarPhalange]

Let me check.

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

It's called burning.

 

[lisab]

Absolutely they are, dear neighbour. We fling the poor letter around as if we think it's free. (And that, of course, is my sad attempt at word-spelling humour.)

I list towards preferring (see? Doubled the "r" on the end of that word. Works for me.) different spellings for homophones so that I know, immediately, with no extra thought involved, what you are referring to. I far prefer the spelling of the piece of paper that represents money written as "cheque" because "check" is something I do to the oil in my car. I stop to sort it out when I read, "I'll send you a check". Check what? Nope.

But if someone told you they wanted to send you a Czech, that would be totally different! And if they asked you to cache a Czech...?

 

[GeorginaS]

But if someone told you they wanted to send you a Czech, that would be totally different! And if they asked you to cache a Czech...?

I'm fairly certain that Poles get involved if you try to ferret people away. But that's a whole other thread, I think.

 

[GeorginaS]

for this thread is about english
I have a question

What is the english adjective term to describe the feeling caused after scattering some salt over an open wound ?

Sting? Smart? Hurt? Or, yes, burn?

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

I usually add 'u's to words like 'colour', 'favour', ect.. They just don't look right to me otherwise, and I'm born and raised american. Thinking about it it seems that the 'u' ought to be there. The words aren't pronounced with an 'or' nor are they properly pronounced with and 'er' sound.

And for WarPhalange, though you have possibly already seen it before...

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.

 

[cristo]

Oh, I guess I'll just take your word for it. (by the way, I love how that's the first smiley on the list)

I'll just point to the Mark Twain quote in the above post (thanks StatutoryApe!)

So what? My point isn't loving English and wanting to fornicate with it, it's with the stupid rules it has and wanting to change them. It will still be spoken the same way.

You do say some bizarre things. Anyway, this comes back to Kurdt's point: if you write the language phonetically, then it will not be spoken in the same way (mainly because it isn't spoken in the same way in different parts of the country). That's why there must be a universal way of writing: what is phonetical to, say, a Geordie would be incomprehensible to, say, someone from Somerset (no offence, Kurdt )

I know, you Brits pronounce it incorrectly.

Are you saying that there should be a second r in drawing? If so, then that is wrong: it is at least not how I was taught to speak! Anyway, let's examine the hilarity of your comment: you're saying that English people pronounce words in the English language incorrectly? Please ..

So what do you do about speaking English? All these problems you are finding with WarPhalangese already exist in spoken English and people manage fine.

Speaking is completely different, because things have context: If I say "hey, look at this met(er/re)," then you know whether I am pointing at a gas meter, or a measurement of a metre. This doesn't work in written language.

Even going back to this, nobody gets confused when you use a 12 hour clock, because you can supply context (pm or am would count as context I think, too).

I thought your entire argument was to simplify things, and to abolish duplicates: well then why have the time 4.00 meaning two different times? Sure, keep it like that in your country, but I don't see why the rest of the world would change things just to appease Americans.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Are you saying that there should be a second r in drawing? If so, then that is wrong: it is at least not how I was taught to speak! Anyway, let's examine the hilarity of your comment: you're saying that English people pronounce words in the English language incorrectly? Please ..

I think when he says brits pronounce it wrong he is referring to some English people who pronounce it 'drawring'. Probably those same people that like to substitute 'th' with 'f' and say 'oi' alot. ;-p

 

[Kurdt]

If I recall correctly, there was a trial of phonetic spelling in England in the seventies that didn't go so well. I suppose phonetic spelling in japan works because it is a tonal language. English does not depend on tone so many different tones can have the same meaning and thus different spellings. To move to a phonetic spelling system you would also have to introduce standardised pronunciation which is ridiculously complicated.

I honestly don't know why people complain. If you're brought up with the language its not that hard to spell. Even learning a new language, it's not hard to spell things correctly.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I suppose phonetic spelling in japan works because it is a tonal language.

Chinese is tonal, not Japanese. Phonetic spelling in Japan does not work for the simple reason that they don't use phonetic spelling. They use kanji. Japanese has so many homonyms that it is unlikely that they ever would use a purely phonetic system.

 

[Kurdt]

oh well never mind.

 

[Moonbear]

Both the irregular (spelt) and the regular (spelled) are permitted in English.



That would rhyme with "hers" instead of rhyming with "verse." These are distinct sounds.

That would rhyme with "metre" (or meter) and instead of rhyming with "sure"



But then what to do in, say, the word "clock"? The sounds at the beginning and the end of the word are strictly different.

You've not improved anything: you've just bastardised the language such that it looks like the way that you pronounce the words. This might work in American, but you should note that not everyone in the English speaking world pronounces the words in the same way as you do.

I actually agree with you on all those points, and I certainly don't have a British accent (not anyone of them).

That's news to me! I've been saying it exactly the same all my life. Or are you referring to that straight line we like to call and "L"? Yeah, that's a different letter.

No, the sounds are different. I'm convinced that people who commonly misspell words do so because they commonly mispronounce words.

Drawring? WTF? It's ridiculous.

Quit picking on my New Jersey accent! :grumpy: Actually, it might be a carry-over of my mom's Massachusetts accent (not Boston...New Bedford area).

And, for the record, those things that slide in and out of the desk to store your pens and papers and such are pronounced droors, not draws...they have an R at the end. On the other hand, it wasn't until I moved to WV that I discovered people who do not consider the H in vehicle to be a silent letter. It's pronounced very softly here, but nonetheless pronounced.

So, like others have asked, just whose accent should we cater to if we're going to spell everything phonetically?

 

[cristo]

And, for the record, those things that slide in and out of the desk to store your pens and papers and such are pronounced droors, not draws...they have an R at the end.

That's why they're spelt 'drawer'

 

[Gokul43201]

The base word is travel.

Do you consider the additive to be "ing" or "ling"

Do you go partyling or partying on the weekends?

Why throw on the extra l in travel? Not needed.

Do keep that in mind when you do any running, sitting, napping, pubbing, trekking, stirring or island hopping the next time you're travelling.

Unless, of course, you go partyning, partyting, partyping, partybing, partyking and partyring on the weekends.

 

[Gokul43201]

British English is like putting racing stripes on your car. It doesn't actually do anything besides make people chuckle behind your back.

-ise? Do you pronounce it with "s" or "z"? I pronounce for example realize with a "z" sound. So why not write it like it sounds?

I don't like to play spelling Nazi...but this time, I can't stop myself.

I hope you ment to say something more like: It dozen't akchually doo anything besidez make peeple chuckle behind your back.

Iz that better?

 

[WarPhalange]

I don't like to play spelling Nazi...but this time, I can't stop myself.

I hope you ment to say something more like: It dozen't akchually doo anything besidez make peeple chuckle behind your back.

Iz that better?

It dozen't akchually (that's if you don't switch regular "c" to the "ch" sound) du anything besidz mak pepl chukle behind your bak.

I haven't reconciled make vs. mac. Might need an "a" with an umlaut.

 

[lisab]

So, like others have asked, just whose accent should we cater to if we're going to spell everything phonetically?

Mine :tongue2: .

 

[Monique]

I we can agree that it really doesn't matter how you spell words, the brain will make sense of it all:

i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt!

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I we can agree that it really doesn't matter how you spell words, the brain will make sense of it all:

i cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Azanmig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt!

Wow! So written English is a pictographic language after all.

 

[Kurdt]

I think in Monique's example all the letters are needed but letter order is not important apart from first and last. When the word is nothing like we recognise when spelled phonetically its very much harder because we expect certain letters.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I think in Monique's example all the letters are needed but letter order is not important apart from first and last. When the word is nothing like we recognise when spelled phonetically its very much harder because we expect certain letters.

I deleted a bunch of vowels and consonants.

I cdnolt blviee taht I clud aulacty uesdntnrd waht I was rdaneg. The phanmneal pwor of the hmun mnid, aocdrnig to a rschearch at Cmabrige Uinevtisy, it dsno't mtatr in waht odrr the lteres in a wrod are, the olny ipromtnt tihg is taht the frst and lsat ltter be in the rgit pcle. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitl raed it whtuit a pborlm. Tihs is bcusae the huamn mnid deos not raed evey ltetr by istlf, but the wrod as a wloe. Azamig huh? yaeh and I alyas tguhot slpeing was ipmoratt!

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I cdnolt blviee taht I clud aulacty uesdntnrd waht I was rdaneg. The phanmneal pwor of the hmun mnid, aocdrnig to a rschearch at Cmabrige Uinevtisy, it dsno't mtatr in waht odrr the lteres in a wrod are, the olny ipromtnt tihg is taht the frst and lsat ltter be in the rgit pcle. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitl raed it whtuit a pborlm. Tihs is bcusae the huamn mnid deos not raed evey ltetr by istlf, but the wrod as a wloe. Azamig huh? yaeh and I alyas tguhot slpeing was ipmoratt!

I can read this with no hesitation. My wife is Chinese and she could read it with hesitation.

 

[Gokul43201]

The phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae.

Also I, guess that you can get away, with lousy grammar if, you spell that worstly.

 

[Moonbear]

It dozen't akchually (that's if you don't switch regular "c" to the "ch" sound) du anything besidz mak pepl chukle behind your bak.

I haven't reconciled make vs. mac. Might need an "a" with an umlaut.

Backtranslating (a la BabelFish ):
It doze not ack chew lee duh anything be Sid's Mac pep el chew kill behind your Bach.

 

[Moonbear]

I think in Monique's example all the letters are needed but letter order is not important apart from first and last. When the word is nothing like we recognise when spelled phonetically its very much harder because we expect certain letters.

I think it takes more than the first and last letter being in the correct place. Syntax and context are helpful too. If simple words to provide context aren't present, I think it gets a lot harder.

Here, only the first and last letter are in their correct positions (except for words where there are only 2 or 3 letters, so they remain intact).

Psgeirte, pweor, fmae, fntroue are the gloas of nmroeuus pniactiilos.

Not so easy this time, is it?

 

[GeorginaS]

I think it takes more than the first and last letter being in the correct place. Syntax and context are helpful too. If simple words to provide context aren't present, I think it gets a lot harder.

Here, only the first and last letter are in their correct positions (except for words where there are only 2 or 3 letters, so they remain intact).

Psgeirte, pweor, fmae, fntroue are the gloas of nmroeuus pniactiilos.

Not so easy this time, is it?

Yep, that's much tougher. I actually had to work to decipher the words.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

Psgeirte, pweor, fmae, fntroue are the gloas of nmroeuus pniactiilos.

Not so easy this time, is it?

I had trouble with the first and last words. The rest I read with no hesitation.