For centuries, there was a movement to reform the English spelling. It seeks to change the English spelling so that it is more consistent, matches the pronunciation better, and follows the alphabetical principle.
Common motives for spelling reform include faster and cheaper learning, making English more useful for international communication.
The reform proposals vary in depth of linguistic change and in the way they are implemented. In terms of writing systems, most spelling evaluation proposals are moderate; they use the traditional English alphabet, try to maintain a familiar word form, and try to maintain common conventions (such as silent e). A more radical proposal involves adding or deleting letters or symbols, or even creating a new alphabet. Some reformers prefer gradual gradual change, while others prefer direct and total reform to all.
Some spelling reform proposals have been adopted partially or temporarily. Many of the spellings favored by Noah Webster have become standard in the United States, but have not been adopted elsewhere (see English and English spelling differences). Harry Lindgren's proposal, SR1, is popular in Australia at one time.
Spelling reforms rarely attract broad public support, and sometimes meet with organized resistance from an educated majority who do not need reform.
There are linguistic arguments against and for reform, for example that the origin of words can be obscured, or vice versa that the current orthography obscures many. Another argument is that wholesale change costs will be great. However, much of the text is on the computer, and can easily be transcoded to serve new and old readers.
Video English-language spelling reform
Histori
The spelling of modern English evolved from about 1350 AD onwards, when - after three centuries of French rule Norman - English gradually became the official English language again, albeit very different from before 1066, after incorporating many French words (battle, cows), buttons, etc.). These early English writers, such as Geoffrey Chaucer, gave it a fairly consistent spelling system, but this was soon diluted by clerical clerks spelling out words based on French orthography. The consistency of English spelling was addressed further when William Caxton brought the printing press to London in 1476. After living in mainland Europe for the previous 30 years, his understanding of the English spelling system has become uncertain. The Belgian assistants he brought to help him set up his business even had a worse command than him.
When printing is developed, printers begin to develop individual preferences or "home styles". Furthermore, typesetters are paid by the line and like to make more words. However, the greatest change in the consistency of English spelling occurred between 1525, when William Tyndale first translated the New Testament, and 1539, when King Henry VIII legalized the printing of English Bible in England. Many of these Bible editions are printed outside the UK by people with little or no English. They often change the spelling to fit their Dutch orthography. Examples include silence h in ghost (to match the craziest Dutch , which then becomes geest ), aghast , terrible and gherkin . The word silence h in other words - such as gospel , ghossip and ghizzard - is then deleted.
There are two periods when the English spelling reform has attracted special interest.
16th and 17th century AD
The first of these periods was from the mid-16th to the mid-17th century, when a number of publications outlining proposals for reform were published. Some of these proposals are:
- De recta et emendata linguÃÆ'Â| angliÃÆ'Â| scriptione ( In Corrected and Renovated English ) in 1568 by Sir Thomas Smith, Edward VI and Elizabeth I
- An Orthographie in 1569 by John Hart, Chester Herald
- Booke and Large for Amendment of English Orthographie in 1580 by William Bullokar
- Logonomia Anglica in 1621 by Dr. Alexander Gill, principal of St Paul's School in London
- The English Language in 1634 by Charles Butler, the vicar of Wootton St Lawrence
This proposal generally does not appeal serious consideration because it is too radical or is based on inadequate phonological understanding of English. However, more conservative proposals are more successful. James Howell in his book Grammar 1662 suggested minor changes to spelling, such as converting logic into logic , warre sin , toune to cities and < i> tru for right . Many of these spellings are now used in general.
From the 16th century AD onwards, English writers who were Greek and Latin literary scholars tried to connect English words with their Graeco-Latin counterparts. They do this by adding silent letters to make the real or imaginary links more clear. Thus det to debt (to relate it to Latin debitum ), dout to doubt > (to connect it with Latin dubitare ), sissors to scissors and sithe to sickle i> (because they mistakenly assume it comes from the Latin scindere ), iland being island (because it is mistakenly derived from the Latin > insula ), ake to ache (as mistakenly supposedly comes from the Greek akhos ), and so on.
William Shakespeare quipped the difference between English spelling and pronunciation. In the game Love's Labour's Lost, the Holofernes character is "a pedant" who emphasizes that pronunciation should change to match the spelling, rather than just changing the spelling to adjust the pronunciation. For example, Holofernes insists that everyone should pronounce unbiblical words B in words like doubt and debt .
19th century
The second period began in the 19th century and seems to coincide with the development of phonetics as a science. In 1806, Noah Webster published his first dictionary, English Quick Dictionary . This includes an essay on the orthographic peculiarities of modern orthography and its proposal for reform. Many of the spellings he uses, such as colors and center , will be the hallmarks of American English. In 1807, Webster began compiling an expanded dictionary. It was published in 1828 as the English Dictionary of English . Although it attracted some protests, the reformed spellings were gradually adopted throughout the United States.
In 1837, Isaac Pitman published his phonetic abbreviation system, while in 1848 Alexander John Ellis published A Plea for Phonetic Spelling . This is a proposal for a new phonetic alphabet. Although it does not work, they are of great interest.
In the 1870s, English and American philological societies chose to consider this issue. Following the "International Convention for Amendment of English Orthography" held in Philadelphia in August 1876, the public was established such as the British Spelling Renewal Association and the American Spelling Renewal Association. That year, the American Philological Society adopted a list of eleven reformed spellings for immediate use. This is is-> ar, give-> giv, have-> hav, live-> liv, though-> tho, through-> thru, guard-> gard, catalogue-> catalog, (in) definite- > (in) definite, wish-> wisht . One of America's major newspapers that started using reformed spelling was the Chicago Tribune , whose editor and owner, Joseph Medill, sat on the Board of the Spelling Reform Association. In 1883, the American Philological Society and the American Philological Association worked together to produce 24 spelling renewal rules, published that year. In 1898, the American National Education Association adopted its own list of 12 words for use in all posts: tho, altho, thoro, thorofare, thru, thruout, catalog, decalog, demagog, pedagog, prolog, program 20th century onwards
The Simple Spelling Board was founded in the United States in 1906. The original 30 members of the SSB consist of writers, professors and dictionary editors. Andrew Carnegie, founding member, supports SSB with an annual profit of over US $ 300,000. In April 1906, a list of 300 words was published, including 157 spellings that are commonly used in American English. In August 1906, the SSB word list was adopted by Theodore Roosevelt, who ordered the Government Printing Office to start using it immediately. However, in December 1906, the US Congress passed a resolution and the old spelling was reintroduced. However, some spellings persist and are commonly used in American English today, such as anemia/anÃÆ'Â|mia -> anemia and mushrooms -> prints . Others like mixed -> mixt and sickle -> tithe did not last. In 1920, the SSB published the Handbook on Simplified Lessons , which defined more than 25 spelling update rules. This handbook notes that every reformed spell that is now generally used in the first instance is the act of a single author, followed initially by a small minority. So it encourages people to "show the way" and "set an example" by using reformed spellings whenever they can. However, with the main funding source disconnected, the SSB was dissolved later that year.
In Britain, the cause of spelling reform was promoted since 1908 by the Simplified Spell Society and attracted a number of prominent supporters. One is George Bernard Shaw (author of Pygmalion ) and much of his great will is left to his cause. Among the members of society, the conditions of his will led to major disagreements, which hampered the development of a single new system.
Between 1934 and 1975, the Chicago Tribune, then Chicago's largest newspaper, used a number of reformed spellings. Over two months of spells in 1934, he introduced 80 different words, including tho, thru, thoro, agast, burocrat, frate, harth, herse, iland, rime, staff and telegraph . The March 1934 Editorial reported that two-thirds of readers favored reformed spellings. Others claim that "prejudice and competition" is preventing dictionary makers from spelling lists. However, over the next 40 years, newspapers gradually remove the spoken words. Until the 1950s, Funk & amp; Wagamen dictionaries include many reformed spellings, including SSB 300, in addition to conventional spelling.
In 1949, a Labor MP, Dr Mont Follick, introduced a private member bill in the House of Commons, which failed in the second reading. In 1953, he again had a chance, and this time past the second reading by 65 votes to 53. Due to the anticipated opposition of the House of Lords, the bill was withdrawn after assurances from the Ministry of Education that research would be carried out to improve spelling education. In 1961, this led to the James Pitman Initial Teaching Alphabet, introduced to many British schools in an effort to increase children's literacy. Although succeeding in its own terms, profits disappear when children are transferred to conventional spellings. After several decades, the experiment was stopped.
In his 1969 book Spelling Reform: A New Approach, Australian linguist Harry Lindgren proposes step-by-step reform. The first, Spelling Reform step 1 (SR1), calls for a short /?/ sound (as in bet ) to always be spelled with & lt; e & gt; (eg friend-> frend, head-> hed ). This reform has had popularity in Australia.
In 2013, Oxford University English Professor Simon Horobin proposed that variations in spelling be acceptable. For example, he believes that it does not matter whether words like "accommodate" and "tomorrow" are spelled with double letters. Note that this proposal does not conform to the definition of spelling reform used by, for example, the Random House Dictionary.
Maps English-language spelling reform
Arguments for reforming
It is said that spelling reform will make it easier to learn to read, parse, and pronounce it, making it more useful for international communication, reducing education budgets (reducing teacher literacy, remediation costs, and literacy programs) and/or enabling teachers and learners to spend more time on more important subjects or expanding subjects.
Organizers note that spelling reforms have taken place, only slow and often not in an organized way. There are many words that have never been spelled out in a phonetic but have since been reformed. For example, music spelled music until the 1880s, and fantasy spelled fantasy until the 1920s. For the time being, almost all words with the end of -or (such as errors ) are spelled -our ( errour ) , and nearly all words with ending -er (like member ) have been spelled -re ( membre ). In American spelling, most of them now use -or and -er , but in English spelling, only a few have been reformed.
In the last 250 years, since Samuel Johnson has determined how words should be spelled, the pronunciation of hundreds of thousands of words (as extrapolated from Masha Bells's research on 7000 common words) has gradually changed, and the alphabetical principle behind English (and every language written in other alphabets) has gradually been broken. Advocates argue that if we want to keep the English spelling regular, then the spelling needs to be changed to account for the change.
Ambiguity
Unlike many other languages, the English spelling has never been systematically updated and thus currently only partially holds the alphabetic principle. As a result, the English spelling is a weak rule system with many exceptions and ambiguities.
Most phonemes in English can be spelled in more than one way. For example. the words f ea r and p ee r contain the same sound in different spellings. Likewise, many graphemes in English have some pronunciation and decomposition, such as ough in words like thr ough , th < span> ough , th ough t , thor ough , t ough , tr ough , pl ough , and < i> c ough . There are 13 ways of spelling schwa (most common of all phonemes in English), 12 ways of spelling/11/how to spell/?/. This is bEdÃ,! This kind of invisibility can be found throughout the English lexicon and they even vary between dialects. Masha Bell has pronounced 7000 common words and found that about 1/2 causes difficulty spelling and pronunciation and about 1/3, difficulty decoding. Improving English Spelling
Such ambiguity is very problematic in the case of heteroids (homographs with different pronunciation different from meaning), such as arc , desert , live , read , ripped , wind and wound . In reading such words, one should consider the context in which the word is used, and this increases the difficulty of learning to read and speak English.
A closer relationship between phonemes and spelling will eliminate many exceptions and ambiguities and make the language easier and faster to master.
Cancel the damage
Some simplified spellings exist as standard spell or variant in the old literature. As noted earlier, in the 16th century, some Greek and Latin literary scholars tried to make English words more like their Graeco-Latin counterparts, sometimes even wrong. They do this by adding silent letters, so det being debt , dout being doubt , tithe to be sickle , iland being the island , ake being sick , and so on. Some spelling reformers propose to undo this change. Other examples of more phonetic long spellings include frend for friends (as in Shakespeare's grave), agents for against , yeeld to generate , bild for build , cort for court , stung to replace , delite for excitement , entise for lure , gost for ghost , harth for stove , rime for rhymes , number for some , tung for tongue , and much more. It's also commonly used -t for ending -ed where it's pronounced like that (eg dropt to drop ). Some of the most famous writers and poets in English have used these spellings and others are proposed by today's spelling reformers. Edmund Spenser, for example, uses spellings like rize, wize and advise in his famous poem The Faerie Queene , published in the 1590s.
Many English words are based on French modifications (eg, colors and analog ) even though they are from Latin or Greek.
Redundant letter
The English alphabet has several letters whose distinctive sounds have been represented elsewhere in the alphabet. These include X, which can be realized as "ks", "gz", or z; soft G, which can be realized as J; hard C, which can be realized as K; soft C, which can be realized as S; and Q ("qu"), which can be realized as "kw", (or, simply, K in some cases). However, these spellings are usually preserved to reflect their frequent Latin roots.
Obstacles and criticism
.
There are a number of obstacles in the development and application of reformed orthography for English:
- The public's resistance to spelling reform has been consistently strong, at least since the early 19th century, when the spelling was codified by an influential English dictionary from Samuel Johnson (1755) and Noah Webster (1806).
- English vocabulary is largely a mixture of Germanic, French, Latin, and Greek words, which have very different phonemes and approaches to spell. Some reform proposals tend to favor one approach over another, generating a large percentage of words that must change the spelling to fit the new scheme.
- Some inflections are pronounced differently in different words. For example, plural -s and possessive - are both pronounced differently in cat (') s (/s/) and dog (') s (/z/). The handling of this particular difficulty distinguishes the morphemic proposal, which tends to spell the same infective end, of phonemic proposals that spell the suffix according to the pronunciation. This suffix raises some issues in understanding the content (decoding and literacy). The difference in this pronunciation is the rule based on the Sound phonetic
- English is the only one of the ten major languages ​​that have no oversight body around the world with the power to propagate spelling changes. There is an English Spelling Institution.
- Spelling a few words - such as tongue and stomach - is so uncomfortable they change the spelling will change the form of the word. Likewise, the spelling of unusual words, such as is , is , has , finished and from makes it difficult to fix it without introducing a noticeable change in English text display. This will create acceptance issues.
- Phonetic spelling reform can produce many different written versions of English, largely unintelligible in different accent groups. Scottish writers may not be able to read by Indians. Americans will write whut and British wot for the same word.
- Spelling reforms can make pre-reform writings more difficult to understand and read in their original form, often requiring transcription and republication. Even today, few people choose to read the old literature in the original spelling because most have been re-published in modern spellings.
Write conveys meaning, not phonemes
The main criticism of many pure phonemic reform proposals is that written language is not a pure phonemic analogue of the spoken word. While the reformist may argue that the unit of understanding is a phoneme, critics argue that the basic units are words. Some of the phonemic spelling reform proposals that are most likely to spell closely related words are less similar than those spelled now, such as electricity , electricians and electricians , or (with full vowel reform) photos , photos and photography . This argument holds even stronger in technical words that appear more frequently in writing than in speech, and words that are similar or identical to corresponding words in other languages.
However, there are also a large number of words in the current lexicon that look as related in their orthography, but that is not semantically related at all. These words will be different and remove ambiguities in words like is and area , control and rediscovery , rivers and rivals , ampersand and ampere , caterpillar and serving , ready and match , man and many , now and
English is a Western Germanic language that has borrowed many words from non-Germanic languages, and the spelling of words often reflects its origin. This sometimes gives clues to the meaning of the word. Even if their pronunciation has deviated from the original pronunciation, the spelling is a phoneme record. The same applies to Germanic originals whose spellings still resemble their native language in other Germanic languages. Examples include light /German Licht , knight /German Knecht ; sea /French ocÃÆ' Â © an , opportunity /French opportunity . Critics argue that spelling such words can hide the link.
Spelling reformers argue that, although some of these links may be hidden by reform, others will become more apparent. For example, the Axel Wijk 1959 proposal Regularized English proposes to change high to hight , which will connect it closer to the high < i>
In some cases, the English spelling of foreign words has deviated from the current spelling of the words in the original language, as the spelled connoisseur is now spelled in French in connaisseur . after the French spelling reforms in the 19th century.
Other language orthography does not pay special attention to maintaining similar links to loan words. English language loans in other languages ​​are generally assimilated by orthographic conventions of those languages ​​so that such words have various spellings that are sometimes difficult to recognize as English words.
Accent differences
Another criticism is that reform may support one dialect or pronunciation over another. Some words have more than one acceptable pronunciation, regardless of dialect (eg economy , good ). Some differences in regional accents are still marked with spelling. Examples include discriminating fern fir and feather maintained in Irish and Scottish English or the difference between toe and < i> tow maintained in several regional dialects in the UK.
Reformers show that students learn accents before they see any spelling. Throughout their lives, learners have a natural tendency to acquire and use the accents they hear around them. Then, as students learn to read, they naturally use and assign the correct allophones or accents they have learned to the correct phonemes or words, as they have been and have been going on for centuries, with a spelling system that phonemic is more accurate or not so much. In addition, dialect accent exists in a spelled language called phonemic, like Spanish. If reform occurs, participants will use the correct accent for the right letter or letter combination (word), whether the spelling is phonemic or not. Reform will only make the game more intuitive, perhaps more organized or systematic than it is today. Spelling reform will only affect how we spell the word , not how we say them. After the reform, English will still allow some standard spelling pronunciations, as is currently the case, with no one struggling to use correct pronunciation for an ambiguous spelling. Some reformers also suggest that reform can actually make more spelling including regional dialects by allowing more spelling for such words. Finally, other reformers will analyze the distribution of all dialect phonemes and use a diaphonem or algorithm to create an integrated system that will seek to create a system that has several features from several dialects.
Incorrect friend
Some reform proposals try to make too many spelling changes at once and it is not possible for the transition period where the old and new spellings may be shared. The problem is overlapping in words, where certain words can be unreformed spellings of one word or spell that are reformed from another, similar to fake friends while learning a foreign language.
For example, a reform can spell wondering as wunder and running as wondering . However, both can not be done at once because this causes ambiguity. During any transitional period, is it astonishing unreformed spellings of miracle or spreading reformed wandering ? This can be solved by using the new old wander with the new wunder . Another similar chain of words is the device -> composing -> * devize , warm worm -> -> * wurm and rice -> up -> * rize .
Spelling proposal reform
Most spelling reforms seek to enhance phonemic representation, but some try the original phonetic spelling, usually by altering the basic English alphabet or creating a new one. All spelling reforms aim for greater regularity in spelling.
Using basic English alphabet
- Cut Spelling
- Accelerate learning
- Handbook of Simple Spelling
- SoundSpel
- Spelling Reform 1 (SR1)
- Regular English Wijk
Expand or replace basic English alphabet
This proposal strives to eliminate the extensive use of digraphs (such as "ch", "gh", "kn-", "-ng", "ph", "qu", "sh", "th" - ") by introducing new letters and/or diacritics. The impetus for removing the digraph is that each letter represents one vote. In the digraph, the two letters do not represent their respective sounds, but are totally different and different sounds, which can occasionally cause mistakes in pronunciation, in addition to words that are much longer.
Important proposals include:
- the phonetic alphabet of Benjamin Franklin
- Alphabet deseret
- Beginning Alphabet
- Interspel
- Roman alphabet
- Shavian alphabet (revised version: Quikscript)
- Sayp (Spelling when you say Universal)
- Unifon
- Simple Standard Sound Symbol (S4)
- Simple-Phonetic Writing Method
Supporters of historical and contemporary reform
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments