English spelling?

Question

What is the deal with this whole idea to change English spelling to make it more phonetic? Does this REALLY look better?

Inglish speelng shud bee tshangjd tu luuk liek thes.

Answer 1

It is a horrible idea.

We need to keep our language as it is. People are just lazy and are looking for ways around it. Get an education and use it.

Answer 2

Don't worry. It can't work. First, English "spelling" is a little bit of a joke anyway, or a game. It's one of the few languages in the world where most users have no idea how to spell a great number of its words. (A "spelling bee" in Spanish would last years because it would take forever to get a child to misspell even words they'd never heard before.)

Secondly, what "phonetic" standard would you use? Cockney, Estuary, Boston Yankee, Alabama Bubba, Australian?

By the way, it's interesting that you bring up how the words "look," as if it were a sort of fashion show - as if they had a function independent of conveying the concept or cognate they represent.

I wouldn't be surprised if various forms of dyslexia are at least provoked by the difference between orthography and pronunciation in English - and I believe something similar occurs in French.

Answer 3

People post like that because they're lazy, don't have respect for English, or just don't have confidence in their spelling abilities. I don't have respect for the language either, but I often write nicely so people can at least see what I'm saying.
It would also be cool if we spoke like Jar Jar Binks: "If me be returnin', the Bosses will do terrible things to me! Tewwwible things!" Or when he says, "Monsters out there, leaking in here. Weesa all sinking and no power. Whena yousa thinking we are in trouble?" Yes, his way of speaking is similar to that which you have mentioned.

Answer 4

I started to read the article and actually had trouble reading the parts spelled phonetically. Instead of changing the spellings of words, why don't make our education system better? It's pretty sucky as it is (unless you live in Ohio).

Answer 5

There would be a big problem with phonetic english spelling, because of all the different accents that english speakers have. One would have to learn many ways to spell one word depending on to whom they write.

Answer 6

I would agree with the English teacher. No changes. If you want to spell the English language using phonics then learn shorthand. I almost guarantee that once you have learned shorthand, you will certainly appreciate the ability to spell any word correctly again (that is to say if you could before you learned shorthand).

Answer 7

I am against it. But I am a traditional person. Also, it would not look like what you have written above, you misspelled phonetic English, which is really sad and pathetic. Sorry.

Answer 8

People are too lazy to learn to spell things correctly or use a spell check, and some think it makes them sound cool. In all actuality it makes them sound like they only have an elementary school education and are illiterate, but that's just my opinion.

Answer 9

Nice try but it won't become luuk liek thes.

What kind of argument is it when you so misrepresent your side? What's the point?

Answer 10

(I totally agree with you but...)

The thorey is that if the next generation is taught the new spelling, it will be adapted by the entire socieity (and our form would be archaic)

The change will happen naturally (to a certain extent) When was the last time sombody said "thou?"