Is anyone in favor of the Simplified Spelling movement?

Question

Is anyone in favor of the Simplified Spelling thing? If so, explain why. Seriously though, if you don't know how to spell then you're pretty retarded... very retarded. If you don't know what I'm talking about, follow this link >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060705/ap_on_re_us/simpl_wurdz<

Answer 1

yea its lame

Answer 2

English spelling will HAVE TO change or eventually we'll be writing one language and speaking another. Why?

Because pronunciations are constantly changing; but English spelling has not changed significantly since the mid-1600's. What does this mean? That every generation, our spelling is going to be further and further from our pronunciation.

In my opinion, Simplified Spelling is too radical, which is why most of you react so negatively to it. However, I believe if there were a way for a limited number of spelling-changes to occur over the generations (and the old spellings not to become incorrect immediately), I believe most people would probably accept it. I mean, basically, we need to go back and update the spelling for all the pronunciation-changes which have occurred in the last 350 years. Like the GH's (light, drought, tough) -- those words were spelled the way they sounded in the 1650's; but not anymore.

The big problem is that there is a power-vacuum. Nobody and no organization has the authority to make a new spelling correct.

Answer 3

Why Not?

Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a tatol mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

****NO I DON'T AGREE, EVERYONE SHOULD LEARN TO SPELL ENGLISH AS AWKWARD AS IT IS SOMETIMES****

Answer 4

No, I am not in favor of this. Kids lives have been oversimplified too much already. Make them learn to spell the hard way. Lose 1 point off of their homework for each misspelled word. That will make them try harder.

Answer 5

no, i dont think that would go over very well. everybody who already knows how to spell would be totally screwed up. not that i agree that people who have a hard time spelling are retarded, its just harder for some people. but still, its not a very good idea.

Answer 6

I find irony in this question as many words have already been simplified - even in Canada we have shortened some words but are very staunch in using the "u" as in colour and valour and the original words such as paycheque instead of paycheck.
Spelling continues to evolve but a lot of the words aren't phonetic anymore but remain loyal to their origin.

Answer 7

I don't think it's retarded, but there's no way everyone is just going to change the "wae thae spehl" things to make it easier for little kids to learn how to read. I learned at age 3, and if I learned that easy, then it can't be too hard.

Answer 8

I'm not if favor of that, but i will admit that some words should be spelled differently
at least get a little more phonetic

Answer 9

Ugh, I couldnt even read through that whole article. Got on my nerves. I find that us Americans tend to make things easier for everyone. It seems like no one really wants to work or do anything. Talk about lazy. Teachers need to teach, thats what they get paid to do! Parents need to sit down with their kids and teach them as well. Talk about no one wanting to take responsibility of teaching our youth. Pretty sad!

Answer 10

HECK NOOO!!!

I'm proud that i can spell
pneumonoultramicroscopicsilico -volcanoconiosis
and floccinaucinihilipilification!
(haha, neither of them even register on the spellcheck!)

Answer 11

NO!! This wouldn't only impact the U.S. it would impact the world. It is without doubt the dumbest idea put forth in years.