Do you believe that current English spelling is over-difficult and it wouldn't be such a bad idea to reform it

Question

There is a company (Simplified Spelling Society) that is raising awarness of over-difficult spelling and i was just wondering whether it is worth it.

Answer 1

Yes, I think it probably would be worth it to some degree. Care must be taken, however, because the different dialects of English pronounce words differently, so the standardized spelling would have to take all the dialects into account, since we don't want to fragment the written language. Thus, words like "merry", "marry", and "Mary" would still have to be written differently, and for an American who pronounces them the same they would have to be learned like the current forms are. But even within constraints like this, the spelling could be made much simpler and more consistent.

However, I don't think it will happen, for a few reasons. First of all, at this point the tradition of English spelling is quite strong. Second, people who have learned the current system tend to be against it, as if the fact that they had to spend so much time learning the spelling system means that others should not be spared the same burden. There's also a bit of a snob factor in being able to correct someone on an esoteric point of spelling.

Edit: Cosimo's answer below is a great example of all this. "If our parents and grandparents and I all had to make the effort to learn the system, then there's no way you're going to weasel out of it. Just make the effort." Of course, the time needed to master English spelling could quite possibly be more productively used to learn something else that's more immediately practical.

As far as the etymological argument, that's very nice for me, who likes to learns lots of languages and study their etymology, but the vast majority of people are not one iota wiser as to the etymology of a word based on its English spelling. The effort needed to learn English spelling is far, far disproportionate to the meager gain that could be had because the etymology is then more obvious, and most people get exactly zero etymological benefit from learning the spelling system anyway.

One more thing I forgot: Some language have an official academy which could promulgate a spelling reform and would be mostly respected by the speakers. There is no such central authority in English, nor for any national dialect of English, so it's hard to see how a spelling reform might catch on.

Answer 2

Well, if you mean here on R&S, I hope I do. I know my grammar and spelling are bad (almost wrote is), but it is the message one is trying to convey that is important. True, grammar and spelling help get the point across easier and make it easier to be taken seriously. Spell check does not work all the time and sometimes I try to cut and paste for the reasons above. Yet I can get pressed for time and just write as best I can so the person can recieve a good answer which should not be confused with a scholarly work. My Father, who only has a 6th grade education, can barely write and yet when he does I do not write him back or correct him. He deserves respect and is quite smart on spiritual matters and other areas as well. Plus there are few pieces of equipment he cannot operate. We of the College set could learn from his example. Only a fool passes up knowledge because of grammar and spelling.

Answer 3

No, I do not agree that English spelling is difficult. At least, it is not difficult for native speakers of English, although it is very difficult for learners of English as a second language. It is a matter of education. It is no more difficult to teach English properly to English students in English schools that it is, say, to teach Italian properly to Italian students in Italian schools. The fact that Italian is a phonetic language and English is not makes no difference. But it seems that something in the education of young people these days is not working as well as it should.

In principle, it is absolutely wrong to attempt spelling reform of English for no better reason than that - allegedly - it's "too difficult" - too much of a challenge for the young people of today. What those people are saying is that the new generations aren't up to the same learning challenge that their parents and grandparents were. It's sweeping the real problems under the carpet. I'm not going to speculate about those real problems, because that's outside the scope of your question.

Spelling reform along phonetic (or phonic - whatever that means) lines would serve firstly to confuse people who already have taken the trouble to learn to write properly, and secondly to obscure the etymological origins of our words and the semantic connections between them.

If anyone tries to interfere with my language, I will fight them for it.

Answer 4

Other attemps have been made to either reform English, or to create a new, easier language. But, ultimately, they fail. There are too many English speakers in the world, and we all need to communicate well in order to make our world work for us.
There is an organization called "The Modern Language Association." They meet yearly to decide if changes should be made to the language. There are changes every year. They base their decisions on how the population uses language. They also publish a book to use in English classes, and in our work elsewhere. English students are required to use a copy of it in their written work in class.

And, yes, spelling can be a pain in the neck!

Answer 5

At the very least, you would think there could be one standard spelling rather than US and UK versions. As for simplifying the spelling, if you are a frequent visitor to these pages, you will notice that this is happening without any formal intervention on the part of the SSS.

Answer 6

Poor spelling is not a product of the language being overly difficult. It is a product of an apathetic society. Changing the way things are spelled is not going to make anyone care about spelling things correctly!

Answer 7

The Americans had changed English spelling of many words from what they had been in British English. That was probably the biggest change in the language. We have the lexicographer Webster to thank for that.

Americans are too resistant to changes. After all, aren't the Americans the only people in the world who still use the English system of measurement? You know, pounds, inches, miles, gallons.

I think French is the next language that needs simplification in the spelling of its words, although I think that is unlikely to happen. The French are too traditional to want to change their language.

Answer 8

It would not be wise to change English Spelling. There are too many factors involved.
I Cr 13;8a

Answer 9

No way. English has been the way it is forever. Just because some people are lazy doesn't mean we should change the language.

Answer 10

They tried phonetic type reading and spelling years ago - it did not work then and it will not work now