why is there a letter c in the alphabet when s and k make the same sounds? Should C be a letter?

Answer 1

Mainly because we don't simply "start from scratch" every generation or two. We tend to continue and adapt the system that has been handed down.

Our "C" when it first appeared in the Latin alphabet, stood for the "hard g" sound (as in "get"). You can sort of see this when you compare it with the Greek alphabet from which the ancient Romans borrowed their letters (through the Etruscans) -- it begins with alpha, beta, Gamma (and behind that is the Semitic "aleph, beth, Gimmel", borrowed from the Phoenicians).

Later "C' began to be used for BOTH a "hard c" and "hard g" sound, which is why the slightly adapted letter "G" was invented to distinguish one of these sounds.

Some of the other early changes are murky, but it became the norm in Latin to use "k" only for words borrowed from GREEK. The /k/ (hard c) sound in native Latin words was always represented by "C". (I believe the Romans MAY have made some slight distinction in the two sounds.) When Germanic languages began to be written they tended to use the K for this sound.

Note that this often shows us something of the HISTORY of a word -- if it is originally Latin (or at least borrowed from Latin) it is more likely to use a "C", where words from Greek and Germanic roots use "K".

As for the "soft c"or /s/ sound -- this was NEVER associated with this letter in Latin. It's one of those sound changes that took place over the centuries as ancient Latin was transformed into the "Romance languages" (Spanish, Italian.... and for our purposes especially FRENCH). Note that a large chunk of the Latin words brought into English came through Norman French, a descendant of Latin which kept many of the old Latin spellings, though the pronunciation changed (as it does over time in any language!)

As others have noticed, C would also be difficult to simply dispense with (replacing with s and k) because of other uses that developed for it -- as in "ch" (whether English "ch" which is actually the /tsh/ sound, or the "ch" sound[s] of German "ich" and "ach", Scottish "loch", and the Greek letter "chi").
_________________

A few other considerations in NOT making the change:

1) On the whole it is not that difficult to know how to pronounce English "c", because it generally follows a handful of specific patterns (how it combines with other letters) --some of which use 'hard c', others 'soft c'-- and "ch" is also not terribly confusing. Other changes would certainly take priority over this one.

[Note some of the c's in that paragaph -- before e and i, as in "specific" and "certain", it makes the /s/ sound; before o, a or u it makes the /k/ sound, as in "difficult", "because" and "confusing"; in the two-letter combo [or 'digraph'] "ch" it makes the /tsh/ sound. That leaves out cases like the /sh/ of "especially" --one we can thank the French for-- but it accounts for a LOT of c's.]

So in any great spelling reform C would probably not get priority treatment. (More likely, you'd start with removing many SILENT letters, beginning perhaps with silent "gh".)

2) If we were to make a massive change in English spelling to make it all more "phonetic" (I suppose you'd want "fonetik" for that, or even "funetik".), WHICH dialect of English would be used as the basis?? There are SO many differences in pronunciation between English dialects that what is phonetic in ONE would often NOT be in many others.

3) If we ever made such a massive change, VAST quantities of written material would suddenly become unintelligible to most of us

Also, for those studying languages like French, learning these languages would become much more difficult. As it stands, we can recognize many words whose spelling may make very good sense in those languages, as related to English ones.. which would not be possible any longer.

For that matter -- and here's a key point -- spelling is NOT just about marking words phonetically. A system of writing may ALSO show us how certain words are related to each other.. So, sometimes, in spoken language, two closely related words may have different sounds, but you can see the relationship from the spelling. Example: "soft" and "soften". The second is a verb derived from the first form. But the combination with /n/ has caused the /t/ to become silent. Yet we do not respell it "soffen". (There are many other instances of this type of change, e.g., list/listen, haste/hasten, fast/fasten, wrest/wrestle)

Answer 2

Frankly, that's a stupid question, because first of all, what would Italian people have since the K is a foreign letter or non-existing letter in their language? Or how would they make the CH sounds? Also, s and k making the same sounds is one of the STUPIDEST things I've heard read a person write before, because there are two sounds.

The C either makes the k sound or the s sound.
Plus "A, B, D" would sound mighty strange.

Just think about what you're asking, okay?! -_- :P

Answer 3

A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling

by Mark Twain

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.

Answer 4

The revamping of the alphabet is an "old one". In addition to elimination of "c", other suggestions are elimination of "x" (replace with "ks"), replace soft "g" (George) with "j", eliminate silent letters ("k" in "knight", "p" in "pneumonia", etc), add 5 more "vowel characters" for "long vowels" and eliminate silent letters that make a vowel long (use current vowels for "short sounds"). The only thing such a move has going for it is that making spellings more phonetic, our language would be easier to speak. My only reaction to this is UGH!!!!!!!!!!!!! If that's one's sole argument, then why not drop all pretense of words and sentences and just start beeping in Morse code?

Answer 5

Well, you need the letter C to make the CH sound.

Answer 6

Why single out c? We don't need a K if C can cover it. In that case get rid of S too. I'm going to ask my professor tomorrow haha

Answer 7

C is in the Periodic Table for Carbon "C" "Cl" for chlorine. Would you spell Cookie , Kookie, that makes a whole new word!

Answer 8

I move to kik C out of the alphabet...any sekonder?

Answer 9

Good question.
Did you know that c makes the s sound when followed by i, e or y? EG: city, cent, cycle.

Answer 10

Chop, Cheddar, Church, Chicken, Choke

need I say more? ;)