English Spelling Sucks—But We Can Fix It | Neel Le Meur | TEDxDulwichCollegeSingapore

[christianstainazfischer]

I think that maybe we should leave current spelling for now as a Standard spelling kinda idea, and then have multiple different spelling reforms for different regions. For example a New York Spelling, an Oregon Spelling, or even different spellings within the British Isles as well. Different accents really are just the first stages of different dialects, and then languages, and I think the longer we force (for the most part) one standard spelling across a whole bunch of different languages, even in their early stages, the worse the spelling will actually correlate to the pronunciation, and ALSO the harder it will be to carry a spelling reform out! Imagine if Dutch, German, English, and Icelandic all spelled their shared vocabulary the same way, that would be insane!

Here are some things that absolutely should be changed though - words that are technically misspelled due to mistakes by French scribes or deliberately changing the spelling to make it ‘look better’ in cursive, i.e. the s in Island has absolutely no business being there. Words with wh should absolutely be switched. I understand that most people don’t say the h/x sound anymore, but that some people still do, so I think keeping the wh is a good idea, at least for now, however, ITS BACKWARDS. No one says wh, the people that say the h/x say it HW, and it’s not even unique to English! Look at Icelandic or other Scandinavian languages, they’re ALL hv! All those words MUST be changed to: hwat, hwen, hwere, hwite, etc. We ABSOLUTELY should abandon the QU combination, and replace it with KW, this could potentially remove an unnecessary letter (q), or even better, free that letter to represent a different source. If we were to now spell qu with kw it would make words like queen, much easier to spot cognates with, for example kween and kvinne (not sure how it’s spelled, but I think that’s Swedish). A huge priority should also be placed on specific consonants, and making them NOT have multiple pronunciations, specifically G and C. I don’t have any solutions off the top of my head, but I’m sure it can be fixed. Another thing I often see people advocate against is the letter X, however I think it should be kept ONLY to make a distinction between words like tack (s.), tacks (pl.) and tax (s.), taxes (pl.). We should also take a look at how in German orthography, a double consonant represents a preceding short vowel, while a single consonant represents a preceding long vowel. This could solve the unnecessary e in words like bite, hate, note, etc. In my opinion, I think at leaat Þþ (thorn) should be brought back to represent the unvoiced th sound and adopt Ðð (eth) to represent the voiced th sound, but I also understand that this isn’t absolutely necessary and depending very likely sound changes, they might even become obsolete with a few years anyway. If I was given the opportunity to create a spelling reform, specific to my accent at least, this is what it would look like 🙂

Ai weik upp evry morning æt sevin o’klak t’go t’work. Ai juzhualy stap æt ðe gæssteishön t’get summ brekfist en mai feivrit fleivr uvv Manstr (maybe keep Monster because it’s a proper noun?). It’s ubbæot ‘n æor draiv t’work, en ai hæf t’by ðer æt eit þrdy. Ovr ðe læst fju wyks wy’v bin working in ðe sno, hwic kaind’u sukks. Hópfolly ðe weðr will worm upp sun, less klæods en mor sunnlait wöd by greit.

Edit: I showed my example to my nine year old brother to see if he could read it, he does speak a little bit of German so he might have a slight advantage noticing some pronunciations like the j making a y sound like year > jyr, but that aside, he was able to read almost all of it, only a few words I had to say for him. I also noticed he actually has a slightly different accent than me which I found quite funny considering we’re both raised in the same house by the same parents, even went to the same elementary school. I can only guess that maybe some factors contributing to this could be age, and our different levels of exposure to specifically Ebonics/AAVE, or other languages as well (I speak Dutch, some Spanish, and some German, while he only speaks English and a little German. What I specifically noticed is he doesn’t at all say the th or ð in the, but instead only says de, (he does however keep the th in other words, both voiced and unvoiced). He also very clearly says and or ænd, while I only say and/ænd if I’m going out of my way to be very very clear, as I typically just say en. He also very clearly says to, with the o making a clear oo sound like shoot, while I say the o like the u in put, again I say it like him if I’m actively trying to be very clear, but in normal speech I say the u in put sound, or even drop the vowel completely, hence t’go or t’by for to go and to be. This is a perfect example of why a spelling reform might be more tedious than first expected, but then again, I’m well sure that some very smart people can come up with a better reform than myself, that’ll account for such discrepancies

[MPhonemicEnglish]

Spelling reform proposals have been proffered many times over the years. Benjamin Franklin had one. There was the Initial Teaching Alphabet that actually got taught in some public primer schools. The question is: Which is the best?
1. Easy to learn. Direct connection between graphemes and phonemes.
2. High efficiency
3. limited character set to keep keyboards compatible with human hands and touch typing.
4. Not a stepping stone. Transition will be expensive and difficult. Not something to do in gradual steps. Teach the kids. Don't worry about adults who need baby bite steps. Let them keep using the old system until they die off. Go for broke! Go for the easiest and most efficient system out there.

[Jürgen-vhin]

Neel, I'm one of those 650 000 000! Thanks for your thoughts and contributions to an English Spelling Reform. I agree with that title of your TEDTalk: "English Spelling sucks but we can fix it!". One point though: I would have liked to be able to decipher the text on the screen of the monitor in the back. Please move it to the front in your next talk. Thank U.

[idkargqrwh]

ghoti as fish is a terrible example. a native english speaker who hasnt heard of it will read it as something like g-ah-tee not fish. physche or pfyshe would be an actually good way to get the point across that english spelling is weird.

[MPhonemicEnglish]

Homophones don't matter when we're speaking since we deduce the word and meaning by the context. We shouldn't feel obligated to separate them in print either. Just add the meanings to the same spelling which now matches the pronunciation.

[erikjohanning]

ghoti makes no sense if you know any of english's phonotactical and etymological rules

[MaoRatto]

Accent marks are a necessity. Though my idea was for circumflexes for historical words that have silent W's, but make them correspond to or separate the words. I constantly have to AVOID mixing AR with ER, UR, IR, because most words with AR become that sound or over extend into other words that the IPA system doesn't account for, like I don't have a double C in ACCOUNT. infact if I wrote it more phonetically it would have sounds that DON'T exist in standard at all. Like intrusive ɹ or gaining a trill after words with θ like in thrice. Lesser stress in words, patalization or schwa becoming "ħõ" like in problem, sounding more like problħõm. Changing ending with strong vowels or turning TT and D -> "
ʎ ". So the spelling becomes less intuitive for words like vowels gaining this " ɔ̃ ", basically. If given a couple of years, we are going to be like Portuguese to what Spanish is. Clear relatives of each other. Like other, having ɜ̃ and not the ˈə. The stress is the same, but not reflective of spoken at all.

A reform is a necessity. I believe having dialectal variation would force the anglosphere to actually agree on somethings which would be great. As I live in a regional with less TH like in THRICE, THE. It's pronounced in some words, but mainly in conjugations. SOFT, SOFTEN -> SOFT, sof'ʊ̃n... The schwa is reduced into nasal sounds for me or just back throat in general. So a reform with dialectal differences is a good idea.

[EngelProgrammings]

I created my own spelling system that matches the way the English language is pronounced, here is an example:

*ORIGINAL*
_The similar form of societal hierarchy known as chiefdom or tribal kingship is prehistoric. Chiefdoms provided the concept of state formation, which started with civilizations such as Mesopotamia, Ancient Egypt and the Indus Valley civilization. In some parts of the world, chiefdoms became monarchies._

*MY PROPOSAL*
_Dhu simulṛ form uv susaiitul haiṛarkee noụn ạz cheefdum or traibul kingship iz preehistorik. Cheefdumz pruvaidid dhu kansept uv steit formeishun, wich startid widh sivulizeishunz such ạz Mesuputeimeeu, Einchunt Eejupt eund dhu Indus Vạlee sivulizeishun. In sum parts uv dhu wṛld, cheefdumz bikeim manarkeez._

I also created one for Spanish:

*ORIGINAL*
_La forma similar de jerarquía social conocida como jefatura o realeza tribal es prehistórica. Los cacicazgos proporcionaron el concepto de formación de Estados, que comenzó con civilizaciones como Mesopotamia, el Antiguo Egipto y la civilización del Valle del Indo. En algunas partes del mundo, los cacicazgos se convirtieron en monarquías._

*MY PROPOSAL*
_La fórrma similárr de jerarrkía sosyál konosída kómo jefatúra o rrealésa tribál es preystórika. Los kasikásgos proporrsyonáron el konsépto de forrmasyón de Estádos, ke komensó kon sibilisasyónes kómo Mesopotámya, el Antígwo Ejípto i la sibilisasyón del Bálle del Índo. En algúnas párrtes del múndo, los kasikásgos se kombirrtyéron en monarrkías._