Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ncsu.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!ncsu!mauney
From: mauney@ncsu.UUCP (Jon Mauney)
Newsgroups: net.nlang
Subject: Re: Spelling Reform
Message-ID: <2696@ncsu.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 9-Oct-84 09:25:44 EDT
Article-I.D.: ncsu.2696
Posted: Tue Oct  9 09:25:44 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 11-Oct-84 05:54:53 EDT
References: <179@scc.UUCP>
Organization: N.C. State University, Raleigh
Lines: 30

Besides being a reactionary old fuddy-duddy when it comes to spelling
(it took me years to learn to misspell vichyssoise,  they can't take it
away from me),  I also have some practical objections.  I intend to
voice these objections every time someone brings up Shaw's ideas.

In order to make spelling logical and consistent,  there must be some
outside standard to compare it with, and that standard is usually 
pronunciation.  The question is, whose pronunciation.  In the example
given,  there are several incorrect spellings:
     while  ==> wile  (this example was given before reform of vowels)
     after  ==> aafte
     letters ==> letez

Where is the (clearly pronounced) 'h' sound in while?
Where is the (clearly pronounced) 'r' sound in after and letters?
I expect to hear some flaming about the 'h', because most people leave
it out,  but I am not the only person who pronounces it.  Personally,
I think any reform of vowels should diphthongize (or worse) every
syllable, as is done down here in God's country.  It is much easier
to justify leaving out letters than putting them in where they're not
written.

Fortunately, spelling reform is about as likely as direct popular election
of the U.S. President,  so the hole diskushon iz mute.

-- 

_Doctor_                           Jon Mauney,    mcnc!ncsu!mauney
\__Mu__/                           North Carolina State University