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