- Joined
- Jan 7, 2011
- Member Type
- Retired English Teacher
- Native Language
- English
- Home Country
- Canada
- Current Location
- Canada
I think learners should be aware of this poorly organized but persistent movement to standardize and simplify the spelling and pronunciation of English.
I have read that it began fifty or sixty years ago as a direct result of Americans' refusal to pay their teachers adequate salaries. According to this theory, a generation of poorly educated teachers emerged. Supposedly, because of their poor education, they found their work difficult, and attempted to make it easier by simplifying and standardizing. I should say that I have no reason to support or believe in this theory of the origin of the movement. What I do know for certain is this: 1) the movement had begun 50 years ago when I was young, and 2) it continues today.
One of the earliest prescriptions I recall is this: when two vowels are separated by a single consonant, the first must have the long sound. So in Canada we say "yesterday the sun shone" to rhyme with don. But Americans insist on shone to rhyme with stone. Similarly, we pronounce the herb basil to rhyme with Brazil. But Americans now insist on baysil. Examples of this can be multiplied endlessly.
Another feature of this trend is the abolition of silent consonants. For example, the pronunciation of palm as pom is disappearing. Everyone on radio and television now pronounces the l. Similarly for calm and other words containing formerly silent consonants.
Related to this last feature is an intolerance for variance in pronuncuation. We formerly said sowth for south, but suthern for southern. The apologists of this movement now insist upon sowthern.
Arguably this movement makes English easier for learners. I deplore it nonetheless.
I have read that it began fifty or sixty years ago as a direct result of Americans' refusal to pay their teachers adequate salaries. According to this theory, a generation of poorly educated teachers emerged. Supposedly, because of their poor education, they found their work difficult, and attempted to make it easier by simplifying and standardizing. I should say that I have no reason to support or believe in this theory of the origin of the movement. What I do know for certain is this: 1) the movement had begun 50 years ago when I was young, and 2) it continues today.
One of the earliest prescriptions I recall is this: when two vowels are separated by a single consonant, the first must have the long sound. So in Canada we say "yesterday the sun shone" to rhyme with don. But Americans insist on shone to rhyme with stone. Similarly, we pronounce the herb basil to rhyme with Brazil. But Americans now insist on baysil. Examples of this can be multiplied endlessly.
Another feature of this trend is the abolition of silent consonants. For example, the pronunciation of palm as pom is disappearing. Everyone on radio and television now pronounces the l. Similarly for calm and other words containing formerly silent consonants.
Related to this last feature is an intolerance for variance in pronuncuation. We formerly said sowth for south, but suthern for southern. The apologists of this movement now insist upon sowthern.
Arguably this movement makes English easier for learners. I deplore it nonetheless.
Last edited: