Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last
Results 1 to 10 of 16
  1. #1
    Glizdka is online now Senior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Other
      • Native Language:
      • Polish
      • Home Country:
      • Poland
      • Current Location:
      • Poland
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    1,354

    Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    My guess is that the English are just very conservative (look at the Royal Family). In American English, there have been a few reforms, but not too many either.
    I wonder why, has any of you dug deep enough into the topic?

    Thought, through, though, thorough are great examples of historical spelling, but there are many much more confusing examples:

    "I live where my father lives. There's a big tree with many leaves in the garden. I love the tree, so whenever a leaf falls from it, it ruins my life, in fact, it ruins both of our lives. I would leave this place because of that, but my father never leaves this place. This is too much, I'm gonna turn on the TV, my show is going live."

    Some things like read [reed] and read [red] are even worse. This is the same verb, different tenses, same spelling, different pronunciations. Why not change the spelling to "red"? Because it could be mistaken for the color red? They are different parts of speech, the context would make it much less confusing than having the present and past form of the same verb look the same.

    Why hasn't English ever adopted diacritic symbols (likę śmę f thśę)?
    And of course, let's not forget this poem.

    At least it's not Tibetan I guess...

  2. #2
    GoesStation is offline Moderator
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    21,581

    Re: Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    English has no regulatory authority to impose spelling changes. Some spelling simplifications like plow instead of plough have taken root anyway, but it's a very slow process.
    I am not a teacher.

  3. #3
    Glizdka is online now Senior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Other
      • Native Language:
      • Polish
      • Home Country:
      • Poland
      • Current Location:
      • Poland
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    1,354

    Re: Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    It sounds reasonable, Piscean. I guess the fact that the English Empire used to span over a significant portion of the world, only adds to that. I think of written Chinese, many different pronunciation for the same word, one script for all of them, people from different parts of the Empire could write to each other intelligibly, even though they couldn't talk to each other with the same amount of intelligibility.

    But then, we have a notoriously difficult to learn script, do you personally think it's worth it?

  4. #4
    Glizdka is online now Senior Member
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Other
      • Native Language:
      • Polish
      • Home Country:
      • Poland
      • Current Location:
      • Poland
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    1,354

    Re: Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    Quote Originally Posted by Piscean View Post
    Chinese and English are rather different. Speakers of, for example Shanghainese and Mandarin, don't pronounce words in different ways; they have different words in the spoken language.
    I know, in English it's just a few patterns that change. I absolutely love this example. And I do agree with you, it would be difficult to decide as to which pronunciation the new spelling rules should be based on.

  5. #5
    Tdol is offline Editor, UsingEnglish.com
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    72,994

    Re: Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    And -gh is a form of orthography reform caused by the Norman conquest as they changed the letter yogh -ȝ- to gh.

  6. #6
    probus's Avatar
    probus is offline Moderator
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Retired English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Canada
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    5,367

    Re: Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    Quote Originally Posted by Glizdka View Post
    My guess is that the English are just very conservative (look at the Royal Family). In American English, there have been a few reforms, but not too many either.
    I wonder why, has any of you dug deep enough into the topic?
    A little while back I wrote in this Forum a brief history of the largely failed American attempt to reform orthography. About all that remains of that effort is traveler versus traveller, color versus colour and so on.
    Admittedly I did not do the work necessary to supply historical and scholarly references so my views got pretty short shrift. So be it. I am as lazy now as then.

    So much for the American side. As for the English, inventors of this wonderful language, my view is that they are as they've always been, pretty much ungovernable. English will always be irregular because controlling the English is like herding cats.
    Last edited by probus; 29-Apr-2019 at 13:12. Reason: Typo

  7. #7
    probus's Avatar
    probus is offline Moderator
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Retired English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Canada
      • Current Location:
      • Canada
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    5,367

    Re: Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    Quote Originally Posted by GoesStation View Post
    Some spelling simplifications like plow instead of plough have taken root anyway
    Good grief. Have they really? Plow? Surely you jest.
    I must make a better effort to stay awake. But in any case I will go to my grave believing it's plough

  8. #8
    Tdol is offline Editor, UsingEnglish.com
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    72,994

    Re: Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    Quote Originally Posted by probus View Post
    A little while back I wrote in this Forum a brief history of the largely failed American attempt to reform orthography. About all that remains of that effort is traveler versus traveller, color versus colour and so on.
    It succeeded in American English, and was largely the effort of one person. It didn't get other variants on board, which made the rationalisation a contributor to the mess that we already had. Our spelling is a problem, though the Roman alphabet is an efficient system of writing, but one that we're one of the worst examples of. Reforms have only added further layers of mess. It some ways, it is sad that such an efficient system is abused by the most widely spoken language that uses it.

    And plow has no roots in BrE. We still plough the fields and scatter.

  9. #9
    GoesStation is offline Moderator
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • Interested in Language
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Posts
    21,581

    Re: Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    Quote Originally Posted by probus View Post
    Good grief. Have they really? Plow? Surely you jest.
    I must make a better effort to stay awake. But in any case I will go to my grave believing it's plough
    I should have added in American English. I wouldn't be surprised if plough​ is still preferred up north in Canada.
    I am not a teacher.

  10. #10
    Tdol is offline Editor, UsingEnglish.com
    • Member Info
      • Member Type:
      • English Teacher
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    72,994

    Re: Why have there been so few orthography reforms in English?

    They still speak proper English there?

Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •