1 2 3 4  6 7 » 19
What you mean "we," paleface?

You're piggybacking. Who are you talking to, redface?

I thought it was clear enough that I was responding to "A.B. Normal" there and to you further down. I suppose it does get confusing when two different "you"s are addressed in the same post. I'll watch for that.

Thanks for the further comments. I do like knowing what spelling reform looks like from people who have lived through it.

Best Donna Richoux
The Netherlands and Belgium together have a population somewhat less than that of California and an area somewhat less than South Carolina.

So what?

So it's much easier to do things on a small scale. Anything that went well shouldn't really be expected to generalize to a situation like English, and anything that didn't should be expected to bite you in spades.
Those who advocate spelling reform of some kind, should at the very least have a look at the only modern language where spelling (and grammar) reform has indeed been done on a major scale.

True. I'd recommend tracking down a copy of Josh Fishman (ed)'s 1977 Advances in the Creation and Revision of Writing Systems , which has stuff on Dutch, as well as several other languages whose spelling or writing was revised. Unfortunately, it's out of print, but a good university library should have a copy. (I've been looking for a reasonably-priced used copy for years. abebooks.com lists one copy in Canada for $60 and Amazon lists a copy in Maryland for $162.35)

Evan Kirshenbaum + HP Laboratories >The law of supply and demand tells us
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 >that when the price of something isPalo Alto, CA 94304 >artificially set below market level,
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
How would this be implemented? In the U.S. the government ... the authority to mandate these spellings in the private sector.

Presumably they could require a particular standard spelling to be used in all education they pay for (even in part).

Well that would get the federal government out of paying (even in part) for education, as the little they pay now wouldn't come anywhere near the cost of new textbooks, not to mention restocking libraries with books the students wouldn't be unable to read.
They could also demand that reports they pay for be written in that spelling.

Thereby making it look to the general public as though the government can't spell.

Evan Kirshenbaum + HP Laboratories >If a bus station is where a bus
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 >stops, and a train station is wherePalo Alto, CA 94304 >a train stops, what does that say

(650)857-7572
http://www.kirshenbaum.net /
"Laugh" for instance should probably be spelled "laf", I would prefer "laaf", to avoid confusion with the "cat" vowel.

But to this American "laugh" and "cat" have the same vowel. See how easily this breaks down?

To me they sort of don't have the same vowel, since my dialect (Postwar New York Prestige Standard) distinguishes "can" (be able) from "can" (container). "Laugh" has the "can" (container) vowel, while "cat" has the "can" (be able) vowel. This distinction is present in nonprestigious New York accents too.
The distinction is a very subtle one for me, and I happen to speak the dialect in question. I suspect that the subtleness may have something to do with the prestige factor PNYPS may be in transition to a merger of "can" and "can".
How would this be implemented? In the U.S. the government ... the authority to mandate these spellings in the private sector.

Presumably they could require a particular standard spelling to be used in all education they pay for (even in part). They could also demand that reports they pay for be written in that spelling.

Well, they could try. It is inconceivable that the political will exists for this.
In any case, my two cents is that spelling reform is the most safely ignorable of all linguistic discussions.

For English, yes,

Quite so. I couldn't say for other languages.
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
Presumably they could require a particular standard spelling to be used in all education they pay for (even in part).

Well that would get the federal government out of paying (even in part) for education, as the little they pay now wouldn't come anywhere near the cost of new textbooks, not to mention restocking libraries with books the students wouldn't be unable to read.

It need (and shouldn't) be that drastic.
They could also demand that reports they pay for be written in that spelling.

Thereby making it look to the general public as though the government can't spell.

Correct spelling will then be what the government says it is. And publishers of dictionaries will go along with it, for it's a great way of generating new sales,
Jan
So what?

So it's much easier to do things on a small scale. Anything that went well shouldn't really be expected to generalize to a situation like English, and anything that didn't should be expected to bite you in spades.

The US is smaller scale than the Netherlands and Belgium, in the way of language.
Those who advocate spelling reform of some kind, should at ... grammar) reform has indeed been done on a major scale.

True. I'd recommend tracking down a copy of Josh Fishman (ed)'s 1977 Advances in the Creation and Revision of ... copy for years. abebooks.com lists one copy in Canada for $60 and Amazon lists a copy in Maryland for $162.35)

Published in The Hague, of all places.
If I ever se a copy I'll let you know,
Jan
(Email Removed)>...
Presumably they could require a particular standard spelling to be ... that reports they pay for be written in that spelling.

Well, they could try. It is inconceivable that the political will exists for this.

At present, certainly. The extreme conservatism which is now dominant in the USA may not last forever.
For English, yes,

Quite so. I couldn't say for other languages.

For most other languages there is less need,
Jan
Students: We have free audio pronunciation exercises.
snippage
Thanks for the further comments. I do like knowing what spelling reform looks like from people.

Few people have. The proces has taken more than a hundred years. Overall it has been a succes, in the long term, for nobody seriously advocates going back to 'De Vries en Te Winkel') as the first standard spelling was called.
But many mistakes have been made on the way that had better been avoided. The 1996 adjustment was mostly a mistake in the opinion of many who 'who have lived through it', but it is impossible to do anything about it.
That is another reason to be very careful with spelling 'reform': it is effectively irreversible,
Jan

"Voor mij had het ook niet gehoeven." (Jo Ritzen)
Show more