Spelling is ruining the English language

[Kingswood]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

I don't think the world will go to hell if people decide to change the english language to suit themselves. Obviously either it's already gone to hell, or changing it to suit ourselves doesn't have that effect.

France chooses to blow things up left, right and centre. Should the rest of the world do that too?

This last paragraph is a non-sequitur. What does that have to do with spelling reform?

Originally Posted by Aliantha

I guess you should send the queen a note about doing a revision of the english language. My guess is she wont be favourable, but I guess you never know.

I don't know about the Queen, but Prince Charles is a supporter of spelling reform.

Originally Posted by Aliantha

Aren't we talking about english?

You completely missed the point. Dyslexia is a disability only if the orthography is irregular.

When you have similar-looking words like tough, though, through and thorough, with up to four ways of pronouncing the ending depending on one's accent, even though it is not the ending that is changing in these words, is it any wonder that English-speaking dyslexics struggle?

Originally Posted by Aliantha

My assertion that languages evolve is not related to my view that spellings should not be changed. One is a fact and the other is my opinion. Whether I like it or not, the english language has changed and will continue to change. I simply believe that the fact that some kids have trouble with the rules of language or find it boring is not a good enough reason to go and change things just to make it easier for them.

Isn't it a good enough reason to make some changes if by doing so we help people with disabilities? Since you are opposed to any revision to spelling, would you care to tell a dyslexic or the parents of a dyslexic child: "I would love to help you manage your disability, but I oppose the measures that would be needed."

[Aliantha]

Originally Posted by Kingswood

This last paragraph is a non-sequitur. What does that have to do with spelling reform?

Again, my point was that we're talking about english not any other language.

You completely missed the point. Dyslexia is a disability only if the orthography is irregular.

When you have similar-looking words like tough, though, through and thorough, with up to four ways of pronouncing the ending depending on one's accent, even though it is not the ending that is changing in these words, is it any wonder that English-speaking dyslexics struggle?


Isn't it a good enough reason to make some changes if by doing so we help people with disabilities? Since you are opposed to any revision to spelling, would you care to tell a dyslexic or the parents of a dyslexic child: "I would love to help you manage your disability, but I oppose the measures that would be needed."

I think Dana and Tiki covered the reply I would have made to these comments.

In a nutshell, yes it's not fair that some people have reading disabilities for whatever reason, but that's not a reason to change the system for everyone else (who happen to be the vast majority). I was going to suggest that by your reasoning we should modify the way we make cars because then people with dwarfism could drive.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Kingswood

I don't know about the Queen, but Prince Charles is a supporter of spelling reform.

Maybe that's why he's a prince instead of king.

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Maybe that's why he's a prince instead of king.

Nah, that's all to do with his Mum still breathing...