Noah Webster's spelling reform. Was it a bad idea?

Natural languages and linguistics
Travis B.
Posts: 6296
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:52 pm

Re: Noah Webster's spelling reform. Was it a bad idea?

Post by Travis B. »

To be completely honest, people who call British spellings "international" as if that were some reason to favor them annoy me, since should it not matter that a majority of native English-speakers speak American English varieties and presumably use American spellings?
Yaaludinuya siima d'at yiseka ha wohadetafa gaare.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate ha eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
User avatar
Zaarin
Posts: 392
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:59 am
Location: Terok Nor

Re: Noah Webster's spelling reform. Was it a bad idea?

Post by Zaarin »

masako wrote: Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:57 am
Zaarin wrote: Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:43 pm Gray is just obscenely ugly.
May, day, bay, lay, play, say, ray, way...etc

Those must be hideous, huh.
No, they're fine, especially since a bey, ney, and Rey are completely different things from a bay, nay, or ray. :p It's not <ay> that's ugly; it's <ay> specifically in the color between black and white in luminosity that's ugly. :p
But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me?
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?
Travis B.
Posts: 6296
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2018 8:52 pm

Re: Noah Webster's spelling reform. Was it a bad idea?

Post by Travis B. »

Space60 wrote: Sun Dec 16, 2018 2:52 pm We can do better.

"Color, colour" "kuller"
"favor, favour" "faver"
"Neighbor, neighbour" "naber"
"Acre" "aker"
"Liter, litre" "leeter"
The problem with spelling reform is that it makes a specific pronunciation or set of pronunciations standard by encoding them in spelling, whereas spellings rather divorced from pronunciation have less standardizing force upon language varieties. Of course standard varieties can certainly exist without their being encoded in spelling, but spelling reform reinforces them, at the detriment of nonstandard varieties.
Yaaludinuya siima d'at yiseka ha wohadetafa gaare.
Ennadinut'a gaare d'ate ha eetatadi siiman.
T'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa t'awraa.
User avatar
Raholeun
Posts: 262
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:09 am
Location: sub omnibus canonibus

Re: Noah Webster's spelling reform. Was it a bad idea?

Post by Raholeun »

Travis B. wrote: Mon Dec 17, 2018 10:08 am To be completely honest, people who call British spellings "international" as if that were some reason to favor them annoy me, since should it not matter that a majority of native English-speakers speak American English varieties and presumably use American spellings?
In the non-anglophone world, you generally get taught British pronunciation and the British spelling system. However, since most of the media intake comes from the US, you learn the Hollywood pronunciation and spelling. Sigh. My writing is a mess and my accent has become idiosyncratic to put it euphemistically.
User avatar
Imralu
Posts: 426
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2018 11:01 am

Re: Noah Webster's spelling reform. Was it a bad idea?

Post by Imralu »

Even as a native speaker, having two main standard spellings for some words trips me up. Obviously it doesn't matter which standard is used, but it's nice to be consistent. I write with non-US spellings except, for some reason, I was never exposed to the spelling of "tumour" from a non-American source so I wasn't even aware that it was one of these -our words until well into my adulthood. Obviously I knew the word, and I pronounce it "chooma", but previously I would have written " a grey-coloured tumor", which is stylistically a bit bleurgh.
Glossing Abbreviations: COMP = comparative, C = complementiser, ACS / ICS = accessible / inaccessible, GDV = gerundive, SPEC / NSPC = (non-)specific, A/ₐ = agent, E/ₑ = entity (person or thing)
________
MY MUSIC | MY PLANTS | ILIAQU
Post Reply