Page 1 of 2

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

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:47 am
by Space60
I remember someone saying that it was. They said that it is better to create bridges rather than walls between the different varieties of English. Noah Webster created a wall between American and Commonwealth English.

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

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 10:41 am
by Zaarin
Probably the only challenging spelling for Americans is manoeuvre. Otherwise I can safely say that Americans have no trouble with -re, -our, or even -ae- spellings. I don't see where the alleged wall is.

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

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 12:02 pm
by missals
Yeah, all of the changes were pretty superficial. The only British-American spelling difference that's ever caused me trouble is draught. I went years not realizing it was the same as draft, thinking it was pronounced the same as drought.

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

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 12:18 pm
by Moose-tache
I can't imagine anyone objecting to Webster Reformed Spelling on the grounds that it is difficult to comprehend. Presumably the issue some people take with it is its nationalist symbolism. Since Webster was in good company at the time, with numerous proposed spelling reforms buzzing around the English speaking world and in other countries, I think his image as a jingoist is simply the curse of success. I don't think anyone is mourning the extra passengers on the word "plow," or weeping on the tiny two-part gravestones of all the ligatures forced onto unconsenting words by the Graecophiles.

That said, I do appreciate the historical spelling of English, and I cringe at modern-day Websterites who brought us "tonite" and "lite yogurt." Spelling reform should only take place in the remote past from now on.

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

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 1:37 pm
by Zaarin
missals wrote: ↑Sat Dec 15, 2018 12:02 pm Yeah, all of the changes were pretty superficial. The only British-American spelling difference that's ever caused me trouble is draught. I went years not realizing it was the same as draft, thinking it was pronounced the same as drought.
Ah, yes, that's another one, though I pronounced it to rhyme with ought before learning better.

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

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 2:27 pm
by Space60
There's also "hiccough" and "gaol". However these spellings are usually considered old fashioned these days even in Commonwealth English.

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

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:30 pm
by StrangerCoug
I never liked the spelling hiccoughβ€”it's a spelling based on a false etymology that gives it a counter-intuitive pronunciation. (Rant: Tell me ONE other word in the world that has <gh> pronounced /p/. And by "in the world", I mean non-English words count, too.) Draught and gaol can trip us Americans up, too, but other than those, I don't think there are any major barriers in being able to read texts from the other side of the pond.

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

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:50 pm
by Yalensky
Barriers between American and British standards are more likely to be lexical, I find. For the longest time I (American) didn't know whether "knackered" meant hungry, angry, or tired.

It used to just give the first sentence

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:31 pm
by Pabappa

Re: It used to just give the first sentence

Posted: Sat Dec 15, 2018 10:45 pm
by Zaarin
Pabappa wrote: ↑Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:31 pm https://www.etymonline.com/word/gaol πŸ˜›
Image

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

Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 5:56 am
by Salmoneus
Of course it was a bad idea! It's caused the whole of the US to spell lots of words wrongly, which is very irritating to read...

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

Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 8:03 am
by Kuchigakatai
Yalensky wrote: ↑Sat Dec 15, 2018 7:50 pmBarriers between American and British standards are more likely to be lexical, I find. For the longest time I (American) didn't know whether "knackered" meant hungry, angry, or tired.
Pro-tip: a waste facility (vulgo "dump") is known in dear old Blighty as a "tip".

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

Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 8:57 am
by masako
Salmoneus wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 5:56 am Of course it was a bad idea! It's caused the whole of the US to spell lots of words correctly, which is very irritating to read...
Fixed it for you.

Besides, the only reason British spellings remain relevant in the largely homogenized English speaking world is their prevalence in major population centers such as India, the eastern African countries, and parts of South America.

Also, not to put too fine a point on it, but Webster was not the progenitor of these differences... most (almost all) of them already existed, he simply made a decision about which version(s) to standardize for American use.

Re: It used to just give the first sentence

Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 10:28 am
by StrangerCoug
Pabappa wrote: ↑Sat Dec 15, 2018 8:31 pm https://www.etymonline.com/word/gaol πŸ˜›
I want to laugh at this:
see jail (n.), you tea-sodden football hooligan.

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

Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:25 pm
by Kuchigakatai
masako wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 8:57 am
Salmoneus wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 5:56 amOf course it was a bad idea! It's caused the whole of the US to spell lots of words correctly, which is very irritating to read...
Fixed it for you.

Besides, the only reason British spellings remain relevant in the largely homogenized English speaking world is their prevalence in major population centers such as India, the eastern African countries, and parts of South America.
American spellings are the odd ones out. British spellings are also used in Australia and New Zealand (and South Africa and Singapore...).

(Canada exists in a bit of a limbo position, using British spellings for Latinate affixes but American spellings for Greek stems and affixes... We also write "grey" and "cheque", but "tire" and "annex".)

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

Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:43 pm
by Zaarin
Ser wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:25 pm
masako wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 8:57 am
Salmoneus wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 5:56 amOf course it was a bad idea! It's caused the whole of the US to spell lots of words correctly, which is very irritating to read...
Fixed it for you.

Besides, the only reason British spellings remain relevant in the largely homogenized English speaking world is their prevalence in major population centers such as India, the eastern African countries, and parts of South America.
American spellings are the odd ones out. British spellings are also used in Australia and New Zealand (and South Africa and Singapore...).

(Canada exists in a bit of a limbo position, using British spellings for Latinate affixes but American spellings for Greek stems and affixes... We also write "grey" and "cheque", but "tire" and "annex".)
I'm American but also write "grey" and "cheque." :P Gray is just obscenely ugly. :(

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

Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 2:39 pm
by masako
Ser wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:25 pm American spellings are the odd ones out. British spellings are also used in Australia and New Zealand (and South Africa and Singapore...).
Note to self: Don't assume that Ser will pick up on obstinate humor.

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

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

"Color, colour" "kuller"
"favor, favour" "faver"
"Neighbor, neighbour" "naber"
"Acre" "aker"
"Liter, litre" "leeter"

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

Posted: Sun Dec 16, 2018 3:46 pm
by Kuchigakatai
masako wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 2:39 pm
Ser wrote: ↑Sun Dec 16, 2018 1:25 pmAmerican spellings are the odd ones out. British spellings are also used in Australia and New Zealand (and South Africa and Singapore...).
Note to self: Don't assume that Ser will pick up on obstinate humor.
:lol: That's not a bad thing to do.

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

Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2018 4:57 am
by masako
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.