Sounds you love, sounds you hate

[Cynthia_Rosenweiss]

XWraith_LordX

Cynthia_Rosenweiss

Hmm, I guess I'm not too fond of the Voiced Pharyngeal Fricative, seeing how I still haven't figured out how to pronounced it right.

I think I posted something on the topic you made for help with that.....did you see it? xp

I did. I still can't do it, it is a damned hard sound to make. I've also listened to the .ogg file of it you can find on wikipedia; but so far all my attempts sound like uvular r.

Quote:

Let's start a spelling reform and bring Þ and Ð back!

I also want to do something to make English spelling actually logical, and abolish the letter C (and use Č for "ch" combinations.)

Well, I mentioned that because recently I've been working on an English spelling reform which does use þ and ð. Mine however does retain C (and the soft/hard C distinction) and the digraph CH. Diacritics are used with vowels. Everything is at a fairly preliminary status though.

Maybe I'll make a thread about it if someone doesn't make an spelling reform thread in the weeks to come.  

[Eccentric Iconoclast]

Honestly, regarding spelling reform, I do think English needs one, but all the spelling reforms I've seen were extreeeemely ugly and failed to preserve etymology. If I were to create an English spelling reform, I would only act to disambiguate and try to keep the spelling as much like it is right now as possible.  

[Homurakitsune]

I think an English reform would fail, personally.  

[Mizenki]

I think it's doable. I really really wanna figure out a way to do it. The biggest problem is actually just the vowels. For the most part, English consonants are regular (the big problems are and , and /ð/ and /θ/).

However, the other big problem is English dialects. Australian and British English really don't do rhotacized vowels, and not all American English dialects do either (mine does). There are plenty of other differences, but I won't bother going over everything.

Plus, diphthongs are different. Vowels in different positions are treated differently. Stress can be different. Whose English should the writing reform be based on? It's a big problem. =[

 

[Henneth Annun]

Homurakitsune

I think an English reform would fail, personally.

Probably, yah....

...but it gives me something to do when I'm super bored. xd  

[Henneth Annun]

Mizenki

I think it's doable. I really really wanna figure out a way to do it. The biggest problem is actually just the vowels. For the most part, English consonants are regular (the big problems are and , and /ð/ and /θ/).

However, the other big problem is English dialects. Australian and British English really don't do rhotacized vowels, and not all American English dialects do either (mine does). There are plenty of other differences, but I won't bother going over everything.

Plus, diphthongs are different. Vowels in different positions are treated differently. Stress can be different. Whose English should the writing reform be based on? It's a big problem. =[

I know. There really isn't a "standard English" is there?

Another reason why my magical spelling reform is imaginary and I know it. XP  

[Robits R real! =O]

Eccentric Iconoclast

Nope, just þorn in English.

No, English had boþ, þey were just interchangeable.  

[Robits R real! =O]

Eccentric Iconoclast

Honestly, regarding spelling reform, I do think English needs one, but all the spelling reforms I've seen were extreeeemely ugly and failed to preserve etymology. If I were to create an English spelling reform, I would only act to disambiguate and try to keep the spelling as much like it is right now as possible.

Who the hell cares about etymology?
No one?
Exactly.
See:
iSland
mOnk  

[Cynthia_Rosenweiss]

Robits R real! =O

Eccentric Iconoclast

Honestly, regarding spelling reform, I do think English needs one, but all the spelling reforms I've seen were extreeeemely ugly and failed to preserve etymology. If I were to create an English spelling reform, I would only act to disambiguate and try to keep the spelling as much like it is right now as possible.

Who the hell cares about etymology?
No one?
Exactly.
See:
iSland
mOnk

I care about etymology.

The spelling of "island" is a result of false etymology, BTW.  

[Mizenki]

Cynthia_Rosenweiss

Robits R real! =O

Eccentric Iconoclast

Honestly, regarding spelling reform, I do think English needs one, but all the spelling reforms I've seen were extreeeemely ugly and failed to preserve etymology. If I were to create an English spelling reform, I would only act to disambiguate and try to keep the spelling as much like it is right now as possible.

Who the hell cares about etymology?
No one?
Exactly.
See:
iSland
mOnk

I care about etymology.

The spelling of "island" is a result of false etymology, BTW.

I agree. It adds character to a language, I think. Even though French spelling is a bit hectic, it's most definitely got a feeling to it, especially because of the etymological retentions... and occasional fake ones, like how scribes added a to 'doigt' because it came from 'digitum', even though it had been spelled 'doit' for the longest time before.

I think the English reform would require something that preserves the 'long' vowels that split into diphthongs in the Great Vowel Shift. Kinda how Icelandic does things, but I think English could do without the mass amount of diacritics.

Double consonants, perhaps?

winn = /wın/ "win"
win = /waın/ "whine/wine"
litt = /lıt/ "lit"
lit = /laıt/ "light"

Or maybe extending the use of the silent to such? (gotta love compensatory lengthening)

win = /wın/ "win"
wighn = /waın/ "whine/wine"
lit = /lıt/ "lit"
light = /laıt/ "light"

I kinda like that. It does look very English.

Igh hav a sentens heghr in dhis diferent speling sceghm.
/aı hæv ə sɛntɛns hi:r ın ðıs dıfərənt spɛlıŋ ski:m/
I have a sentence here in this different spelling scheme.

agh = /eı/ "name" (naghm)
egh = /i:/ "here" (heghr)
igh = /aı/ "fight" (fight)
ogh = /oʊ/ "stone" (stoghn)
ough = /u:/ "boom" (boughm)
ugh = /aʊ/ "house" (hughs)
a = /æ/ "that" (dhat)
e = /ɛ/ "bed" (bed)
i = /ı/ "fit" (fit)
o = /ɒ~a/ "fox" (fox)
u = /ʊ/ "book" (buc)
au/aw = /ɔ/ "law" (law)
eu/ew = /(j)u:/ "new" (new)
ou/ow = /ʌ/ "cut" (cout)

The final three interchange depending if the digraph finishes a word or comes before a vowel: "cauf" (cough); "eus" (use); "now-ow" (nuh-uh).

The only kinks to work out is how to show a 'long' vowel before a short, like in "idea" (/aı.di:ə/) and how to represent /ə/. (ighdegha? ighdeya?)

"Throughout" would be "throughught". "Actually" = "actoughalegh". I'm not crazy about that final "-egh", but I hate the dual use of "y" as a consonant and vowel.

EDIT: Maybe replacing with when the 'long' vowel finishes a word? "Actoughaley"? That's not too bad.

Perhaps combining the two systems would be interesting, seeing both discard different etymologies.

 

[Eollodwyn]

Cynthia_Rosenweiss

Robits R real! =O

Eccentric Iconoclast

Honestly, regarding spelling reform, I do think English needs one, but all the spelling reforms I've seen were extreeeemely ugly and failed to preserve etymology. If I were to create an English spelling reform, I would only act to disambiguate and try to keep the spelling as much like it is right now as possible.

Who the hell cares about etymology?
No one?
Exactly.
See:
iSland
mOnk

I care about etymology.

The spelling of "island" is a result of false etymology, BTW.

I think etymology is very important, and it's one of the reasons I actually like spelling in English. Sure, it's hard and confusing, even for native speakers, but it adds character, and shows the roots of the language. Etymology is fascinating because it shows the mixtures of cultures that go into creating and changing a language.  

[Cynthia_Rosenweiss]

Mizenki

Cynthia_Rosenweiss

Robits R real! =O

Eccentric Iconoclast

Honestly, regarding spelling reform, I do think English needs one, but all the spelling reforms I've seen were extreeeemely ugly and failed to preserve etymology. If I were to create an English spelling reform, I would only act to disambiguate and try to keep the spelling as much like it is right now as possible.

Who the hell cares about etymology?
No one?
Exactly.
See:
iSland
mOnk

I care about etymology.

The spelling of "island" is a result of false etymology, BTW.

I agree. It adds character to a language, I think. Even though French spelling is a bit hectic, it's most definitely got a feeling to it, especially because of the etymological retentions... and occasional fake ones, like how scribes added a to 'doigt' because it came from 'digitum', even though it had been spelled 'doit' for the longest time before.

I think the English reform would require something that preserves the 'long' vowels that split into diphthongs in the Great Vowel Shift. Kinda how Icelandic does things, but I think English could do without the mass amount of diacritics.

Double consonants, perhaps?

winn = /wın/ "win"
win = /waın/ "whine/wine"
litt = /lıt/ "lit"
lit = /laıt/ "light"

Or maybe extending the use of the silent to such? (gotta love compensatory lengthening)

win = /wın/ "win"
wighn = /waın/ "whine/wine"
lit = /lıt/ "lit"
light = /laıt/ "light"

I kinda like that. It does look very English.

I'd turn silent to so:

night > nyht

And to disambiguate "knight" from "night," "knight" would get to keep its k: knight > knyht

Another example:

sight > syht

To disambiguate "site" from "sight," site could be spelled sait. In this scheme, /ai/ would be rendered most of the time, with as a back-up. The reason would be chosen is that intelligibility to the common speaker of English would trump "phonological correctness," so to speak. So I'd keep the in the word "house" exactly the way it is instead of spelling it haus in light of such considerations. In fact, I'd retain the spelling of that word as a whole, at least in the singular. Plural, it would be housis, since the vowel in the second syllable is clearly an /i/ in the spoken language. On the other hand, for words that end in an /s/ sound where it doesn't change into a /z/ sound in the plural, I'd use soft-c for such words:

horse > horce
horses > horcis

Homophones do present some problems, e.g. "two," "too," "to." I mean, how many people on this site habitually confound "your" and "you're"?

Whine and wine aren't homophones, at least not the way I say them, so:

whine > whyn
wine > wyn

Preserving consonants is IMO more important than preserving vowels when it comes to etymological spellings.

And adding to "doigt" isn't a fake etymological spelling if its Latin progenitor really did have its . At most it's a hypercorrection.

I'm reminded somewhat of the orthography of Late Egyptian, where for example, Middle Egyptian nhj (or nhy, depending on how you transliterate the dual-strokes) "some" was rendered as n3hy ( = double reed-leaf, not the dual-strokes) in Late Egyptian, that is, the scribes inserted a 3 (Manuel de Codage A, Gardiner Code G-1) for whatever reason. (It certainly doesn't represent a vowel, since apart from the fact that Ancient Egyptian was written consonantally, the logical place to put one would be in the stressed final syllable - the first syllable of that word was lost in Demotic and Coptic.) There are lots of peculiar spellings, especially with respect to final syllables, since /r/'s and final /t/'s had become glottal stops by the time of the New Kingdom.  

[TurtIe Tracks]

I Þink English spelling is fairly stupid. It doesn't really make any sense at all, like you need to learn ðe spelling of each word instead of just learning ðe letters--

but I like it anyway.

I guess for a similar reason for my liking Chinese characters. Sure you have to learn multiple... Þousand, but once you know all of ðem it actually is easier to read.  

[Song Wei]

I love the formation of soft letters, mostly Zh (which I consider a soft letter, like the Russian Zh) mostly I love the sounds of N/M/L/B/V/W/ and Zh/Ng/Dh

I HATE the letter C, it was a fail invention of any language, S or K please... no stupid in the middle letter.

sorry...  

[Homurakitsune]

Shangroulu

I love the formation of soft letters, mostly Zh (which I consider a soft letter, like the Russian Zh) mostly I love the sounds of N/M/L/B/V/W/ and Zh/Ng/Dh

I HATE the letter C, it was a fail invention of any language, S or K please... no stupid in the middle letter.

sorry...

I actually like the letter C. I think it would be neat if it replaced both K and S and relied on the sounds surrounding it to determine if it was hard or soft. Just something to speculate; I don't think that'll actually happen.