Why reform English spelling?

I do not think that anyone who has studied English has any doubts that English spelling should be reformed. How difficult it once was for all of us to remember that the word daughter contains four sounds and eight (!) letters or that the past indefinite of win is spelled won but pronounced [wʌn] instead of [won], etc, etc.

Of course, there are also some other languages where words are not pronounced the way they are written, e.g. French or Portuguese; apparently, Scandinavian languages such as Swedish or Danish also belong to this group. They have a so-called traditional orthography, i.e. the spelling of words in these languages reflects the way words used to be pronounced long ago (sometimes as long ago as in the Middle Ages) rather than the way they are pronounced today. Originally, the spelling systems of these languages were phonetic, but with time they gradually ceased to be ones because the pronunciation of words changed while their spelling did not.

But none of these languages has such an awful number of exceptions from spelling rules that the English language has! When you study French or Portuguese, you have to put a lot of effort into memorizing all the rules of pronouncing letters, but once you have learned them all, you will be able to correctly pronounce virtually every word of the language (with the exception of some borrowed words). In English, however, almost each pronouncing pattern has its exception. It is said that there are only about 400 words in the English language that are pronounced completely contrary to the rules, but almost all of them belong to the most common and frequent words in the language. As a result, English learners have to study two English languages instead of one, the written one and the oral one; that is, they have to memorize the spelling and pronunciation of each word separately, while in other languages it suffices to memorize the spelling of a word. I suppose that English-speaking children also have a hard time learning the spelling of their mother tongue. I can imagine how many of them must regularly make spelling mistakes …

There is an organization called The Spelling Society, which has existed for 100 years already (since 1908) and has been trying to raise people’s awareness of the necessity to reform English spelling and provide information on the attempts at reforming it in the present and in the past. I recommend to read their article . If you want to know more about this problem, read also this article.

There are various projects of reforming English spelling. Some of them are moderate ones, i.e. they only suggest changing the spelling of some words or the graphic representation of some sounds so that people do not have much difficulty in getting used to the new spelling system. For instance, some of them suggest introducing diacritic (e.g. accent) marks for representing some sounds (e.g. ô, û), etc.

Others suggest reforming English spelling more drastically by making it wholly phonetic, i.e. each sound should be represented by only one letter and vice versa. Here is the example of a project of this kind, the one named Neato English (you can read about it here). On the left there are words in today’s English spelling, on the right there are the same words in Neato English spelling:

Neato English = Néytoe ínglish

My attempt at reforming the English written language = Miy utémpt at reyfórming dey inglish rítn láyngwij

Simplified Spelling Society = Símplifiyd spéling

In such projects English spelling becomes wholly phonetic, but the way words are written changes almost beyond recognition.

The History of One Successful Reform

In 1793, soon after the United States gained independence from England, Noah Webster made up the first American dictionary of the English language. In this dictionary, the spelling of some English words was simplified; these were the first spelling differences between British and American English. For instance, some words originally borrowed from French, which were and are spelled according to French rules in Britain (colour, centre, catalogue), had their spelling simplified so that it reflected their pronunciation more accurately (color, center, catalog). The spelling of words such as realise or defence was also tailored to their pronunciation in American English – realize, defense. By the way, I cannot understand why the word defenсe began to be spelled with c in British English, for in French, from where this word is borrowed, it is spelled with an s – défense.

So, why not continue reforming English spelling in this way?

Now let us get to the point …

My project on reforming English spelling is a moderate one. If the English language has historically developed such difficult spelling patterns, they may stay as they are. But this rules must have no exceptions! So, the main goal of this project is to re-write the words that do not follow the spelling patterns. Besides, my project includes some other measures on simplifying the spelling such as removing mute consonants and reducing number of the ways of writing the same sound.

So, let’s start!

1. First of all we will deal with the most common words with the most illogical spelling:

English = Inglish

people = peeple

you = u (this variant spelling already exists);

your = yer

do = doo

does = duz

are = ar

aren’t = arn’t

were = wer

answer = anser/ ænser

says, said = sez, sed

aunt = aant (the long [a:] is represented by aa)

plaid, plait = plad, plat plæd, plæt

brooch = broach

of = ov

to = too (vs. tóo “too” and tóo “two”)

too = too tóo (vs. tóo “two” and too “to”)

one = wun

two = too tóo (vs. tóo “too” and too “to”)

four = for fór (vs. for “for”)

could, should, would = cood, shood, wood cůd, shůd, wůd

any, anyone, anything = enny, ennywun, ennything ennyþing

suit, suitable, suitcase, suitor = sute, sutable, sutecase, sutor

walk, talk, stalk = wauk, tauk, stauk

nephew = nevue

2. The sound[ʌ] should be always represented by u when in a closed syllable and never by o, ou, oo, wo:

come = cum

become = becum

welcome = welcum

some = sum

somebody, someone, something = sumboddy, sumwun, sumthing sumþing

nothing = nuthing nuþþing (the first syllable should be a closed one)

love = luv (this variant spelling already exists)

dove = duv (dove [douv] is the past tense of dive in American English)

done = dun

won = wun

other = uther uððer (the first syllable should be a closed one, hence the doubling of ð)

mother = muther muððer

brother = bruther bruððer

onion = unnion

company = cumpany

accomplish = accumplish

country = cuntry

courage = currage

courageous = currageous

double = dubble

trouble = trubble

touch = tutch, etc.

blood, flood = blud, flud

twopence = tuppence (this variant spelling already exists)

Similarly, the sounds [u:] and [u] should be represented only by oo and ů respectively (except some French borrowings such as coupé or coupon):

wolf = wůlf

group = groop

wound [wu:nd] = woond (wound [waund] is the past tense and past participle of wind wiend [waınd])

move, prove, approve, disprove, improve = moove, proove, approove, disproove, improove, etc.

3. The sounds [au] and [ou] should have different spellings. In English, ou is usually pronounced as [au], but ow may be pronounced as [ou] (know, grow, mow, throw, slow, etc.) or [au] (now, how, brow, vow, etc.) This lead to the appearance of homographs, i.e. words that are spelled the same but have different pronunciations: bow [bou] (a bow tie, a weapon, a fiddlestick) – bow [bau] (an act of bending your head as a sign of respect); row [rou] (to row a boat) – row [rau] (a quarrel); sow [sou] (to sow the grain) – sow [sau] (a female pig).

That is why [au] should always be represented by ou and never by ow, which, in its turn, should always be pronounced as [ou]:

[ou]: now (вместо know; см.ниже), grow, mow, throw, slow, bow, row, sow, etc.

[au]: nou, hou, brou, vou, bou, rou, sou, etc.

4. The letter combination ea can also be abolished. Instead, the sound [i:] could be represented by ee and the sound [e] by e in a closed syllable (if necessary, the last consonant of the syllable should be doubled to make a closed syllable):

meat = meet

seat = seet

read [ri:d] = reed

bean = been

clean = cleen (vs. clense “cleanse”)

jeans = jeens

peace = peece

read [red] = red

bread = bred

dead = ded

death = deth deþ

spread = spred

thread = thred þred

lead = leed

lead [led] = led

realm = relm

heaven = hevven

heavy = hevvy

weather = weððer (note the doubling of ð)

pleasure, measure = plezzure, mezzure (a double z may represent the sound [ℨ] like a doubled s represents the sound [ʃ] in words like mission, passion, pressure.

But the words real [rıəl], realize ['rıəlaız] and realtor ['rıəltə] would not change its spelling (unlike the word reælity).

Also, ie / ei [i:] can also be replaced by ee (in a closed syllable) or e (in an open syllable):

believe = beleve

ceiling = celing

chief = cheef

field = feeld

fiend = feend

niece = nece

piece = pece

receive = receve

thief = theef
This would eliminate the present mnemonic rule “Write i before e except after c“.

5. The letter combination ear could also be abolished. Instead, the sound [ıə] could be represented as ere and [з:] as er:

hear = here

heard = herd

dear = dere

dearth = derth

ear = ere (and the conjunction ere, which is pronounced as [eə], can be re-written as are; there would be a spelling shift, but one can get used to it).

clear, near, spear = clere, nere, spere;

earth = erth

search, research = serch, research

learn = lern, etc.

By the way: ere & ear could be replaced with are when pronounced as [eə]:

bear = bare (A bare bear = A bare bare)

pear = pare

where = ware

there = thare

6. The words clerk and sergeant should be re-written as clark and sargeant respectively. However, in American English, where clerk is pronounced as [klз:k], the spelling may stay the same …

7. The mute letter combination gh should be abolished:

light = lite (this variant spelling already exists and is used, for example, in advertisements and on products)

night = nite

right = rite

bright = brite

daughter = dauter

slaughter = slauter

eight, eighteen, eighty = ate, ateen, aty (and the verb ate (past of eat), if pronounced as [et], could be spelled as et)

caught, taught = caut, taut

fought, brought = faut, braut (with au, because ou would represent the sound [au] – see above), etc.

Words ending in –ough / augh deserve particular attention, because these two letter combinations can be pronounced unpredictably. They should all be re-written in accordance with their actual pronunciation:

though = tho

through = thru (this variant spelling already exists)

bough = bou

plough = plou (in American English this word is spelled as plow, but we have already mentioned that ow should be pronounced as [ou]);

enough = enuff

tough = tuff

trough = troff

cough = coff

hiccough = hiccup (this variant spelling already exists)

laugh = laff / læf

laughter = lafter / læfter, etc.

8. Mute consonants should be removed:

know = now (of course, at first it will be difficult to get used to the fact that now [nou] is “know”, but I think that it is no less difficult to get used to the fact that lead is [li:d] when it means “to guide” and [led] when it means “a metal”);

knee = nee

knight = nite (so, night knight will be spelled nite nite);

gnash = nash

gnat = nat

what, where, when, why, which, etc. = wat, ware, wen, wy, wich, etc.

who, whom, whose = hoo, hoom, hoose

whole = hole

ghastly, ghoul [gu:l], ghost = gastly, gool, gost goast

hour = our

honour = onor onnor

honest = onest onnest

write, wrote, written = rite, rote, ritten

wrong = rong

build = bild

Wednesday = Wensday

guard = gard (by the way, in French, from which this word was originally borrowed, it is written garde as a noun and garder as a verb)

calm = caam

palm = paam

alms = aams

half = haff /hæff , etc.

Probably it makes sense to leave mute letters in the beginning of Greek words such as psychology (psychollogy), psalm (saam), mnemonic (mnemonnic), etc. However, in Italian, for instance, letters in these words were also removed when they became mute, e.g. salmo “psalm”.

9. When g is read as [g] rather than [ʤ] before e, i, y, it should be replaced with gu (as in beguile, guerrilla, guess, guest, guide, guilt, guinea, guitar, guide, etc.):
begin = beguin

get = guet

gherkin = guerkin

girl = guirl

give = guive

gynaecology (even in this Greek word g before y is pronounced as [g]!) = guynaecology.

But what to do with the words where –gu- is pronounced as [gw] in the middle of the word? One of the possible variants is as follows:

languid = langwid længwid (BUT: languor [læŋgə] = langor længor)

anguish = angwish ængwish

In this case, there will be no more questions as to how to read words such as gel or gist, because their spelling would clearly demonstrate that they are pronounced [ʤel] and [ʤıst].

10. Consonants should be consistently doubled, if the vowel before them is pronounced as it should be pronounced in a closed syllable  (e as [e], i as [ı], o as [o], u as [ʌ]). Update: Consonants are not doubled after the letter æ, because this letter may denote no other sound than [æ]:

live [lıv] = liv (аnd live [laiv] would not change its spelling)

living = livving

coming = cumming

loving = luvving

body = boddy

every, everybody, everyone, everything = evry, everyboddy, evrywun, evrything evryþing

It particularly concern words of Latin and Greek origin:

recognize = reccognize

decorate, decorative = deccorate, deccorative

demonstrate = demmonstrate

abolish = abollish

copy = coppy

vomit = vommit

relative = rellative

lemon = lemmon

memory = memmory

moral = morral

forest = forrest

florist = florrist

comic = commic

image = immage

criminal = crimminal (leaving crime unchanged)

model = moddel (leaving modal unchanged)

modern = moddern

study = studdy

BUT: have = hæv, having = hæving, galaxy = gælaxy, valid = vælid, etc.

11. “Short-syllable” and “long-syllable” vowels should be consistently opposed to one another:

[æ] vs. [eı] = æ vs. a: bæd, fæt, ræt, fæshion, pæssion vs. Cambridge, Danish, David. Particularly note such oppositions as nætional vs. nation, nætural vs. nature.

[aı] vs. [ı] in a closed syllable = ie vs. i: biend, bliend, fiend (vs. feend), kiend, miend, wiend, pient vs. mint, stint, wind.

[ou] vs. [o] in a closed syllable = oa vs. o: doan’t, moast, poast, woan’t (as in boast, coast, roast) vs. cost, pond, font.

[u] vs. [ʌ] = ů vs. u: bůll, půll, půsh, půss, půt vs. but, butter, pus, putty.

[u] vs. [u:] = ů vs. oo (before d, k, t): bůk, cůd, cůk, fůt, gůd, lůk, shůd, shůk, stůd, tůk, wůd (wood & would) vs. boot, coot, food, loot, moot, rood, root, snooker.

12. a before ll should be pronounced as [o:] before l(l). [æ] before l(l) shpuld be represented by the letter æ:

all, alder, fall, pall, stall, etc. = all, allder, fall, pall, stall, etc.

altitude, fallacy, infallible, pal, Pall-Mall = æltitude, fællacy, infællible, pæl, Pæl-Mæl

13. [θ] = þ, [ð] = ð: þink, þænk, þermometer vs. ðis, ðæt, ðare. Particularly note such oppositions as smiþ vs. smiðy & smiðereens, worþ vs. worðy.

All rite! Nou let’s try too rite æ simple text using ðe reformed Inglish spelling.

Đe simpler the text is, ðe better, because moast words too be reritten belong too the moast common words in ðe Inglish længuage. Æs u cæn see, sum but not verry menny words wůd hæv ðeir spelling changed. I wunder hou menny per cent ov ðe words in ðis text hav changed ðeir spelling ænd hou menny ov ðem hæv remained ðe same. Duz ðis clerely demmonstrate ðæt ðare is nuþþing too be fered in ðis reform? I þink ðæt it mite not be perfect in all its æspects, but æt leest sumþing wůd be done for ðe millions ov peeple hoo studdy ðis længuage æs well æs for ðe native speekers ov Inglish. “Doo u speek Inglish? Duz he speek Inglish?”

Evrywun nows ðæt Inglish hæs æ rellatively simple grammar but a horribly difficult spelling – really, really difficult compared too menny uther længuages. So, if Inglish spelling wer improoved – even verry slitely, ðen Inglish wůd becum more sutable for æ gůd ænd rellatively simple internætional længuage. Sum words wůd inevvitably becum shorter, utthers wůd becum longer.

Doo u agree wið my opinnion? Wot is yer opinnion on ðis issue? Shůd Inglish spelling be reformed after all or shůd we let it alone ænd not trubble it enny longer? It’s my plezzure too anser yer questions, if u hæv enny.