3 ms·

Start small, and use compromises. Don't try to be completely phonetic, which won't work for the reasons you mentioned. You can start by undoing misguided spell

Start small, and use compromises. Don't try to be completely phonetic, which won't work for the reasons you mentioned. You can start by undoing misguided spelling reforms of the past. "Debt" used to be spelled "det" but due to incorrectly inferred etymology it was changed to be non-phonetic. There are many words like these. Then look for major inconsistencies where a cluster of letters is pronounced more than one way, and simplify one of them. For example, "ough" is pronounced as in "tough" more often than as in "though". Change "tough" to be spelled as "tuff" and "rough" as "ruff". Going further, embrace text/informal writing and use tho, altho, nite, tonite, etc. Although the last two are not necessary since "ight" is pretty consistent. Keep common clusters of letters so that it still looks like English. Do it in in stages over a 100 years , making changes every 15 years or so. I'm mostly aiming at ease of reading vs ease of writing.

ttfkam 4y ago
Every other major language had a recognized central authority to do its work. Spanish, French, written Chinese, etc. all had a monarchy/dictatorship of some sort to mandate the change and enforce its use. England could have done it perhaps in Shakespeare's time or shortly thereafter, but once English spread across the globe in its modern (lack of) form with no recognized central authority with the power to force the change, it's not going to happen. You couldn't get three states in the United States to agree on a universal spelling/pronunciation let alone the three countries in the United Kingdom. You think you'll have any more success over continents and across oceans? Good luck!
- yakireev 4y ago
  > Spanish, French, written Chinese, etc. all had a monarchy/dictatorship of some sort to mandate the change and enforce its use. There is no central authority over the Spanish language since the days of Bolivar and San Martin (1810s or so). Modern e.g. Argentinians would laugh at the idea that Real Academia Española has any say on how they should use their language. And indeed, there are differences not just in vocabulary and pronunciation, but also in grammar: "vos hablás" instead of "tú hablas". Nevertheless, I can pick pretty much any written Spanish word and know how it sounds both in European and Argentinian Spanish. It is specifically English which failed at the task of not being like Chinese.

ttfkam 4y ago

Every other major language had a recognized central authority to do its work. Spanish, French, written Chinese, etc. all had a monarchy/dictatorship of some sort to mandate the change and enforce its use. England could have done it perhaps in Shakespeare's time or shortly thereafter, but once English spread across the globe in its modern (lack of) form with no recognized central authority with the power to force the change, it's not going to happen. You couldn't get three states in the United States to agree on a universal spelling/pronunciation let alone the three countries in the United Kingdom. You think you'll have any more success over continents and across oceans? Good luck!

yakireev 4y ago
> Spanish, French, written Chinese, etc. all had a monarchy/dictatorship of some sort to mandate the change and enforce its use. There is no central authority over the Spanish language since the days of Bolivar and San Martin (1810s or so). Modern e.g. Argentinians would laugh at the idea that Real Academia Española has any say on how they should use their language. And indeed, there are differences not just in vocabulary and pronunciation, but also in grammar: "vos hablás" instead of "tú hablas". Nevertheless, I can pick pretty much any written Spanish word and know how it sounds both in European and Argentinian Spanish. It is specifically English which failed at the task of not being like Chinese.