On Monday, 2 May 2016 at 21:49:21 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
However, various recent attempts to reform English spelling
have for the most part failed, mostly due to inertia and the
presence of a substantial (and very fast growing!) body of
literature in current spelling, which would require a
monumental effort to respell. It's difficult to convince the
myriad writers and publishers to adopt a new spelling system
when the current one has been ingrained for so many centuries.
But hey, if Chinese could simplify the original characters (at
much protest, I must say), and if the Russians could pull it
off in 1917, who's to say we can't do it in English too?
T
There was a spelling reform in Germany in the 1990ies. Portuguese
spelling has been reformed several times (and there are two major
spelling systems Brazilian and Portuguese Portuguese)[1], and in
Spanish it has also been a to and fro (Latin America vs. Spain).
All these languages have produced a vast body of literature too
and still spelling reforms have been pushed successfully. So
quantity is not an argument. First, most people don't have
problems reading texts in older spellings, and second, it only
takes one or only half a generation of school children to make
the new spelling feel "natural".
The main reason why English spelling has not been reformed is the
nasty class system that is still prevalent in GB and, albeit
better concealed, in the USA, or in fact in any English speaking
country. The mastering of English spelling has always been a
social shibboleth (and continues to be), and any serious attempts
at simplifying it are met with fierce opposition in educated
circles. Even the few simplifications that have been introduced
into American English, like color (instead of colour), program
(instead of programme), or thru (instead of through) etc. are
frowned upon and belittled by European (native) English speakers.
The conservative spelling preserves the etymology of the word,
they claim. This means you have to know Latin, French and some
basic Greek to master English spelling. This clearly shows their
bias. It is the educated elites that could bring about a reform
of English spelling, but since they're not willing to give in an
inch an lose some of their (imagined) superiority, this ain't
gonna happen.
People often adopt the elites' views and oppose to spelling
reforms, because they feel they'll "lose" what they've learned
("it was all in vain"), and of course, what they are used to. But
hey, it's just a coding convention. We shouldn't be too attached
to spellings, especially if reforms make it easier to spell (i.e.
to spell out a word as you hear it in your head) and parse text.
It's a code to communicate, not a religion.
PS If you think that discussions about D language features on
this forum are sometimes mad and nit-picky, you should attend a
meeting of a spelling committee!
[1]
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ortografia_da_l%C3%ADngua_portuguesa#Cronologia_das_reformas_ortogr.C3.A1ficas_na_l.C3.ADngua_portuguesa
