DJA wrote:
Ralph Shumaker wrote:
[snip]
If only we, today, would be daring enough to let go of the customary
spellings on at least a *few* of the most common words and just spell
them more like they sound. I have chosen to do exactly that with
words like tho and thru. These "mistakes", at least, are common
enough that they don't act as speed bumps for the brain. I suppose
"enuf" should be a candidate, as well as "altho" (among many others).
But even if we can get enough people to do this, of course there's
going to be differences of opinion as to which ones to do it with.
And that's all right. The popular ones will catch on better than the
unpopular. And I'm going to do my part.
Tho I do *not* hold to the idea of carte blanch replacing with "z"
every part of every word that sounds like "z"
[....]
Each change was perfectly logical, tho each implementation made the
> resulting text progressively harder to read.
I think this approach would create too much backlash and the result
may end up worse than the start.
You mean like in the above two sentences where your non-standard
spelling inflicted whiplash on my eyes?
:-P
I think that most even moderately literate people have certain
expectations not only of how words are spelled, but also of how they
*look*. Much of the way we recognized words is based on the word's shape
and size. Changing not only a word's spelling, but also its size and
shape is like randomly placing real looking, but nonfunctional cars in
the middle of the freeway.
Yeah, so let's get rid of words like "sans" when the word "without" is
perfectly good enough and much more commonly used. For that matter, we
don't really need "sic" or "viz" or (long list snipt for brevity). Such
words belong in the Department of Redundancy Department.
By the time the reader sees the word, he's already run over and past it,
and still wondering "What the hell was that!" when, disoriented, he has
to stop, back up, and take a second look.
If you're running over things because you can't avoid them, then you are
driving too fast for the conditions of the road *or* you are
tailgaiting. You should know this. :-)
I don't see efficiency in such spelling, except in certain contexts. I
see instead either laziness or ignorance or both.
Then envision whatever you choose to see. Your insults will not shame
me into compliance. :-P
;-)
However, I can put up with your changes a lot easier than the complete
and utter lazy ignorance of those assaulting me with a complete lack
capitalization (yes _every_ sentence should start with a capital letter)
and a complete ignorance of punctuation (it's not a contest to see how
many words you can fit into each sentence).
I consider "tho" to be an improvement over "though". But I also see it
as something in common enough use to be not too awfully far from
adoption. I think I might even intermix the two just to show that it's
*not* ignorance compelling me to do it, *nor* laziness, but rather a
deliberate choice.
But I use punctuation a tad more strictly than what is standard. I
dislike seeing the period (or question mark or exclamation point) which
is part of a quotation being put outside the ending quote mark just
because the writer is too lazy to put his own punctuation there. I say,
"This is not so hard to do!".
--
It's a damn poor mind that can only think of one way to spell a word.
--Andrew Jackson
I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
--Mark Twain
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
