That is stupid.
I don't wanna spell things like that!
I mean, it makes people look stupid when they spell stuff like that, and why dumb down the English language?!?!?
Children WILL learn how to spell correctly all the time eventually.
TOTP'D!
| Homestar Runner Wiki Forum http://forum.hrwiki.org/ |
|
| Simpler Spelling http://forum.hrwiki.org/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=9039 |
Page 2 of 3 |
| Author: | ikwaylx [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
That is stupid. I don't wanna spell things like that! I mean, it makes people look stupid when they spell stuff like that, and why dumb down the English language?!?!? Children WILL learn how to spell correctly all the time eventually. TOTP'D!
|
|
| Author: | Peter222 [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 2:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I agree ikwaylx. I think it would be hard for people who have already learned the English language to get used to the spelling. |
|
| Author: | Funkstar [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Homerun Starrer wrote: If they keep this up, 1337speak will be declared an offical language, mark my words.....
0|\/|G 7|-|47 \/\/|_| |33 1337 And increasingly annoying. |
|
| Author: | ikwaylx [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Anyway, if this really happens someday. I'm gonna disobey it like my English teacher might...... I could kill that guy who's trying to enforce this. |
|
| Author: | DS_Kid [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Thair iz noh wai that eyem spelling lik thiz enie tim suen... This would no doubt make the English language collapse...people pronounce many words differently than others in this language, so trying to pronounce them out on paper like a dictionary would make it even more confusing. Who cares if the lesser percentile of people in English-speaking countries can't write or learn English properly; do we just fall to them and make the majority of people have to relearn English the "proper" way again? Besides, kids don't have to be the most perfect spellers at a young age. In second grade, I spelled "have" as "half" and "with" as "wif" (it didn't help that I had problems pronouncing numerous letters  ).
Either way, I was one of the only ones in my grade to have spelling problems, and that went back to Kindergarden, as well. So, hopefully, we don't fall victims to the few wanting this to happen. Semeye-long poast ovr.
|
|
| Author: | ikwaylx [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
ACK! Just a joke, but my name would become Ickwaylix. Oh wait. Thats not so bad..
|
|
| Author: | Ju Ju Master [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, as I said before, it'd be illogical to change the entire language, but I do disagree with one thing you guys are saying: "It'd look dumb." No, it wouldn't, it'd look normal. English looks completely normal to us, but to someone who speaks French, they think our language looks weird. Normality is just whhatever you're used to, if we ever became used to a simpelr spelling, it'd be normal. |
|
| Author: | ikwaylx [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ju Ju Master wrote: Well, as I said before, it'd be illogical to change the entire language, but I do disagree with one thing you guys are saying: "It'd look dumb." No, it wouldn't, it'd look normal. English looks completely normal to us, but to someone who speaks French, they think our language lookjs weird. Normality is just whhatever you're used to, if we ever became used to a simpelr spelling, it'd be normal. Yes well. I said it'd look dumb because I'm basically a top speller....
To me. Misspelling makes the words look all wrong.... Therefore, I think its dumb to change letters to how they sound. I couldn't read half of that news thing with all the weird spelling! Sooo, that's my opinion. |
|
| Author: | Cybernetic Teenybopper [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ack, the look of it, it hurts my brain! See, the problem with revising spellings is that it messes up reading. It's painful to look at, and the way we've already been trained in our heads to decipher the sounds of words makes it painful. It may be easier to remember to spell, but reading it back is a world of headaches. Sibernetik Tenebapr owt. |
|
| Author: | Simon Zeno [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 3:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Ju Ju Master wrote: Well, as I said before, it'd be illogical to change the entire language, but I do disagree with one thing you guys are saying: "It'd look dumb." No, it wouldn't, it'd look normal. English looks completely normal to us, but to someone who speaks French, they think our language lookjs weird. Normality is just whhatever you're used to, if we ever became used to a simpelr spelling, it'd be normal.
Except for the fact that it would take a very long time to "get used to it". And what about everything that's currently written in English? What about the kids that are currently learning how to spell, or rather, the ones who begin learning in current English, then have to shift to "English for Dummies"? No, I doubt that anyone will do this. It'd be too much chaos. And I'd have to move to England. |
|
| Author: | Ju Ju Master [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 4:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Santa Zeno wrote: Ju Ju Master wrote: Well, as I said before, it'd be illogical to change the entire language, but I do disagree with one thing you guys are saying: "It'd look dumb." No, it wouldn't, it'd look normal. English looks completely normal to us, but to someone who speaks French, they think our language lookjs weird. Normality is just whhatever you're used to, if we ever became used to a simpelr spelling, it'd be normal. Except for the fact that it would take a very long time to "get used to it". And what about everything that's currently written in English? What about the kids that are currently learning how to spell, or rather, the ones who begin learning in current English, then have to shift to "English for Dummies"? No, I doubt that anyone will do this. It'd be too much chaos. And I'd have to move to England. Oh, I agree with you, my post on te first page says the same things as yours. But if we were to change, it wouldn't be dumb to spell like that, i'd be normal. |
|
| Author: | Funkstar [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 4:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
About that ajusting thing: THere are millions of webpages, and billions of books in english. To translate the majority would take decades, and if no one spoke regular english anymore, who would translate them? |
|
| Author: | DumDeDum [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 5:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
ikwaylx wrote: Mispelling makes the words look all wrong....
Nice spelling there... |
|
| Author: | homestarspants [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
If we fix the spelling, English would prabably be one of the easiest languages. Think about it. We don't decline adjectives. Words don't have genders. There are only two indeffinate articles and one deffinate article. |
|
| Author: | IantheGecko [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 10:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
It's definite and indefinite You're right; we don't have to change the spelling of words based on gender. However, I don't think this is going to happen suddenly. It will change very gradually, probably to the point that it will lead to a new form of English altogether, like I said earlier. People a few centuries in the future won't be able to read what we're all typing & writing right now. |
|
| Author: | Obomaru [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hm. I always thought that if words in English would be written the way the sound, move would be muuv, not move and always would be olweis... And so on. This just makes more sense to me. But maybe that's just me. But yeah, while English is an unnecessarily complicated language, there are languages that are a lot harder to learn. Besides, trying to change it so drastically is just unthinkable. I seriously doubt it's going to happen any time soon. |
|
| Author: | Chekt [ Sat Jul 08, 2006 11:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Funkstar wrote: That thing about words
huh?, wuh?, AAAARRRRRGGGGLLLBLBLLBLBL!!! *head 'splodes* i did not understand a word on that... |
|
| Author: | homestarspants [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 2:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
IantheGecko wrote: It's definite and indefinite
You're right; we don't have to change the spelling of words based on gender. However, I don't think this is going to happen suddenly. It will change very gradually, probably to the point that it will lead to a new form of English altogether, like I said earlier. People a few centuries in the future won't be able to read what we're all typing & writing right now. I was also thinking that this could be granual. It might not be that gradual. We can read Shakespear and that was a few centuries ago. What word shall we start with? Here are some possibilities: Chef->shef enough->eenuf through->throo |
|
| Author: | IantheGecko [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 3:00 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The thing is, Shakespearean English is considered Modern English, Early Modern English to be specific. We can't read Middle English. i.e. the works of Chaucer. If this new spelling reform catches on, people in the future won't understand the works of any modern English-language writers. |
|
| Author: | Funkstar [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:02 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Hello future people! You can't understand me! Haha, I'm using more complex english!
|
|
| Author: | Alberto [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
hægl gomen firas min awritan oðer eow. I fail old English. Reading most of that felt like tying to drive of an un-paved, rocky road. Uuhg. |
|
| Author: | ikwaylx [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Funkstar wrote: Hello future people! You can't understand me! Haha, I'm using more complex english! [future]uhh, wat the?!?! Err. Mom. at dos this sai?[/future]
By the way. Will this be just for Americans? Or The english+Irish+Scottish+Austrailian and everywhere else that speaks English. |
|
| Author: | Occasional JD [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:52 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
No. Against. Completely and utterly. The English language has a good thing goin' on already, why change it? What's next? Will people start saying "lol" instead of actually laughing? |
|
| Author: | ikwaylx [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Maybe the Americans/English will go too far and make the Earth like the Internet........ Actually. That would be kinda cool. But not for the language! 
|
|
| Author: | Alberto [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Occasional JD wrote: What's next? Will people start saying "lol" instead of actually laughing? Hey, hey, hey! I say lol when I laugh.>:( Also ROFL. ikwaylx wrote: Maybe the Americans/English will go too far and make the Earth like the Internet........
Actually. That would be kinda cool. Yeah, but I'd hate to meet Goatse in real life. Jibbly... |
|
| Author: | Joshua [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 5:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
ikwaylx wrote: [future]uhh, wat the?!?! Err. Mom. at dos this sai?[/future]
Its speld "th", silee. At any rate, I despise it when people write like this on the Internet/instant messagers, so for it to be mainstream would be pure hell. Not to mention would lose any artistic aspects of words. Special > Speshoel How would you spell my name, exactly? Jaemz Joshoou Butin? ... You know what this simplified language reminds me of? Single-button mode on Super Smash Bros. Melee.
|
|
| Author: | Chekt [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 5:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Joshua wrote: You know what this simplified language reminds me of? Single-button mode on Super Smash Bros. Melee.
uh, how? |
|
| Author: | Joshua [ Sun Jul 09, 2006 10:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Everything's all simplified for beginners that it strangles the experts, basically. You also can't use any of your hard-learned advanced techniques. And is dumb. 
|
|
| Author: | Dark Grapefruit [ Mon Jul 10, 2006 12:18 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
This "simplification" is not at all intuitive and assigns pronunciations arbitrarily. "Either" is spelled in the article as "eether", but plenty of people would want to spell it "aither". "Way" is "wae", but, knowing about Latin roots, I would instinctively pronounce "wae" as "why". On a practical level, redesigning a language practically from stratch and actually implementing it would be impossible. Even if, after decades of enforcement, everyone has switched over to Newspeak (not bloody likely), languages are a social construct and are constantly changing. In a few centuries many new words would be coined, and a lot of words would gain alternate spellings or pronunciations. That's just how it works. On a more abstract level, I would hate to see the thousands of years of culture and evolution that the current English language represents be ditched all at once. In closing, Quote: witnes th faeluer
BONIS STAEJ |
|
| Author: | Chekt [ Mon Jul 10, 2006 12:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
how would you distinguish words like sail and sale week and weak shoo and shoe and but and butt? |
|
| Page 2 of 3 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|