| Most Recent Messages of Each Discussion |
Created by |
I know it would be hard.
I have recently changed the way I believe English should be spellt. I think it will be easier to adopt to, and yet still simple. Before I thought putting an "H" directly after a "U" would be good for the sound as in the word "puff". I've looked more closely at how it works and most of the time the letter U makes that sound when 2 of the same letters come after it. Now of course we can not do this will all words so it will just be one of those things that you would just have to learn.
On a last note I have also decided to adopt 1 letter from french (Ç) and slightly the same with one of the spanish letters, however molding it to my own (Ñ except rather than N it would be a U).
Ie hav reicently chainjd dhe way Ie beleve Einglish shud bei spellt. Ie theink it will be easier tu adopt, but still çimpole. Before Ie thot puting an "H" directly after a "U" wud bei good for dhe çound as in "puff".I've lookd more clossly at how it werks and most uv dhe time dhe letter "U" maiks dhat çound wen 2 uv dhe Çame letters cumm after it. Now uv corsse wei can not du dhiss with all werds ço it will just bei wunn uv dhose theings dhat yew wud just haf tu lern.
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Stephen B.
March 13, 2007
# Msgs: 1
|
The wind of changes
The previous topic that deals with the English spelling has indicated a critical mismatch of opinions, but it induced me to raise another problem in the field of the Russian one. The Russian alphabet has a pair of letters [sh] and [sh'] (#26 and #27). The apostrophe here is to indicate a palatisation of a consonant, that means pronouncing with a tongue risen up. In Russian almost each consonant has a palatised mode producing a new phoneme, but only the above mentioned require two different letters to spell, while all the other reveal that feature by means of a succeding vowel. It makes a lot of difficulties in the spelling rules, producing a lot of sorrow for school pupils and foreign students. It seems a high time to abandon using this odd couple of letters.
What will the World-wide community say?
|
Language pair: Russian; English
|
|
Leonid P.
February 24, 2007
# Msgs: 1
|
I know it would be hard
You seem to speak of the Russians a lot. But I don't think someone should actually do that because for one Russian is a slavic language and English is a Germanic language which obviously means they run on different rules. But also Russian uses an entirely different alphabet. I say you shouldn't put too much thought these kinds of things.
English is already extremely difficult compared to most other languages when it comes to spelling. I want to keep the basic set of rules that English has and just because some of those rules are unlike any other language doesn't mean we should change them. I just want to make the learning process easier, but still keeping those esential rules. So if you don't like it, I would have to say "oh well" because even though I'm trying to make it easier for foreigners doesn't mean I should make it extrodinarily harder for the native speakers.
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Stephen B.
February 23, 2007
# Msgs: 1
|
Re:I know it would be hard
The discussion seems getting hot.
Maybe, native sreakers in English "most commonly associate one of the U sounds with spelling 'uh'", but if the sound that represents the non-labialized mode of [u] is meant (we lack so badly typing phonetic symbols!), than any russian person should hear a common [a] here. Some international statistics on that question would be very amazing.
Then, a phrase like "He has very already come" is beyond my understanding. CAN ANYONE TRANSLATE THIS INTO RUSSIAN? (it concerns all the languages indeed.) Or make a more clear example at least?
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Leonid P.
February 22, 2007
# Msgs: 2
Latest: February 22, 2007
|
I know it would be hard
Let me try to explain to you what the letter "U" is all about in english. That particular letter as you already may know has 3 different sounds and all I want to do is make it more predictable for which sound it's going to make. For us native speakers in English, We most commonly associate one of the U sounds with this spelling "uh". So I made so that is the only way the "U" can make that sound.
And just to give you some clarification, the word "already" is an adverb. You can put words like "very" in front of it. It's just that is not how native speakers of English talk. For example, it is proper English to say something like " I am wanting", but it's just not how we talk. English gets pretty complicated with stuff like that.
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Stephen B.
February 19, 2007
# Msgs: 2
Latest: February 22, 2007
|
Re:I know it would be hard
I have been even more confused with those combined letters. WHY there are 3 signs for the sounds in "eye, day and eat"??? I also would prefer to spell "shat", not "shuht".
Of course, it comes that "may, can and will" have to be fixed as particles producing certain verb forms. But there is one much more thrilling question, for me at least. Is "already" an adverb, or a particle, or what? It cannot be an adverb since we cannot say "more already" or "very already". But if it is a particle, what form does it produce? It looks something like a perfect tence, but english ALREADY has a perfect tence. Maybe native english speakers feel that these forms conflict each other? Does a language without "already" exist? Or we shall have to admit that our linguistical terms are just approximation?...
|
Language pair: Russian; English
|
|
Leonid P.
February 18, 2007
# Msgs: 3
Latest: October 24, 2020
|
I know it would be hard
I'm just simply trying to stick to the rules english originally had and the "ie" made the "ai" sound. And I understand our grammar is easy, but I would just like to change just a couple things.
In english the words "will, may, and can" are verbs but have no infinitives and they don't conjuagte so I would just like to fix that.
If you didn't notice here are some of the sound combined letters will make:
AE=ay as in day EA=ee as in eat IE=I as in eye
AI=ay as in day EE=ee as in eat IY=I as in eye
AU=ah as in on EI=ee as in eat
AW=ah as in on EW=u as in do
AY=ay as in day
OA=o as in so UE=yu as in you YE=I as in eye
OE=o as in so UH=uh as in shut
OI=oi as in point
OO=u as in do
OU=ou as in loud
OW=ou as in loud
OY=oi as in point
|
Language pair: English; German
|
|
Stephen B.
February 17, 2007
# Msgs: 3
Latest: October 24, 2020
|
Re:I know it would be hard.
Stephen, I suppose those changes would be too crusial. The matter is the american prononciation differs badly from britain and other ones. As far as I know, not only certain sounds do not match, but the whole sounds' system. We all learnt the britain mode in school and futher, thus I cannot imagine that "I" should be spelt "Ie", though "Ai" seems perfect. Then, I suppose there is no use spelling "ht" and "hv" where sounds are aspirated since an aspiration itself doesn't vary words. Nevertheless, "dh" and "tu" are quite bright ideas that I should introduce immediately if I could. Telling about the ehglish grammar, it is so simple that seems having nothing to change. It is ispecially evident in comparision with russian one: even russian man must give up all other occupations in order to get learnt all the spelling rules.
|
Language pair: Russian; English
|
|
Leonid P.
February 16, 2007
# Msgs: 2
Latest: February 16, 2007
|
I know it would be hard.
I think that the English language should be changed. I'm a native speaker of English myself, but English seems to be too dificult for people of other languages to learn. I think we should dramatically change our spelling and slightly change our grammar. English should of course keep its rules but we should follow those rules more often. If any of you agree with with me than please post a message so I can read your comments.And if you have any suggestions about what we should change or keep the same or find out more how I think it should be than post it please.
This is what it would look like if we spelled it the way I imagine it.
Ie theinc dhat dhe Einglish lainguage shudz tu bei chainjd. Ie'm a naitiv speaker uhv dhe Einglish miyself, buht dhe Einglish lainguage seemz tu bei too dificult fore peapol uhv uhdher lainguagez tu lern. Ie theinc wei shud dramatically tu chainge our spelling and sliytly tu chainge our grammer. Einglish shudz uhv coerse tu keep it's rulz, buht wei shud tu follo dhoze rulz more often. If any uhv yew agree with mei dhan pleaz poste a message soe Ie can tu read yore comments. And if yew hav any suhgjestionz about waht wei shud tu chainge ore tu keep dhe same ore tu finde out more about how Ie theinc it shudz tu bei dhan poste it pleaz.
|
Language pair: English;
|
|
Stephen B.
February 6, 2007
# Msgs: 2
Latest: February 16, 2007
|
Re:Re:wowowo... what's going on here? Are you still around, MtG?
personally i suggest that there be different places on the bulletin board for each language. it takes forever to find what you are looking for when there are thousands of posts. and it is likely not many people find what they are looking for very easily. not everyone has enough time and patience on their hands to look through and read thousands of posts. if you are suggesting changes to someone in charge, this is my suggestion.
|
Language pair: English;
|
|
Megan
January 30, 2007
# Msgs: 2
Latest: January 30, 2007
|
