Below:
Same passage converted to the more phonemic and compact Chekt
Speling CKS
| Spel3 riformrz tipikli
want tu ryt with a' dik5u'neri pra'nu'nsiei5n gyd raxr xan tra'di5nl I3gli5
spel3. Xei want x spel3 si.stm tu bi nirli 100% alfa'betik insted
'v 40%. I3gli5 spel3 iz hard bicoz ther ar tu meni ortho'grafik op5nz.
Tipikli xer ar 14 difrnt weiz tu spel a' partikiulr saund. Xis minz
xat a' simpl w'rd su'ch az si.zrz /sizerz/
ka.n bi spelt 14x14x14x14x14x14 weiz. Ellis kalkiuleitd xis aut 'nd
i.t keim tu o'vr a' ha.f mi.lia'n. Onli wn 'v x 500,000 weiz tu spel
/sizerz/ iz leksi.kli ka'rekt. I.n Spani5, or
eni hyli fonimi.k ryti3 si.stm, ther iz iuza'li o'nli w'n wei tu spel a'
pra'nu'nsiei5n. |
Numbers (logograms)
used as sound signs (phonograms): 2-zh, 3=ng (looks like an N on its side),
5=sh, 5n=tion
Other substitutions:
'y=ai, x=dh, a'=shwa, o=awe, o'=owe,
at=a.t, up=u'p, it=i.t
Same
passage converted to the more systematic and compact SPanglic Saxon
Englisc
| Speling Reformerz tipicly want tu rait with
a dictionery pronunciation gaid rather than traditional [tradisnl] English
speling. They want the speling sistem tu bi nirly 100% alfabetic insted
of 40%. English speling iz hard becoz ther ar tu meny orthografic options
[opshnz] (Hanna, 1962). Tipicly ther ar 14 difrent weyz tu spel a particiular
saund (Dewey, 1971). This mins thet a simpl werd ssuch az sizors /sizerz/
caen bi speld 14x14x14x14x14x14 weyz. Ellis calcyuleited this out aend
it caem tu oaver a haf milyon (Dewey,
1971). Oanly wan of the 500,000 weys tu spel /sizerz/ iz lexicly corect.
In Spanish, or eny haily fonimic raiting sistem, ther iz yuzhualy oanly
wan wey tu spel a pronunsiation. (10
lines) |
Latin
1: å æ Ð ð
An
eclectic no dots variation on Chkt Speling - long vowels
(ei, ee, ai, o', uu, rr)
( 
^=a)
| Spelng riformrz tipicli want tu ryt with
a dicshaneri pranansieishn gyd ræthr
thæn tradishnal Inglish speling.
Thei want th speling sistm tu bi nirli 100% ælfabetic
insted av 40%. Inglish speling iz hard bicoz ther ar tu meni orthagrafic
opshanz. Tipicli ther ar 14 difrnt weiz tu spel a particiular saund.
This meenz that a simpl wrrd sach æz
sizrz /sizerz/ can be spelt 14x14x14x14x14x14 weiz. Ellis calkiuleitad
this aut and it ceim tu o'vr a hæf
milyan. Onli wan av x 500,000 weiz tu spel /sizerz/ iz lexicli corect.
In Spænish, or eni hyli fonimeek ryting
sistm, ther iz iuzali onli wan wei tu spel a pranansieishn. 9
lines See Mitrevski's World English |
substitutions:
ee=/i:/,
ei=[ay] ng=ing,
c=k, th=dh, dha', &
th, sh=sh, her=hrr,
from=fram, at=æt
As shown above, what the idealists want respells over 60% of
the words. Initially, this looks odd and unfamiliar. Only 4 words out of
ten in a consistent orthography will match traditional English. A
systematic orthography, such as OGD-positional
spelling, which has up to 4 spellings per sound, can achieve a closer approximation
to TO (about 50%). When the positional restriction is relaxed, one
of four spellings will correct about 75% of
the time.
Spelling modernizers want to tidy up the English spelling system
without disturbing the appearance of most words on the page. Modernizers
are satisfied with something less than an ideal fully consistent phonemic
writing system. Surplus Cut spelling, for instance, simply removes all
of the superfluous letters following the recommendations of Noah
Webster. Almost every letter in the alphabet is redundant
in some word: e.g., bread,
debt, give,
have,
friend
The middle ground in the reform movement
is held by those advocating a systematic and predictable orthography but
not necessarily a fully phonemic one with a 1 to 1 correspondence between
symbol and sound. Restored English Spelling (RES), attempts to spell
in acordance with pre 1000 a.d. rules. With RES, there is more than
one way to spell a sound depending on its position in a sentence.
RES currently spells /peil/
[pail] rather than [pale]. Interspel advocates
allowing both patterns. This seems like a reasonable concession given
the fact that TO has 14 spelling patterns for
this sound. However, such an allowance would increase ambiguity and
reduce predictability.
The most radical reform proposal is by
those who favor a new character set. Mark Twain
noted:
"One great drawback to Simplified Spelling
is, that in print a simplified word looks so like the very nation! and
when you bunch a whole squadron of the Simplified together the spectacle
is very nearly unendurable. A written character with which we are not familiar,
however,
does not offend."
Twain
IPA notation added a few characters to avoid code
overlaps, confusion, and the use of digraphs other than for blends
of pure sounds. IPA added the turned e
for schwa
and the turned c
for awe,
and the eth [ ð
] for the consonant sound in "the". The Shaw
Alphabet replaces the entire Latin character set. Read
Shaw's
rationale.
|
|
Ten
of the current crop of phonemic notations for English have been mapped
to IPA. IPA, developed before 1900, is the most widely understood
phonetic notation. It is often found in dictionary pronunciation guides.
IPA requires a special font. All of the notations on the left can
be written in ASCII or the characters found on any typewriter.
This
page also includes sample passages written in each of the notations.
All of the notations are more logical than the traditional orthography.
Some are more consistent than others. Some are harder to read without
a key. These transcriptions provide a way to compare alternative
solutions to the alphabet problem. The most compact
comparison includes a click n' listen option. |
