radikal vs. gradyooal chaynj

[A.B. Normal 65]

Hay, Evreebodee,

Wat doo yoo giez vyoo too bee the logikal steps that wuhd leed too
fastr pozitiv refohrm in English speling? How doo yoo feel abowt
radikal chaynjez vs. gradyooal? Ie wuhd say that a gradyooal proses
iznt probablee goeing too doo the trik. The roolz fohr tradishunal
speling ahr just too complikayted and inkonsistent with spohken
English too alow for noo spelingz and ohld spelings too koh-egzist
kumfortablee toogether. Fohr anee refohrm too troolee moov English
speling toowahrd a konsistent, lojikal sistem it ahlmoest has too
entayl a toetal reeriet ov the roolz. However, a konsistent rool
reeriet shuhd prezerv az much ov the ohld sistem az posibl too help
tradishunal spelerz mayk the tranzishun. Anee thots?

a.b.

[A.B. Normal 65]

Post by A.B. Normal 65
Hay, Evreebodee,
Wat doo yoo giez vyoo too bee the logikal steps that wuhd leed too
fastr pozitiv refohrm in English speling? How doo yoo feel abowt
radikal chaynjez vs. gradyooal? Ie wuhd say that a gradyooal proses
iznt probablee goeing too doo the trik. The roolz fohr tradishunal
speling ahr just too complikayted and inkonsistent with spohken
English too alow for noo spelingz and ohld spelings too koh-egzist
kumfortablee toogether. Fohr anee refohrm too troolee moov English
speling toowahrd a konsistent, lojikal sistem it ahlmoest has too
entayl a toetal reeriet ov the roolz. However, a konsistent rool
reeriet shuhd prezerv az much ov the ohld sistem az posibl too help
tradishunal spelerz mayk the tranzishun. Anee thots?
a.b.

On the other hand...I'd also like to ponder the idea of a more
conservative reform for a minute. It's possible that totally
revamping English spelling to become phonetic isn't the most practical
approach. It would definitely cause people a lot of trouble for a
very long time. Maybe smaller reforms are indeed the best way to go.
Perhaps the main thing we might seek to accomplish with a reform at
this time would be to just clean up some of the more serious
inconsistencies. We don't have to do a total rewrite of the rules,
just bring a bunch of the words that don't conform to the existing
rules into line. Words like psychologist, pneumatic, laugh, night and
knife would be great candidates for reform. How about changing them
to sychologist, nuematic, laf, nite, and nife respectively? I'd be
tempted to change phsychologist to siekolojist, but just dropping the
silent "p" would be incredible! If we take a pretty conservative
approach and just address the most serious problems I think we'll be
better off and can actually bring about some vast improvements with a
relatively painless reform. More revision could come in 100 years or
so, but this might do us for now. I'd like to get your thoughts on
this.

a.b.