English spelling bias

Is part of the reason people think English is more latin based than it actually is, simply because of the archaic spelling. I mean if english was spelt more phonetically it would look more like this than anything else.
Just contrast this with dutch and they look much more similiar all of a sudden. Also french for further contrast


Uans apon a taym, da byutiful doota av a greyt madzhishan uontid moo paalz tu put amang haa trezhaz. “Luk tru da senta av da muun huen it iz bluu,” sed haa royal mada in ansa tu haa kueschan. “Yu mayt faynd yoo haats dizaya.” Da fea prinses laaft, bikoz shi dautid diyz waadz. Insted, shi yuzd haa imadzhineyshan, and muuvd intu da fotografi biznis, and tuk pikchaz av da muun in kala. “Ay paasiyv moust saatanli dat it iz olmoust houli wayt,” shi toot. Shi olsou faund dat shi kud meyk inaf mani in eyt mants tu bay haaself tuu lavli hyudzh nyu dzhuualz tuu.

Een goede kennis van het Engels is een vereiste in een aantal werkgebieden en beroepen zoals geneeskunde en informatica; ten gevolge daarvan spreken ten minste één miljard mensen de beginselen van het Engels. Het is ook een van de zes officiële talen van de Verenigde Naties.

L’anglais est une langue germanique occidentale dont l' origine se trouve dans les dialectes anglo-frisons qui ont été apportés sur l’île de Bretagne par les tribus germaniques venues s’y installer, et fortement influencée ensuite, surtout au plan lexical, par les langues des envahisseurs scandinaves, normands au Moyen Âge, puis par le

Once upon a time, the beautiful daughter of a great magician wanted more pearls to put among her treasures. “Look through the centre of the moon when it is blue,” said her royal mother in answer to her question. “You might find your heart’s desire.” The fair princess laughed, because she doubted these words. Instead, she used her imagination, and moved into the photography business, and took pictures of the moon in colour. “I perceive most certainly that it is almost wholly white,” she thought. She also found that she could make enough money in eight months to buy herself two lovely huge new jewels too.

the current spelling aswell

You actually took the time to type that shit out? why?

<<You actually took the time to type that shit out? why? >>

To get smug little @ssholes like you to have a thought for yerselves every once in a while

<<moo paalz tu put amang haa trezhaz.>>

One problems with this phonetic spelling, is that each dialect needs a different speling system. In US english this becomes:

"moar purrlz tue poot umung hur trezhurz."

Its don't need to be perfect. It's based on NBC broadcast english. Could you imagine. Lets just pretend were trying to agree on standard english pronounciation, would you an accent from atlanta, ohio, the bbc, or 500 years ago?

Anyway I'm not arguing for correcting spelling I'm just wondering whether or not you think it skews the germanic/latin relations of english.

<<Is part of the reason people think English is more latin based than it actually is, simply because of the archaic spelling>>


No. You're forgetting that the same people who say English is Latin based haven't got a clue a fucking clue what Latin is or looks like either.

I consider English a latin/germanic hybrid, however after seeing this I'm gonna think twice.

People who speak Spanish, which is a Latin-based language, are horrified and daunted by our spelling. They don't apparently think that it looks that Latin on close examination. Should we throw in a few umlauts to really scare them off?

I mean, look at three languages that ARE based on Latin, and look at all the spelling variations that exist between them:

Spanish: porque
French: pourquoi
Italian: perché

I'm not suggesting we should change our spelling. My simple point is that would English's link to it's cousins, "if" its spelling was more phonetic be more self evident. I mean it's kinda hard with our current spelling to see the like with dutch or german, however you gotta wonder "if" our spelling was more phonetic would we see a difference in how we see's english's position among other languages.

I don't think so. We already use W's and K's and decidedly un-Latin letter combinations like GH and TH and KN and WR and DG. That automatically suggests our origins.

I don't know if I see a major affinity between English and the Romance languages in the following. (I think if you got rid of all the eye-popping diacritical marks and mid-sentence capitals in the other germanic languages, they start looking a little more like English -- Jag skulle arbeta ga innan min chef far arg med mig, Ich sollte zur arbeit gehen, bevor mein chef bose mit mir wird.)


Swedish: Jag skulle arbeta gå innan min chef får arg med mig.
Norwegian: Jeg burde gå på arbeid før min sjef får sint med meg.
Dutch: Ik zou moeten gaan werken voor mijn baas boos met mij wordt.
German: Ich sollte zur Arbeit gehen, bevor mein Chef böse mit mir wird.
English: I should go to work before my boss gets angry with me.
French: Je devrais aller travailler avant que mon patron se fâche avec moi.
Italian: Dovrei intendere lavorare prima che il mio capo prenda arrabbiato con me.
Spanish: Debo ir a trabajar antes que mi jefe se enoje conmigo.
Portuguese: Devo ir trabalhar antes que meu chefe fica zangado comigo.

How exactly does typing out a bunch of garbled shit encourage others to " have a thought for themselves"?

There is something missing from your life if you sit around worrying about the connection betwwen languages.

You are just a boring , pompous prick.

However, I will admit that you cheered me up today. Life doesnt seem so bad(even when you are stuck in a shithole like china) when compared with yours.

I find it so fascinating, it's like my brain is having a n orgasm pondering such things. Anyhu if you don't like this thread what's more inderesting dicussing the grammar are accents of the language.



The thing is from what i understand when languages like german uses a french or latin word it's usually reflects how they would prounce it instead of the original spelling. When they have words like doctor or director they spell it doktor and direktor. Although it's only one letter I think it skews perception of relation between language. I mean we have many traits not found in latin but we have many traits that set us apart in writing from say dutch. We use s's when we cleary should use more z's. It makes the language look softer and than in reality.

<Lets just pretend were trying to agree on standard english pronounciation>

You would then simply be substituting arbitrary pronunciation for an arbitrary spelling.

Your "imaginary" version is nothing like phonetic spelling for a Scottish, Welsh, Irish, Australian, South African or English person, for instance.

I see your point. Picking out s as it sounds when voiced as z, for instance, pushes written English closer to its Germanic brethren. However, Uriel's got a point that written English is very Germanic-looking already. Take the word I just wrote - "looking": double o, letter k, -ing ending = NOT LATIN.

Noting peoples' points about the effect accent would have on phonetic writing, I wonder if northern English accents would look more Nordic and southern English accents would look more Low Germanic? I doubt it, but maybe a few centuries ago it might have.