Slight resemblance to Early Medieval English. They still spell that way in parts of Glasgow you know! :-)
English is dying
I don't know that your efforts are an improvement, Travis.
Personally, I like the spelling just the way it is.
Personally, I like the spelling just the way it is.
If English had to change it wouldn't be as drastic as Travis has pointed out.
English has already changed spelling in American English but it's only a handfull of words.
What could happen would be a similar change Portuguese suffered, that being the substitution of 'ph' for'f'.
physics = fysics
pharmacy = farmacy
English has already changed spelling in American English but it's only a handfull of words.
What could happen would be a similar change Portuguese suffered, that being the substitution of 'ph' for'f'.
physics = fysics
pharmacy = farmacy
Much of the objections to what I wrote above are more due to the graphical appearance of the orthography than anything else, most likely. However, the important part underneath it all is not the way the orthography is actually written and rather the phonology that it represents and the specific choices as to what phonemes are to be used to write individual words (for instance, whether "with" is to be /wIT/ or /wID/). The actual spelling used is just superficial, in the end.
As for why such is an improvement is that it is trying to carry out spelling reform while actually being truly universal with respect to all extant English dialects, rather than being a mere codification of some standard(s) or compromise between them at the orthographic level or the arbitrary specification of any particular dialect as being *the* standard. Even if it might not be considered to be an improvement over the current orthography by some who consider the idea of orthographic reform to be pointless to begin with, it is definitely an improvement over other sorts of orthographic reform.
As for "tjeendjing", the reason is that I figured it would be most consistent to specify /S/, /Z/, /tS/, and /dZ/ using "sj", "zj", "tj", and "dj" respectively in all positions rather than using, say, "sh", "zh", "ch", and "j" or "sch", "zch", "tsch" and "dsch" (I was toying with using "sch" to represent /S/). Some may not be used to such mappings, but such forms are not without precedence within Germanic languages' orthographies (e.g. orthographies used for writing Low German languages and North Germanic languages).
As for why such is an improvement is that it is trying to carry out spelling reform while actually being truly universal with respect to all extant English dialects, rather than being a mere codification of some standard(s) or compromise between them at the orthographic level or the arbitrary specification of any particular dialect as being *the* standard. Even if it might not be considered to be an improvement over the current orthography by some who consider the idea of orthographic reform to be pointless to begin with, it is definitely an improvement over other sorts of orthographic reform.
As for "tjeendjing", the reason is that I figured it would be most consistent to specify /S/, /Z/, /tS/, and /dZ/ using "sj", "zj", "tj", and "dj" respectively in all positions rather than using, say, "sh", "zh", "ch", and "j" or "sch", "zch", "tsch" and "dsch" (I was toying with using "sch" to represent /S/). Some may not be used to such mappings, but such forms are not without precedence within Germanic languages' orthographies (e.g. orthographies used for writing Low German languages and North Germanic languages).
One note - all those "y"s are really just graphical substitutions for "ii" - the two are interchangeable; I just use "y" because lots of "ii"s do not really look that good overall, especially word-finally. (The reason for the alternation between "i" and "y"/"ii" word-finally is that this orthography preserves the word-final distinction between /I/ and /i/.)
What word is "tjeendjing" trying to spell, Travis? I can't figure it out.
With a double E? "Cheenging"? He MUST have a "weird-ass accent" after all!
Hey Sprinserisolinaminousiler , I have never seen such a thinking! It's really the most ridicilous one I have ever seen.English is dying. YOU MUST BE DREAMING OR SO.I think you are a francophone trying to make the world speak french.Ha ha ha.It will never come true, sorry. ;)
"Tjeendjing" is supposed to represent "changing" as /"tSendZIN/, but such does not attempt to simply "fix" the current English spelling as what it represents is a consistent phonology (or at least an attempt at such) rather than purely a graphical spelling alone. Consequently, one cannot assume that it should look like its current counterpart, even if it may often superficially resemble such (which is often not unintentional, I must note).
I think this forum should get a policy that all threads over a certain age are automatically locked. Every time a thread that's a year or more old gets revived, the post that revives it is something stupid that shouldn't have been posted.
- Kef
- Kef
English has already died, twice! The first time was in the 11th century, then again in the 15th. If you were to try to communicate with the average person on the street in England in either of those two times using 'English' you would not recognize what the speaker was saying. So, as it goes it will probably die again! I wouldn't worry however, no one realized it had died the first and second time until centuries later when it had slowly evolved into something quite new -and useful to the speakers using it at the time.
Globalization will bring the end to the English language, and we're witessing the change as it happens.