Which do you like better? And why?
"The SSWD project favors smaller changes rather than larger," he writes. Have a look at these suggestions.
campaign ==>> campane (6 June 2004)
freight ==>> frate (11 June 2004)
weight ==>> wate (22 August 2004)
eight / eighth ==>> aet / aeth (12 October 2004)
colonel ==>> kernal (9 September 2004)
journal /-ist /-ism ==>> jernal /-ist /-ism (8 December 2004)
machine ==>> masheen (14 February 2005)
antique ==>> anteek (31 December 2004)
technical ==>> teknical (17 January 2005)
school ==>> skool (4 October 4, 2004)
Here's how he might have rewritten them so as not to change them as much.
campaign ==>> campain
freight ==>> freit
weight ==>> weit
eight / eighth ==>> eit / eith
colonel ==>> curnel
journal /-ist /-ism ==>> jurnal /-ist /-ism
machine ==>> mashene
antique ==>> anteke
technical ==>> tecnical
school ==>> scool
****
The above is a citation from
http://www.antimoon.com/forum/posts/6977-4.htm
Which do you like better? And why?
I think that a mixed system which incorporates some features from both sets of suggestions would be best; kernel and masheen for colonel and machine but freit and weit for freight and weight.
You could also invent a new alphabet for English has Professor Stanley Hess has done with his Tempered Notation:
http://www.drizzle.com/~slmndr/salamandir/calli.html
or use any number of modified Roman alphabets with special letters to represent sounds that were not in the original Roman (i.e. Latin) language like dh (as in rather) , dj (as in edge) sh, th, oo and æ etc.
>>You could also invent a new alphabet for English has(sic) Professor Stanley Hess has done with his Tempered Notation: <<
Sorry, but I would rather stay away from inventing a new alphabet for English.
Which do you like better, "waggon" or "wagon"? And why?
I would favor:
campaign ==>> kaempeen
freight ==>> freet
weight ==>> weet
eight / eighth ==>> eet / eeth
colonel ==>> kernyl
journal /-ist /-ism ==>> djernyl / djernyllist / djernyllisym
machine ==>> masjien
antique ==>> aentiek
technical ==>> teknikkyl
school ==>> skuul
Oh, your own proposed orthography!
How about "dryer" and "drier"?
> Which do you like better, "waggon" or "wagon"? And why?
"Waggon" definitely, because without the double g the first syllable becomes open which suggests a long rather than a short vowel sound in it.
Open syllables end in a vowel and have long vowel sonds, closed syllables end in a consonant and have short vowel sounds. Close an open syllable by doubling the terminal consonant to make the previous vowel short.
<<Open syllables end in a vowel and have long vowel sonds, closed syllables end in a consonant and have short vowel sounds. Close an open syllable by doubling the terminal consonant to make the previous vowel short.>>
Well English seems to have no problem with the so-called "short" vowels (I guess they're accurately known as "short" if you speak a non-NA dialect) followed only by one consonant in plenty of other words, say "body" "dragon" "spigot" or "bigot."
<<Open syllables end in a vowel and have long vowel sonds, closed syllables end in a consonant and have short vowel sounds. Close an open syllable by doubling the terminal consonant to make the previous vowel short.>>
That's an orthographic principle (or perhaps I should say, a relic of an orthographic principle) that applies in some English words, but as Kirk points out, there are a huge, huge number of exceptions.
Similar principles of consonant gemination are employed pretty consistently in other Germanic languages like German and Dutch, but there are so many exceptions in English that you could hardly consider it a general rule of English spelling.
Which I do like better? Considering the latter are mine ...
... as for why, see the link.
Brennus,
I can see the value in "masheen": /i:/ is more often spelt "ee" than "e" + magic "e" but "kernel", why?
Is that as in a Kernal of information? I never know how to spell that.