# Have there been any recent academic efforts to simplify English spelling? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 1, 2007, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321 "2007-06-01T08:44:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Shamozzle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shamozzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shamozzle)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/1 "2007-06-01T08:44:56Z")
Specifically, have there been any recent efforts by the academic community to impart a simplification of English spelling and the English alphabet? You know, knife = nife queen = cween city = sity phlegm = flem, etc… Which letters could we eliminate entirely? ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 8:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/2 "2007-06-01T08:52:03Z")
I guess you’d have to define what you mean by _recent_. Omniglot has a number of pages describing various alternative scripts. One such for English is the [Deseret Alphabet](http://www.omniglot.com/writing/deseret.htm), developed in the 1850s. More recently, some words have had their spelling simplified, at least in the United States. One such word seems to be _kidnaper_, which I learned to spell those oh so many long years ago in elementary school as _kidnapper_. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 9:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/3 "2007-06-01T09:07:42Z")
I think the academic community has passed the torch of setting the standards of language on to others. Nowadays newspaper editors and advertising copywriters are more likely than academics to be making the rules of what’s acceptable. If we start accepting “lite” and “tonite” as proper spelling it won’t be because academics said so. ---
**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 10:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/4 "2007-06-01T10:28:04Z")
I doubt very much things will change at all quickly (nor do I see any good reason why they should). I’m certain most people have no great desire to learn to spell all over again. ---
**Author:** ![Chief\_Pedant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@Chief\_Pedant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chief_Pedant)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/5 "2007-06-01T10:51:05Z")
[QUOTE=Shamozzle] Specifically, have there been any recent efforts by the academic community to impart a simplification of English spelling and the English alphabet? You know, knife = nife queen = cween city = sity phlegm = flem, etc… Which letters could we eliminate entirely? [/QUOTE] Wouldn’t it be kween and sittee? Simplified spelling would lose some of the richness and history, as would simplified grammar. It would permit the feeble-minded to lord it over the pedants–an intolerable comeuppance, particularly since pedants own the language. 😉 It would diminish the ability to use written language as a proxy for educational level or linguistic IQ. There are some useful heterographic homophones that would get turned into homonyms. In any case two linguists=three opinions so I think we are stuck. I wil let yoo no if I chanje mie minde. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/6 "2007-06-01T11:14:25Z")
[QUOTE=Chief Pedant] Simplified spelling would lose some of the richness and history, as would simplified grammar. It would permit the feeble-minded to lord it over the pedants–an intolerable comeuppance, particularly since pedants own the language. 😉 [/QUOTE] To be honest, I think people who push for simplified spelling are also pedants, just a different variety. On the subject of pedants, have a look at this: [![](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VBq7CTWz4jE/hqdefault.jpg "Greenwing Take It Back!") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBq7CTWz4jE) ---
**Author:** ![Chew\_Barker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7bcc69/32.png) [@Chew\_Barker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chew_Barker)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/7 "2007-06-01T12:11:23Z")
This has very little to do with the OP, but one word that particulary annoys me is “Queue”. Its got 5 letters and the last 4 do nothing ! ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/8 "2007-06-01T12:42:18Z")
[QUOTE=Chew Barker] This has very little to do with the OP, but one word that particulary annoys me is “Queue”. Its got 5 letters and the last 4 do nothing ! [/QUOTE] So–four of the letters in “queue” are just waiting in a queue? ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/9 "2007-06-01T14:10:08Z")
Melvil Dewey, of the Dewey decimal system, was part of the spelling reform movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. He was actually born “Melville” and would have preferred to be “Melvil Dui”. He was into the metric thing, too. And the mackin’ on the ladies thing. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/10 "2007-06-01T14:17:05Z")
You might start by looking at the [Simplified Spelling Society](http://www.spellingsociety.org/). It was started by academics and scholars in 1908, but I haven’t heard much from them recently. Here’s one of their leaflets from their website: [http://www.spellingsociety.org/aboutsss/leaflets/ns90.php](http://www.spellingsociety.org/aboutsss/leaflets/ns90.php) ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/11 "2007-06-01T14:25:22Z")
[QUOTE=Zsofia] Melvil Dewey, of the Dewey decimal system, was part of the spelling reform movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. He was actually born “Melville” and would have preferred to be “Melvil Dui”. He was into the metric thing, too. And the mackin’ on the ladies thing. [/QUOTE] That brings up one of the problems of simplified spelling. Some words get pronounced differently in different parts of the world, and while Mr Dewey doubtless pronounced his surname “Dui” most of us brought up outside the US pronounce it “Dyui”. So, in this reformed-spelling world, should “schedule” be written as “skedule” or “shedule”? ---
**Author:** ![AHoosierMama](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/258eb7/32.png) [@AHoosierMama](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AHoosierMama)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 2:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/12 "2007-06-01T14:29:18Z")
I was tickled by the spelling while reading [The Journals of Louis and Clark](http://www.amazon.com/Journals-Lewis-Clark-Expedition/dp/0395859964/ref=sr_1_1/002-2782427-3637604?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1180707648&sr=8-1). The book is a collection of accounts by various members of the party of their adventures - basically letters back to Jefferson on how they were faring and what they were learning/finding. Any given day might be told through the eyes of a number of the members. Each of them (with varying levels of education), have tremendous spelling incosistencies form one account to another, and even within their own writing. Turrible for terrible. Moskeeto for mosquito. Seems like spelling used to be less important, as long as you were getting your point across. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/13 "2007-06-01T14:58:52Z")
[QUOTE=Monty] One such word seems to be _kidnaper_… [/QUOTE] But that would be pronounced with a long A, _kidnāper_ rather than _kidnăpper._ We may not have enough consistency in English spelling for some people but one fairly solid rule of thumb is that a vowel followed by a single consonant is long but if you double the consonant the vowel is short. Plus, I’ve never seen _kidnaper_ untill today, so it doesn’t seem to have caught on that much. 😃 > [@Zsofia](#): > > And the mackin’ on the ladies thing. Well, you know that reputation librarians have! Remember that scene in _It’s a Wonderful Life_ where Clarence tells Never-Been-Born George what his wife is doing since she never married? On the director’s cut the scene goes: GEORGE: Where is she? CLARENCE: She’s just about to close up the library! GEORGE: That WHORE! Then there’s the scene where the strippers and prostitutes are being herded into a paddy wagon. Two versions were shot, one with just Violet Bick being pushed into the wagon and one with both her and Mary being arrested. ---
**Author:** ![Thudlow\_Boink](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thudlow_boink/32/320_2.png) [@Thudlow\_Boink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thudlow_Boink)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/14 "2007-06-01T15:09:37Z")
Drawbacks to “simplified spelling” include: People would still have to understand the old spellings to be able to read the zillions of books, etc., that were printed before “spelling reform” took hold. Some words are spelled the way they are because they were taken from other languages that spelled them that way. If the spellings were changed, they would no longer match their origins, which could be confusing for people familiar with the language they came from. It would make reading harder and slower, at least until people got used to the new spelling. (When I see “knife” I instantly know what that cluster of letters denotes. When I see “nife” I have to stop and figure out what the heck that means.) Enough people would think the “simplified” spelling looks stupid, and/or are perfectly happy with the way things are now (“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”), that there would be major resistance to change. (Speaking of resistance to change, look how hard it was to get the USA to go metric.) ---
**Author:** ![Xema](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/9de053/32.png) [@Xema](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xema)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/15 "2007-06-01T15:31:12Z")
[QUOTE=AHoosierMama] I was tickled by the spelling while reading [The Journals of Louis and Clark](http://www.amazon.com/Journals-Lewis-Clark-Expedition/dp/0395859964/ref=sr_1_1/002-2782427-3637604?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1180707648&sr=8-1). The book is a collection of accounts by various members of the party of their adventures - basically letters back to Jefferson … [/QUOTE] They do indeed make interesting reading. But I believe the mail service west of, say, longitude 100 was not too reliable in those days. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/16 "2007-06-01T15:31:29Z")
It is an eye-opener to read in the beginning of Chomsky and Halle, Sound Patterns of English" that English spelling is by and large quite appropriate for English. They follow that with reasons. One reason is that words often change pronuncation when modified. Compare “finite” and “infinite”. English spelling is morphological rather than phonological. A real reform would make the whole of earlier literature inaccessible, for example. Among other objections are that English has too many vowels (22-24 depending on dialect is what I have read; I have never tried to count them), so we would want to introduce a host of accents or something. Then there is a question of dialects. I would want the ends of “sad” and “bad” spelled differently, but I understand that they rhyme in most dialects. It just opens an ocean of difficulties. And would no longer work in a 100 years. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/17 "2007-06-01T16:18:07Z")
[QUOTE=Chief Pedant] Wouldn’t it be kween and sittee? Simplified spelling would lose some of the richness and history, as would simplified grammar. It would permit the feeble-minded to lord it over the pedants–an intolerable comeuppance, particularly since pedants own the language. 😉 It would diminish the ability to use written language as a proxy for educational level or linguistic IQ. . [/QUOTE] Arbitrarily simplifying a grammar is impossible, just as it would be to complicate it. While it’s true we could say, for example, that we’re going to abolish “whom”, and “make” everybody use “who” in all contexts, when we do so we already are already following syntactical rules that perform the same function that the “-m” ending used to. Regarding the OP, one fairly prominent example of a spelling reformist in the late 19th and early 20th century was Melvil Dewey, who devised the Dewey Decimal Catalog for libraries. Some editions of the catalog in the 1920s were published using the reformed spelling. ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/18 "2007-06-01T16:26:59Z")
[QUOTE=Spectre of Pithecanthropus] Regarding the OP, one fairly prominent example of a spelling reformist in the late 19th and early 20th century was Melvil Dewey, who devised the Dewey Decimal Catalog for libraries. Some editions of the catalog in the 1920s were published using the reformed spelling. [/QUOTE] Mr Dui has already been mentioned. I have copies of some of the editions of DDC with reformed spelling, including “Filosofy” on one page and “Philosofy” on another. So Mel couldn’t make his mind up, even within one word, about issues like replacing “ph” with “f”. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/19 "2007-06-01T17:16:52Z")
> [@](#): > > And the mackin’ on the ladies thing. It was in fact Mel who first reformed the spelling of “player” to the simplified “playa”. So don’t be hating. ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2007, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321/20 "2007-06-01T18:01:49Z")
[QUOTE=Little Nemo] It was in fact Mel who first reformed the spelling of “player” to the simplified “playa”. So don’t be hating. [/QUOTE] I can’t find a cite right now in a hurry, but I _know_ I’ve read that at an ALA conference on a river cruise he tried his act on the wrong young librarian and she broke his arm. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/have-there-been-any-recent-academic-efforts-to-simplify-english-spelling/406321.md?page=2)