# How would you improve the English language? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [November 20, 2004, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755 "2004-11-20T00:08:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/41 "2004-11-22T01:06:53Z")
I would forbid people from England, Australia and Massachussettessttessettteeestsests from speaking it. ---
**Author:** ![umop\_ap\_sdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/dbc845/32.png) [@umop\_ap\_sdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/umop_ap_sdn)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/42 "2004-11-22T01:07:56Z")
Gender neutral pronouns and separate inclusive/exclusive first person plurals are good ideas. We have the regionalisms “youse”, “y’all”, and “y’ins” for the second person plural - everybody everywhere gets to decide which one they want to use. Phonetic spelling might be a mess, but accents over vowels could address the inconsistencies without specifying exact IPA equivalents - comb, bomb, and tomb might become cóm, bôm, and töm. All silent and double letters are out. The letter C can have the sound of SH, and for heaven’s sake people if you must pronounce CH with a T sound then spell it with a T. English uses the letter S for pluralization and posession - one of them has got to get assigned a different letter. Make all verbs and noun pluralizations regular - no longer will we have spoke of oxen, but speaked of oxes. **Johnny LA** , is [this](http://www.paulgerald.com/english.html) the joke you were referring to? ---
**Author:** ![Cunctator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 9:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/43 "2004-11-22T09:37:18Z")
> [@gatopescado](#): > > I would forbid people from England, Australia and Massachussettessttessettteeestsests from speaking it. Why? Does our perfect command of the English language cause you to feel inferior? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 10:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/44 "2004-11-22T10:11:40Z")
> [@alanak](#): > > This would require a fundamental leap in how we construct sentences, because they would be so different. In fact, a lot of your other changes would just be disastrous trying to convert to. I suppose, feasability is not a criteria given by the OP, but it certainly would help. But that’s the point - feasibility isn’t a criterion. If it were, I would never have posted. Or in my new dialect: “But it is point - feasibility is not criterion. If it was, I was past if not post.” 😉 ---
**Author:** ![dwc1970](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a183cd/32.png) [@dwc1970](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dwc1970)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/45 "2004-11-22T18:14:16Z")
> [@](#): > > 1. Change the word for "w’. Double-U? That’s three syllabels. 2 more than any other letter. It’s got to go. I really hate using ‘dub’ cause that just sounds idiotic. Plus, most letters end with a vowel sound. I was thinking it should be pronounced ‘wee’ but that sounds to similar to the letter ‘v’, so it would get confused a lot. I think we’ll have to settle for the sound ‘woo’. Of course, this just entirely screws up the alphabet song. I agree with this one, especially as in this day and age we are often forced to say “double-u, double-u, double-u” to denote the beginning of a web address (even though I rarely say this part of the address among even semi-computer literate folks, as this part is generally understood). As for the alphabet song, this is easy to overcome Just stretch out the “woo” to span the notes covered by “double-u.” My big change would be to eliminate the use of the letters OUGH and substitute them by their phonetic equivalents. There are too many sounds that these four letters represent and it must be hell for foreign people learning English to keep these words straight. Here are some examples: rough -\> ruff through -\> thru though -\> tho thought -.\> thot cough -\> coff bough -\> bow (the current word “bow” would become “boaw”). ---
**Author:** ![gfloyd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/d2c977/32.png) [@gfloyd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gfloyd)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/46 "2004-11-22T19:11:32Z")
To agree with **Middlecase** and **Little Nemo** , we need an Us but not you pronoun. I’ve thought about this for years. ---
**Author:** ![JohnBckWLD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d6d6ee/32.png) [@JohnBckWLD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnBckWLD)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/47 "2004-11-22T19:48:58Z")
> [@June](#): > > 1# - “th” as in “the” > : - “th” as in “thick” I see June gave alot of thought to the OP’s premise - but where are the ‘th’ sounds made in the words ‘the’ and ‘thick’ pronounced differently? ---
**Author:** ![umop\_ap\_sdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/dbc845/32.png) [@umop\_ap\_sdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/umop_ap_sdn)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/48 "2004-11-22T20:10:25Z")
> [@dwc1970](#): > > I agree with this one, especially as in this day and age we are often forced to say “double-u, double-u, double-u” to denote the beginning of a web It’s easier to refer to it as “world wide web”. Why, would you pronounce it “woo-woo-woo”? :dubious: > [@](#): > > thought -.\> thot > cough -\> coff thawt cawff [We’ve been over the o/aw thing already. 😉](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=277331&goto=newpost) ---
**Author:** ![Greenback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/2bfe46/32.png) [@Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Greenback)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/49 "2004-11-22T20:48:03Z")
“Valley girl” dialects would be removed. One of my pet peeves is my little sister speaking as though she was raised on the beaches of California. The word “like” for comparisons like the one just made. It is not for, like, inserting into a, like, sentence so that, like, your brain can, like, catch up with your tongue. (I apalogize that I have no idea how to punctuate that last sentence). The use of a semi-colon would not be used in sentences. This is just for me as I have never been taught how and when to use it. How about a single term to declare relation. I can’t be bothered to follow twists and turns of relations. I don’t care if my twice removed great-aunt’s sister’s cousin’s dog’s sire’s master’s niece’s grand-daughter was in my class at school. I too, would be up for a gender neutral pronoun. ---
**Author:** ![ianzin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ed655f/32.png) [@ianzin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ianzin)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/50 "2004-11-22T22:19:05Z")
> [@DougC](#): > > And I also might switch to that “pronunciated punctuation” from the old Danny Kaye routine. I would have said that was a [Victor Borge](http://www.comedystars.com/Bios/borge_victor.shtml) routine called Phonetic Punctuation. Maybe they both did versions of same basic gag, but I don’t know who did it first. ---
**Author:** ![Anne\_Neville](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Anne\_Neville](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Anne_Neville)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2004, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/51 "2004-11-22T23:04:12Z")
> [@Athena](#): > > I just want a better word for “that person of the opposite gender who I sleep with to whom I’m not married yet we’ve been together for 8 years and we have a mortgage and a dog and a kid and we’re not gonna split up anytime soon.” > > “boyfriend” and “girlfriend” suggest a casual relationship; indeed, you can have girlfriends even if you are a girl and aren’t gay. > > “significant other” is too clumsy and dated. > > “partner” has been hijacked by the gay community. I’m guessing they’d like something better as well, since it’s difficult to understand if you’re talking about a business partner or a spouse equivalent. And “lover” doesn’t work because it implies (to a lot of people) an extramarital relationship. I think we need a few different words: First, we need a word for “being in a relationship with someone.” “Dating” or “seeing” doesn’t really work except maybe for a casual relationship. And “going out with” is confusing, because you can go out somewhere with someone you’re not going out with. One word for a person who you’re seeing casually, but one or both of you is either seeing other people or is willing to entertain the idea. Boyfriend/girlfriend might fit here. One word for an exclusive long-term dating relationship where you aren’t engaged and don’t live together, but you don’t consider yourselves available for dating other people. One word for a relationship where you live together, with the mortgage, etc. Another word it would be nice to have is a word to describe the relationship status of someone who isn’t married or engaged, but who has an exclusive partner and is not available for another relationship. “Taken” is the word I used to use, but I wish there were a better one. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [November 23, 2004, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755/52 "2004-11-23T01:11:01Z")
> [@cityboy916](#): > > **Johnny LA** , is [this](http://www.paulgerald.com/english.html) the joke you were referring to? That’s the one! 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-would-you-improve-the-english-language/275755.md?page=2)