TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Revising English Spelling From:Laurel Rosinger <Laurel_Rosinger -at- MAIL -dot- AMSINC -dot- COM> Date:Wed, 8 Feb 1995 10:17:22 EST
(original author of this piece is unknown)
Having chosen English as the preferred language in the EEC, the European
Parliament has commissioned a feasibility study in ways of improving
efficiency in communications between Government departments.
European officials have often pointed out that English spelling is
unnecessarily difficult - for example, cough, plough, rough, through and
thorough. What is clearly needed is a phased programme of changes to
iron out these anomalies. The programme would, of course, be
administered by a committee staff at top level by participating nations.
In the first year, for example, the committee would suggest using 's'
instead of the soft 'c'. Sertainly, sivil servants in all sities would
resieve this news with joy. Then the hard 'c' could be replaced by 'k'
sinse both letters are pronounsed alike. Not only would this klear up
konfusion in the minds of klerikal workers, but typewriters kould be
made with one less letter.
There would be growing enthusiasm when in the sekond year, it kould be
announsed that the troublesome 'ph' would henseforth be written 'f'.
This would make words like 'fotograf' twenty per sent shorter in print.
In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted
to reash the stage where more komplikated shanges are possible.
Governments would enkourage the removal of double letters which have
always been a deterent to akurate speling.
We would al agre that the horible mes of silent 'e's in the languag is
disgrasful. Therefor we kould drop thes and kontinu to read and writ as
though nothing had hapend. By this tim it would be four years sins the
skem began and peopl would be reseptive to steps sutsh as replasing 'th'
by 'z'. Perhaps zen ze funktion of 'w' kould be taken on by 'v', vitsh
is, after al, half a 'w'. Shortly after zis, ze unesesary 'o kould be
dropd from words kontaining 'ou'. Similar arguments vud of kors be aplid
to ozer kombinations of leters.
Kontinuing zis proses yer after yer, ve vud eventuli hav a reli sensibl
riten styl. After tventi yers zer vud be no mor trubls, difikultis and
evrivun vud fin it ezi tu understand ech ozer. Ze drems of the Guvermnt
vud finali hav kum tru.