Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!insosf1.infonet.net!internet.spss.com!markrose
From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Subject: Re: Lunatic orthography (was Re: Esperanto as a stepping stone?
Message-ID: <D2IMB0.491@spss.com>
Sender: news@spss.com
Organization: SPSS Inc
References: <3ergbm$g14@condor.cs.jhu.edu> <henryD294pL.DJp@netcom.com> <D2CzMA.3Gx@spss.com> <henryD2DADy.KDG@netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 20:30:34 GMT
Lines: 31

In article <henryD2DADy.KDG@netcom.com>, Henry Polard <henry@netcom.com> wrote:
>Thanks for the reference. I'll take a look at it.  BTW, I merely
>expressed a liking for "deep/morphemic" orthography; I don't know
>enough to defend or attack any point of view.  I realize that this
>is awful netiquette on my part. :-)

Refusing to attack or defend any point of view is awful netiquette?
No, just odd. :) 

>Most of the spelling reforms mentioned in this thread are
>"phomemic/shallow." Have any "deep/morphemic" reforms been proposed
>for English?  

Well, one could argue that one has already been implemented: the ~ 16th
century fashion for Latinizing spellings in both English and French,
resulting in such spellings as "debt", "habit", and "author", and 
including a slew of well-meaning mistakes such as "island", falsely derived 
from Latin _insula_, or French _poids_ (cf. "avoirdupois"), falsely derived 
from (I think) _pondus_.  The French went further than we with some of these 
reforms (e.g. _habile_ vs. "able"), less far with others (cf.  _dette_, 
_auteur_); and fortunately abandoned some of the more outre proposals 
(e.g.  _scapvoir_ for _savoir_).

>If so, was the reaction something we can learn from (other than that
>spelling reforms are hard to implement in English and are often
>ridiculed)?

Perhaps that partial reforms are more successful than wholesale ones.
(Webster's would be another example.)  This seems to be the idea behind
the Australians' "SR1" proposal, limited to just one change: spelling
the /E/ sound "e" wherever it occurs.  
