I suggest, OmSig, if you insist the LAW of PRECISENESS AND LOGIC all day long,
that you MUST spell ALL your words in stardard English spellings.
For brevity, I will address you as A, if that is OK with you.
I was born in New York, and lived in Arizona & in California for a few years,
but I have lived my entire life (except for vacations) in America.
My education was in America. I was a trial attorney in New York for a few decades.
I am retired from the practice of law for many years.
When I was in practice as a lawyer, it never occurred to me
for a minute, nor any fraction thereof, to use fonetic spelling.
I had more important things to do. When addressing the Court
in writing as well as addressing other lawyers or anyone else,
I used fully paradigmatic spelling for years and for decades.
After my retirement, in retrospect,
I felt guilty
about contributing to the perpetuation of the illogical and inefficient
aspects of traditional spelling. I have some familiarity with the Spanish Language,
whose spelling is very nearly 1OO% fonetic;
it is spelled as it sounds.
Logically, that puts English to shame.
English words are already
pronounced the same as they are spelled,
but a far inferior
percentage than Spanish. The Spanish did it and DO
it the logical way.
When I began to use the Internet, around 2OOO, I decided to set a good example
for my fellow citizens to encourage them to tear down
so much of conventional spelling as was illogical and inefficient.
I decided to show them better ways of spelling,
in hope of having them adopt the easier ways, rejecting
the bad old ways.
I am trying to support a paradigm shift among my countrymen
This was attempted (unsuccessfully) by a very popular and respected
President of the United States, Teddy Roosevelt, about 1OO years ago.
Now, the youth of America are supporting faster & easier writing.
I hope that this will accelerate and come to predominate.
On the merits
, the old paradigm does not deserve
to endure intact.
For instance: there is NO
to add the letters UGH
to the word tho
There is no logical reason to SOMETIMES
, but not always
spell the sound of F
as "ph"; that is foolishness, with no redeeming value.
In the words woul
d and shoul
d, the letter L serves no purpose
It is simply not
helpful, yet 3OO,OOO,OOO Americans remain doing it year after decade, after century.
That is violence against logic and against efficiency; I choose not to be an accomplice thereto.
Among my own countrymen, I seek to support
in defense of sound reasoning,
against stupid traditions of spelling. My ancestors were less
than perfect logicians qua spelling.
When I express myself on the Internet, I address my fellow native speakers of English.
Nearly all of them are adults, with years of linguistic experience.
the pattern that I am trying to tear down,
to the extent that it is not fonetic.
in addressing an alien who requests advice on correct English,
I am very uncertain as to the propriety of showing you any variation
from orthodox usage, thoUGH I have done
it (perhaps out of habit).
It 'd be very unreasonable of me to enlist your support
in our local rebellion.
If you wish me to employ fully orthodox usage of English
on your threads, then I shouL
d understand and comply with your wishes and your needs.
Precisely and logically speaking, What is u and r?
The letter u
is the only functionally operative part
of the word that is commonly written: you.
The letter r
is the only functionally operative part
of the word that is commonly written: are.
My ancestors were foolish
in unnecessarily lengthening those words.
By showing the correct
ways of spelling them on Internet fora,
I was hoping to encourage everyone to adopt the better methods,
rejecting the bad, old traditions, the atavistic throwbacks to Chaucerian times
or earlier when English was closer to its Germanic origins.
Your persistence on these informal, wrong or short-lived cyber spellings has obviously put you in an inferior position in the debate and, contributed to the stark contrast to your "precise and logic image."
I respectfully disagree.
is inappropriate in a rebellion,
until success has been achieved. Between myself and my fellow citizens,
I argue that the short easy way is the CORRECT
and that the old established non
-fonetic way of spelling is incorrect
and an offense against sound reasoning
when rendering advice to an alien to the English Language
who solicits advice on conservative usage.
Note that in my advice to you, I have NEVER
suggested that you adopt
fonetic usage. I will not suggest that to you.
My dispute with Mr. Setanta concerned correct use of grammar
to wit: his run-on
sentences (too persistent in his years of posting).
This is an error of punctuation.
He never disagreed as to the error of using run-on sentences,
nor did he deny the definition of this particular error.
He merely threw another Setantrum.
His side of the argument was purely ad hominem
His side of the argument consisted of his questioning my mental health
and consisted of his declaration that I am a member of a different species
(indeed, one whose hooves
wouLd prevent him from typing Internet posts).
He then (ignominiously) fled the scene, not seen on this thread since.
His position was untenable.
When I have employed short fonetic forms (like u instead of you),
I did so in the belief that even with your limited knowledge of English,
d get the idea, because of its simplicity.
if you wish that I use only purely conventional English when addressing you,
I will comply
because of your unique circumstances.
In any event, my advice as to your actual usage of English
has ALWAYS contemplated your use of perfectly standard, orthodox English spelling.