Linguistic purism in English is a different topic now than it use to be with English as an international language. I believe spelling reform to be the much more fruitful topic.
> From the 16th century onward, English writers who were scholars of Greek and Latin literature tried to link English words to their Graeco-Latin counterparts. They did this by adding silent letters to make the real or imagined links more obvious. Thus det became debt (to link it to Latin debitum), dout became doubt (to link it to Latin dubitare), sissors became scissors and sithe became scythe (as they were wrongly thought to come from Latin scindere), iland became island (as it was wrongly thought to come from Latin insula), ake became ache (as it was wrongly thought to come from Greek akhos), and so forth.[6][7]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-language_spelling_refo...
That wiki also lists a number of proposed spelling reforms.
If you say t'meito and I say t'mahto, and a Spanish speaker says tomato and a Korean speaker says 토마토 and a Japanese speaker says トマト, none of which are phonetically the same, it seems like spelling it 'tomato' is as good a system as any.
To introduce phonetic spelling into English, you'd need to either privilege one dialect's pronunciation over all the others (which speakers of those other dialects would be unlikely to accept), or else you'd end up with far greater spelling variation between different dialects of English than exists at present (which would harm international communication.)
The other problem with phonetic spelling is that phonology changes faster than orthography. If we adopted phonetic spelling tomorrow, then within a few generations many of those spellings likely wouldn't be phonetic any more. Keeping orthography reasonably fixed over time (even as pronunciation changes) makes it easier for us to understand the written texts of past generations.
I heard in Turkish they went with another option: everything is spelled phonetically, and there's a `standard' pronunciation / spelling. But I heard of a case where some people spell a word differently, because they pronounce it differently. (And that's seen not as a failing of these people's spelling.)
I'm Australian we mostly use British English. The biggest complaint for me is in Programming language API's. "colour" vs "color" and "centre" vs "center" have cause me so many syntax errors.
For example with the last spelling reform, the rules for writing an ß or ss got streamlined. The rules follow the pronounciation of _some_ German speakers. If your region doesn't have the same pronounciation you can't rely on that but have to learn the rules.
German being a pluricentric language and therefore people knowing that one spelling doesn't fit all, different spellings for different regions is just a pragmatic matter of fact. The various governmental and non-governmental organizations that work together for defining the official spelling just try to minimize the rules for spelling. So that German spelling doesn't become the abomination that English or French spelling is. ;-)
Also we should remember that the official spelling is not mandatory. Nobody will sue you if you write "kuhl" instead of "cool" (unless you are a civil servant). There are of course soft factors at work so that your spelling isn't that far from the official one but there are still lots of people that write according to the old rules from before the spelling reform from 1996.
"Let them write how they feel writing, don't interrupt their creative processes with not so important rules".
(And given that there are many pronunciations in common usage, we can't alter the spelling to fit them all. And there are essentially only two spelling systems, and they only differ in minor ways.)
For Japanese, the current state is that most new words are loan words written with the non-kanji syllabaries. It makes you wonder if someday the loan words will overbalance the originals, causing kanji to die out from Japanese (as it has, to some extent, from Korean).
This is not a technological issue, it's a social one. After the American conquest of Japan the American occupation forces were quite keen on the idea of language reform, whether using romaji or one of the native syllabaries. The idea died a death when they compared ease of decoding/reading speed. Japanese speakers, even not terribly well educated ones in terms of years of education were on a level with English speakers. Mao wanted to replace the hanzi with pinyin (the modern romanisation used in the PRC) but didn't feel it was worth the political cost. Replacing the hanzi/kanji would be a boon for foreigners but a massive and unnecessary disruption for Japanese and Chinese speakers.
>For Japanese, the current state is that most new words are loan words written with the non-kanji syllabaries. It makes you wonder if someday the loan words will overbalance the originals, causing kanji to die out from Japanese (as it has, to some extent, from Korean).
Korean is a very different case from Japanese or Chinese. If the Japanese hadn't conquered Korea they'd probably be using some combination of hanja (hanzi/kanji) and hangul (the syllabary used in modern Korea (North and South). To be fair that's the case nowadays but there are less than 300 hanja that every educated Korean would know. Any literate Japanese person knows over two thousand. The kanji aren't going anywhere in Japanese. They're the words that you use for educated, literate speech.
I meant that fonts and IMEs make it technically unfeasible to change kanji or create new ones.
> kanji .. are the words that you use for educated, literate speech.
But not for neologisms. That's what my post was about.
Further, my lay understanding of Japanese history is that their have been many attempts to reduce or eliminate kanji usage.
Actually IMEs have led to a resurgence in kanji usage. A lot of words that normal people could not (and were not expected to) write in kanji are now used online every day, to the extent that grade schools now teach them as kanji to appear on reading tests but not to be graded in handwritten essays. The most famous example of these "read only" kanji is 鬱 ('utsu', depression or melancholy), introduced to the school system in 2013 (iirc).
Also words that can be written in either kanji or kana but with a preference for kana in modern edited text are often written in kanji online (like 或いは instead of あるいは).