Hacker News Reader

Comment by skrause | Hacker News Reader

> Given the variation amongst different varieties of English, a phonetically-based reform would be tricky.

Spanish has managed to do that. It has as much variety in its dialects as English (e.g. some dialects have very different "c" and "s" sounds or "b" and "v" sounds while others don't), yet all in all the orthography is quite regular and phonetic.

View on HN

That's regular but not phonetic. (I'm not fully convinced that Spanish has quite as much variation as English, but I'll admit I'm not expert on Spanish.) But what do you do when certain segments are not just pronounced differently, but completely absent in some varieties? (E.g. my example about /kɑ:/ vs /kɑ:r/)

Let alone "absent in some varieties", there are sounds that are absent in all varieties but still spelled (e.g. the h in hombre or the u in queso). There was an attempt to regularize that in Latin America but the countries that tried to adopt it reverted back to the old spelling[1] - I guess the same will happen if someone tries to "reform" English

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bello_orthography

Apropos not much, I’m a native English speaker who is learning Spanish quite intensively, and I can say without a doubt that there is more variation across Spanish dialects than English. Different regions have hugely different lexicons, with many many different words for the same things. Just try to predict the word for “green pea” based on region! Learning Spanish is like learning 15 languages at once. It’s hilarious fun but specialization becomes a concern very very early.

I wasn't talking about lexical variation though. (I also wonder how much experience you have with the wide range of English varieties: there's quite a bit of lexical variation.) Lexical variation is pretty irrelevant for spelling changes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com