|
|
Words with the same or similar sound, different
meaning, different spelling
Some homografs in phonemic/alphabetic
spelling would be heterografs in TO.
PER:
pair pare pear pere payer
RYT:
right wright write rite
FATHR:
father farther
homografic hetrofones
- different sound, same spelling [tear]
List
of homophones
'Homograf' is mor specific - it can be used to specify words like 'tear' (=rip) versus 'tear' (=weepng), wich ar not homofones, ie, they ar homografic hetrofones (=difrnt sound, same spelng).
'Hetrograf' is th oposit, ie, same sound, difrnt spelng (eg, 'meat/meet'),
to be mor precise 'homofonic hetrografs'.
Som of these terms ar used rathr loosly in books about languaj. But
wen discusng english spelng in particulr, it is useful to be as specific
as posbl. I like 'hetrofone' for 'tear x 2', because u normly expect 'difrnt
sound' to produce difrnt spelngs. And I like hetrograf' for 'meat/meet'
because u normly expect difrnt spelngs to produce difrnt sounds. So 'hetrofone'
and 'hetrograf' ar seful terms for those particulr typs of anomly in english
spelng.
Chris Upward
MB: Getting rid of heterografs has allways been hi on my list.
CU:Do u mean *al* hetrografs? I hav a list of nearly 600 sets,
MB:I WOOD LUV TU SEE THOSE 600 SETS.
CU - a good few of
them containng 3 words (eg, 'vain', 'vane', 'vein'), and a very
few with
even 4 words ('rite', 'right', 'write', 'wright'). I like to shok
peple
with th quintuplets 'pair', 'pare', 'payer', 'pear', 'père',
but maybe
'payer' dosnt count.
MB - I WOOD NOT COUNT ' payer', BUT I DOO MEEN ALL HEREROGRAFS.
Thay ar a compleet contravention/contradiction/antithesis of the
alfabetic
principl. Fonics is no help with them at all. Lerning them is simply
a feet of memmory.
MB: My son visiting this last weekend and telling me (as sumwon
whoo is quite amused by my
obsession with spelling) that that is what needs tu bee dun first
of all makes me wonder
wether that shood not perhaps reely be top of the list.
CU -Ther ar a numbr of reasns for hesitating over ther holesale
merjr. They ar
nothing like so big a problm as, say, redundnt letrs. They do somtimes
trip
up riters, but they asist readrs.
MB - Thay ar verry hard tu lern in the first place.
CU - It is not always posbl to say wich words
ar tru hetrografs, partly because difrnt accents disagree - ar
'candid/candied', 'daze/days', 'father/farther', 'wail/whale' homofnus?
And
many of th merjrs ar likely to be very controversial (eg, 'meat'
'meet').
But som pairs myt usefuly be merjd.
MB -I wood say 'candid/candied', 'daze/days', 'father/farther' ar
not
homofones, since thay include inflected words, but wail/whale yes,
and both
need tu be respeld as wale.
We wood hav tu argue that the shock of the new is a price worth
paying for the
sake of the children. And the hundreds of homofones which ar not
speld
differently make a strong case for getting rid of the rest.
MB - As for CS, I wood not want tu go beyond Rule 1. With that we
probably
need to define the extent mor precisely. Cutting the a from ea
as in head, for
exampl,was a sugestion from Cornell.
CU -But many dubld consnnts, for instnce, cause endless problms.
Surely we
must ensure that 'accommodate' is delt with, musnt we? That's
CS Rule 3.
MB -Why is this not Rule 1? Thay serv no pupos whatever in acomodation.
Cutting totally superfluos -e endings cood bee anuther won.
CU -Agreed. But deciding wat is superfluus (=redundnt) is
not always
straitforwrd.
MB - Sum ar surely verry simpl: giv, liv, hed, bred, instead, dout, det.
Eliminate unnecesary dubld consonants after an initial unstressd
vowel (which
leevs remarkably few) cood bee anuther won still.
CU - Wel that's a larj part of CS Rule 3. Howevr, that wud stil
leve th MM-
trap
in 'acommodate' - it's not th CC that's th main problm. Ther
ar also words
wher difrnt peple stress difrnt vowls (eg, 'cigarette' - in th
UK we wud
rite 'cigarett', in th USA, they myt rite 'ciggaret').
MB - Peepl mite eeven understand stress better if we produced the short list whair a dubbld consonant is justified, e.g. additiv.
CU - So ar u sujestng 'additiv/adition'? Such DD/D variation wud
make things
mor complicated.
Re,
MB' Respel as -IZE al words endng in -ISE that hav long I and voiced S.
CU - This wud
1
disambiguate th 'organise/organize' alternativs.
2
include al th trap words like 'advertise', 'exercise',
'revise', 'surprise'.
MB I am reelly no longer so shure about that, at leest not as a
hi priority.
Thair ar lodes of words like that and if mor end in -ise than in
-ize, it
mite
bee a better idea to drop the -ize ending. It is not that hard
tu lern that
-ise at the end of a word is allways pronounced -ize.
CU - But it's not! That's wy I mentiond 'promise','paradise',
'expertise' in
my
last messaj. These endngs cause a lot of trubl both in readng and
riting. I
remembr a Secretry Jenrl of NATO once referng to 'practYZE', and
mispelngs
like 'surprize' ar rife.
MB - The contrasting consistent ending is then -ice
and can stay like that too.
CU - But hardly anything is consistnt in english. I agree that in
jenrl -ICE
had
betr stay for th time being, but let's not forget inconsistncis
like
'device/crevice'. Then wat about th notorius 'practice/practise'
trap -
surely we must at least go americn on that?
MB - Why not just 'practice'?
CU -As for -ISE/-IZE, far mor end in -IZE in th USA than in th UK.
U'd nevr
get
our americn membrs to agree to -ISE - they regard it as a rathr
nasty
british habit, and quite rytly so.
Then wat about 'analyse/analyze', and ther ilk?
MB - 'Analise' is the anser.
The Americans ar stil looking over thair shoulder at Britain. Thay
offen still
use 'colour'. Allan sed NZ follos the American leed. Menny L2 lerners
will hav
nuthing tu doo with ennything that is American.
The Americans hav not had mor suxess with thair reforming, I think,
because
thair aproche has been too bitty. Onely tinkering with peripherals,
so tu
speek. The leed probably needs tu cum from Britain. Home of Shekespeare.
Aproval from the Queen.
MBI dont see digrafs or trigrafs (maybe not eeven quatrugrafs) as
a grate
problem. Inconsistency is whot worrys me a lot mor.
CU -Agreed.
MB -Inuff for now. (Or inuf? How urgent is that kind of cutting.
Kined? How
urgent
is that kined of respelling?)
CU - Wat kynd? 'Kined' looks like 'kinetic'.
CU - I hope to begin going thru th CS catlog soon.
Som comnts arising from th discussion of th basic 500. To ensure
bakwrds
and forwrds compatbility, a useful rule myt be "No mor than 1 chanje
per
word". Anothr rule cud be dont insert extra letrs.
MB - Oh deer, I don't see the need for either of those limitations.
MB - Our disagreements arise manely from our different views about
magic e (we
agree on silent e) and the dubbling of consonants.
MB-I think that magic e is a regular and perfectly teechabl and
lernabl part
of TO. It can thairfor bee aplyd when respelling words.
Ar u sugesting that we shood respell thousands of perfectly good
words of the
file, mile, dale, pale, cope, rope kined?
If thay ar allrite, then so ar lite, nite, mite ….and bothe can
be eesily
differentiated from cloth and broth.
MB-The y for nyt and the like is not a good choice, because in TO
the
pronunciation for y in the midl of a word is not predictabl: cylinder,
cycle,
cymbal - but allso system, syndrome and synthesis, for exampl.
-MB-U may hav alreddy cum across my views about the dubling of consonants
in
my email entiteld 'A personal view based on the 500'.
MB-Thair is nuthing rong with the dubling principl, onely with its
inconsistent aplication all over the place in TO: shoddy - body,
muddy -
study. Tu use it onely tu indicate a short stressd vowel in words
of 2
sillabls or longer, wood be fine. If we want tu abolish the
dubling (and if u
ad -ing after 2 consonants as in dubl, the short sound is shurely
safe?) of
consosnants altogether we wood hav tu interfeer with words like
butter,
summer, better, letter which ar perfectly allright in my opinion.
MB-The consonant dubling rool allso helps tu diferentiate 'beginning'
from
'lining', etc. Its too valuable a mechanism tu thro away, and shurely
quite
esential for backwards compatibility.
MB- If the dubbling principle is a good TO rule, then it can
allso (like
magic e) bee aplyd tu respellings. (I wood like tu introduce dubl
'v' for the
likes of givven as wel. My onely introduction of a new spelling
pattern.)
MB -I think that thees 2 objections anser menny of yor objections
tu my
proposed respellings (especially the 'Why dulb …? Questions).
MB -I think the trigraf 'all' can be taut as a foneem. I allso think
that
changing or dropping letters in compounds servs meerly tu confuse,
hence I
sugest: allmost and butifull.
MB -Dubld consonants cood becum superfluos after short e, if the
consistent
spelling of 'ee' was adopted for the long sound without exeptions.
(Maybe just
leev the pronouns he, she, me, we as site words.)
CU -Othr jenrl points: I dont think we shud chanje O to U in 'mother',
etc.
Som
peple say it with short O. Is it a problm?
MB -Evry irregular spelling is a problem. Never mind what SUM peepl
say, the
majority say it with shorT 'u'. We have upper, under, mutter, rudder
- so it
shood bee muther and bruther.
CUTry to reduce majic E, nevr introduce new ones.
WHY? Quite a few peepl hav sed thay dislike it, but hav not givven
enny good
reeson why. Children don't fined it difficult. Thay actually like
it.
Comments belo on the list in lower case ar by CU.
IN CAPITALS (or at leest started in capitals) - replys by MB.
I did not reply tu all of Chris's comments, since menny ar anserd
by my
comments abuv. I started to flag a bit neer the end of the list
too.
able abel aebl
'aebl' and eibl are too stranje.
above abuv abuv
too stranje. Som peple probbly hav short O in 'abov'
across JR MB acros why use double S here ?
TO INDICATE STRESS AND SOFT S.
To sho it's not a plural. Contrast 'velcro'.
add ad ad
Wat about 'added','adding'?
DUBLED TU SHOW STRESS AND TU PRESERVE SHORT SOUND.
all
RF JR MB
almost ?
allmoest / allmoest
allmoste
Leve 'most' alone for now. Dont dubl L.
'ALL' AS CONSISTENT FONEEM. 'MOSTE' AND 'POSTE'
ON THE SAME PRINCIPLE AS 'HASTE' AND 'PASTE'
AND TO DIFFERENTIATE FROM 'COST' AND 'LOST'
among JR ? amung amung
Som peple rym it with 'long'. SUM.
animal RF MB
Contrast 'enamel'. Betr 'animl', 'enaml'.
NO. MUCH BETTER: ANNIMAL AND ENAMMEL.
another JR anuther anuther
Som say it with short O.
ONELY VERRY FEW.
any enny eny why double N ?
TO KEEP THE VOWEL SHORT (AS IN penny or Jenny).
IF THE LONG 'EE' WAS APLYD CONSISTENTLY, THE NEED FOR DUBLED CONSONANTS
AFTER
'E' WOOD DISAPEER (UTHER THAN FOR INDICATING PECULIAR STRESS.)
In Ireland it's a homofone of 'Annie'.
ball RF JR MB
Contrast 'ballot'.
STRESSD 'A' AS IN carrot, parrot, mallet, pallet and gallop. PERFECT.
To spell the dance 'galop' is just stupid afectation.
be JR AC bee bee
Dont lengthn.
DO (now and then), IF NEEDED TU IMPROOV REGULARITY.
because ? becos becos
Dont cut final E aftr voiced S.
IN THAT CASE, LEEV AS SITE WORD OR CHANGE TU 'becoz'.
Cant hav becose. Dusnt rime with pose or dose.
(Shood bee'doces' for medicin.)
beginning MB begining
Ryms with 'lining'.
MUST NOT, SO KEEPS 'NN'.
behind behined behynd
Behynd.
better MB beter
Ryms with 'completer'.
birds JR MB berds
Ask a scot. I gess ER/IR ar difrnt sounds. Cerntly UR is.
black RF MB
blak?
called JR
calld calld
I still want to recomend the '-ed' only for cases where it
is audibl
I agree. So do I - CU.
cannot JR MB canot why double N ?
Wy not two words? 'can not'
YES.
can't ? RF
No apostrofe.
certain sertan sertan
But ther's no A sound. Must be 'certn'. Se belo for 'mountain'.
close MB cloes
Cloes is unrecognizebl. Distinguish 'close/cloze'.
could cood cood
How do u distinguish it from 'cooed'?
U HAV ANSERD THE QUESTION.
different MB DIFERENT
At least th first E is silent.
either MB EETHER
But for me it's long I, not long E. And wat about 'ether'?
even eeven eeven
This only needs 2 x E, not 3.
ever RF JR MB
Dos this rym with 'lever'?
THAT SHOOD BEE 'leever'
family RF JR MB
The I is virtuly silent, and is ofn mispelt. 'Famly'?
NO OBJECTION.
father? farther farther
R must not be playd around with, as half th worlds speakrs of english
pronounce it even befor consnnts.
find fined fined
fynd
fire fier fier
fyr
fellow MB felo
Such words need th dubl consnnt - contrast 'hallow/halo'.
following MB
foloing OW has a
value in HOW
'follo' needs LL - it dosnt rym with 'solo'
front frunt frunt
Keep O.
full MB FUL
Same problm as 'all', etc.
NO. DIFFERENT. AND WE COOD HAV 'FUL' AND 'GULL'
(Or the uther way round? ) To indicate the difference in the 'u'.
Also for
'putt' and 'put'. (Hav the mor common won with a single consonant.)
given RF JR ? givven
Wy not 'givn'?
great grate grate
Nevr introduce majic E.
half ? harf
No R.
-ALF, -AST AND -ASK COOD REMANE AS TRIGRAFS FOR THOSE FONEEMS?
high JR hy hy
hy.
house hous hous
But 'houzes', 'to houze'.
OR 'HOUSES' AND 'TU HOUSE'
kind kined kined
kynd - unlike kinetic.
UNLIKE 'KINETTIC'.
known none none
No majic E, plese. Incompatbl with TO 'none'.
TO 'NONE' SHOOD BEE 'NUN'
large
RF MB
larj
last
RF JR MB
later
RF MB
light
lite
lite
If 'high' becoms 'hy', 'light' must be 'lyt'
little
littl
LITL litl
YES. LITL. A MISTAKE ON MY PART.
living RF JR AC MB
Ryms with 'thriving'?
LIVVING?
longer RF JR MB
Incompatbl with 'stranger', etc,
STRANGER - STRANJER?
making makeing makeing
No majic E, plese.
many
menny MENY
Irish 'manny'
might
mite
mite
myt
mind
mined mined
mynd
money munny muny
Keep O.
most ? moset / moste MOEST
no chanje.(Chris)
LOST. COST. - MOSTE. POSTE.
mother muther muther
Keep O
mountains mountins mountins
Wy 'certan' but 'mountin'? Must be 'certn/mountn'.
MOUNTAN is better.
night nite nite
nyt
nothing nuthing nuthing
keep O
often
JR
offen OFEN
of(t)n
other uther uther
keep O
peace peece PEES
we pee, he pees.
PEECE!
probably RF JR MB
Wat about -ABLE/-IBLE?
AS NEITHER CAME UP ON THIS LIST, ARE THAY PERHAPS NOT THAT COMMON
AND NOT
WORTH WORRYING ABOUT?
quickly RF MB
CK K? (Chris?)
IS IT THAT NEEDED? The -ck after a short vowel is regular.
read red red
we read, he red (lead/led?)
WE 'REED' now, but WE 'RED' last nite.
right rite rite
ryt
river RFJR ?(rivver)
Ryms with 'diver'? betr as 'rivr'.
road JR rode rode
No majic E.
said sed sed
'Sed' is even mor iregulr. Betr as 'sayd' (Chris)
'SED' IS WHOT WE SAY.
says ses sez
'Says' is a regulr spelng. Dont chanje it.
DOO U REALLY HEER IT AS RIMING WITH 'DAYS'?
school skool skool
Therfor also 'skeme', 'skolar'?
GRATE!
sea see see
Too confusing.
NO MOR THAN A BABY IN 'ARMS'
AND GOINT TO 'ARMS', AND THE HUNDREDS LIKE THEM.
should shood shood
Wat about 'shooed'?
SHOOED.
show
sho
sho
shows
shos
shos
Wat about 'shown/shone'?
'SHONE - SHON'
something sumthing sumthing
Keep O.
space? spase spase
Ryms with 'phase'?
SPACE
special MB SPESHL
Too stranje.
summer MB SUMER
But 'Sumer' is pronounced quite difrntly. If not 'summer', then 'sumr'.
From Ron on MB's respellings:
The mor I look at wot u hav proposed
the mor I think it cood be whot we ar looking for
Wot u hav dun is tu get rid ov the speling that confused
with the minimum ov change tu TO
It needs fine tuneing ov cors
but I doo think it is werth a try
Wun thing is certain it is eesi for all tu reed
Reply from CU
I think this is a useful exrcise, but it shos how many complications
ther
ar that ar not obvius from a simpl list like this. It is dificlt
to be
consistnt if one is workng from a word list. We shud be lookng
to simplify
spelngs rathr than words. - CU
I HOPE THAT I HAV ANSERD MENNY OF YOR QUESTIONS.
talk RF MB
'tauk' is worth considrng
thats RF JR AC MB
That word is a mistake. It must hav an apostrofe.
through throo throo and this !
But 'thru' alredy exists.
tried ?tryed TRYD
tryd
two too too
Merjng 'one', 'two', 'four' with ther homofones is danjerus.
usually MB USEALY
But th A is virtuly silent. 'Usually' has virtuly 3 sylabls 'yooz-yoo-li'
very RF JR verry
Dont ad letrs.
want wont wont
Incompatbl with TO 'wont'.
warm
RF MB
was
wos
WOZ
watch
woch
woch
water
MB
WALTER Wy L?
Th A shud be kept in al these words to avoid clashs with TO (eg, 'warm/worm')
well MB WEL
Must be consistnt with 'all', etc.
were
wer
wer
what
whot
WOT
Wat?
when
RF MB
where
whair WAIR
whether
wether wether
which RF
MB
while
wile
wile
white
wite
wite
who
whoo
HOO
whole
hole
hole
why
RF MB
Must be consistnt with WH - exept for 'who', 'whole', etc.
will MB WIL
wind RF JR AC MB +wined down +wined down
distinguish 'wind', 'wynd', 'unwynd', 'wined and dined'.
would wood woo
Wat about 'wooed'?
WOOED
your yor yor
Dos 'your' rym wituh 'yore' or with 'ewer'? Ther's no agreemnt here.
We doo not say the H so I think it can be dropd
Ho dosnt? (That's a pun.)
I feel that - me, she,
he, we, be - need respelling because thay
feetur so much in children's erly lerning and confuse them
too much. -Masha
Do they? They ar pretty straitforwrd, surely. It's 'see/sea/key/quay'
that
mess things up - not to mention 'the'.
SEE, SEA, KEY, QUAY - shood bee
SEE, KEE.
Hope these comnts help.
Cheers
Chris U.
