>Bluefish writes:
>As I've state, illiteracy is NOT a function of our spelling system. Changing the spelling system will NOT make kids want to learn. Their illiteracy is a function of deeper social problems. You can find all kinds of correlation between a lack of education and social-economic environments, yet we ALL have the same spelling system.
[You are right to an extent. Of course most English speakers learn, even with our spelling system. Those who don't either suffer from a specific problem (dyslexia) or have low IQ's and/or motivation.
But England has the same high rate of illiteracy, while right across the North Sea are the Swedes, with the same genetics, IQ's and social problems. But they have a different spelling system and one third the illiteracy. Ditto the Germans etc.
Of course there are differences in populations, and Canada has a slightly lower rate than the USA. But everywhere English speaking countries have high rates and similar countries (meaning they educate all their people) have lower rates. Sweden's rate is not zero, for they have retarded children like everyone else, and dyslexia and truants and lower class young drunkards who don't want to learn. It is not zero but it is two-thirds lower than England's.]
>It is fine to focus on illiteracy. Might I suggest that you turn away from the overly simplistic notion that it is our spelling system that is the problem and turn your attention to all the social ills that result in illiteracy.
> We cannot solve all the other social problems. "The poor ye shall always have with you." But we can solve spelling and cut illiteracy by half or two-thirds, and that's a good start. We'll leave you the other third...]
>Yes, illiteracy and social ills are a viscious cycle and they feed on each other. However, your notion that our spelling system is somehow the cause is flat out naive, illogical and flies in the face of the simple fact that we ALL have the same spelling system - yet specific social economic groups are the ones who have issues with illiteracy.
[The same groups in Sweden have a third the trouble.]
>Changing the spelling system, which would casue problems for the majority (are we all supposed to go back to school to learn your silly new system?) will not change the fact that certain kids to not want to learn for reasons far more complicated that how we spell.
[We emphasize, as Mark Twain emphasized in 1905, that no one would be required to abandon regular spelling. At most one would be asked, not told, to try to read messages that came to him in SoundSpel. And since everyone can read SoundSpel on the first try without much trouble, and quickly (within a page or two, within a minute or two) comes to feel fairly comfortable with it, this would not cause much of a problem for the majority. Just look at this passage in SoundSpel -- would anyone have to return to school to cope with *this*?
[We emfasiez, as Mark Twain emfasiezd in 1905, that no wun wuud be reqierd to abandon reguelar speling. At moest wun wuud be askt, not toeld, to tri to reed mesejes that caem to him in Soundspel. And sinss evrywun can reed Soundspel on th ferst tri without much trubl, and qikly (within a paej or too, within a minit or too) cums to feel fairly cumfortabl with it, this wuud not cauz much of a problem for th majority. Just luuk at this pasej in Soundspel -- wuud enywun hav to retern to scool to coep with *this*?]
>A lot needs to be fixed to cure illiteracy and the social ills that come of it - long before we all suffer under your silly new spelling system. You basically want to disrupt everything for those of us getting along just fine, under the naive notion that it will somehow magically fix illiteracy in the minority of the population who have much more serious problems than you acknowledge.
[What suffering? I repeat, nobody ever proposed to make regular spelling users read or write in reformed. Except very rarely to read a message in SoundSpel. (Which is not much worse than the typos which appear on this forum, which nobody even comments on, far less moans about.) Compare that to your suffering now -- it costs twice as much per year for each Special-Ed student as each regular one, and lots of those Special-Ed's would be regular if they could read better. It cost $25,000 a year to keep a prisoner in jail, plus welfare for the family he cannot support plus the lost taxes he would pay if he were free and had a job, plus the cost of all the crimes he commits. Do all those expenses, paid from your taxes and mine, and all that misery not cause more suffering than reading "Can't U reed this?" instead of "Can't you read this?"
I agree with you in many ways. I too would like to see lazy undisciplined families shape up, like to see money spent on the gifted instead of the "challenged", and like to see the law favor the reasonable man instead of the criminal who is attacking him (and here in Colorado we have the "Make my day" law, which I heartily support.) But fixing our spelling will increase literacy, lift many families out of poverty by their own efforts, and cause practically no inconvenience to the majority.
The problem Spellfix is that you have failed to convince me of your overall basic premise. To suggest that Sweden fixed their illiteracy b/c they changed their spelling is ludicrous. There is a lot more different between our two countries and cultures than the spelling system.
You haven't addressed my primary point:
Illiteracy is not a function of our spelling system. It is not a result of our spelling system being too difficult.
Illiteracy is a cultural problem. It is a function of children not willing to learn - the casue of which is highly complicated and contentious. Changing WHAT they learn doesn't change this underlying problem.
Again, you have failed to convince me of anything, simply because I recognize the problem is not nearly as simple as you have made it out to be. Chaning how we spell does not correct the fundamental problems afflicting those who will not (not can not) learn.
I'd be willing to bet if your proposal somehow became the law of the land, our illiteracy rate wouldn't change a whit. It's not what is wrong with the American education system or the American student.
While on business in Korea, school children would constantly run up to me and practice their English skills. Based on watching their "teaching channels" on TV, they probably all spell very well. They're encouraged and, thus, motivated to learn it. Education is about getting educated there. Here it seems to be more and more about the lowest common denominator and the path of least resistance.