Now Teachers Correcting Spelling is ‘Racist’?

A professor in California has been accused of “racism” and for sponsoring a “toxic” learning environment after correcting the spelling of students.

This is how bad our so-called system of education has gotten when even correcting spelling hurts our kids “self esteem.”

Professor Val Rust of the University of California at Los Angeles’ Graduate School of Education and Information Studies was confronted by students after doing his job and correcting the bad spelling of his students. The poor little waifs staged a sit-in to protest the prof.

Sadly, the majority of the students that staged the protest were minority students. Apparently they were unhappy that the prof was preparing them for their future instead of treating them with the bigotry of soft expectations as they were used to.

One of the protesting students, Nora Cisneros, read a letter written to the the prof. it was probably riddled with grammatical errors.

“There are documented and undocumented stories of a hostile and toxic environment for students of color here in Moore Hall and throughout the campus,” the letter said as it went on to whine about professor Rust.

The prof called the idiotic protest an example of “micro-aggression.”

Professor Rust wrote a letter himself. “I have attempted to be rather thorough on the papers and am particularly concerned that they do a good job with their bibliographies and citations, and these students apparently don’t feel that is appropriate,” he said.

Exactly right, professor Rust.

(H/T BizPacReview)

Obama Disrepecting The Vatican, Catholics, Jews, Everyone But Muslims
Police State: Louisiana Cops Have Power to Force Drivers to Give Blood Samples?
  • jim_m

    Expecting minorities to be able to achieve the same standard of performance and achieve the same level of education is RACIST!!!

    Seriously, if blacks want to be treated as genetically inferior they should just say so (wait, I’m sorry, apparently they are!!!).

  • Paul Hooson

    Interestingly, as a young guy in grade school I had a major argument with a teacher when I referred to “soul” music on a homework assignment, which the White teacher had never heard of at the time. They argued that no such music genre as “soul” existed. But, I had come from a mostly Black neighborhood, where my next door neighbor was Lous Armstrong’s bandleader and an incredible jazz musician. – Teachers graded papers based off the English they know, which will vary based on their ethnic background. A Hispanic or Black teacher might understand some different terms fpr things that are still English, but just ethnicly varied from mainstream White English.

    • jim_m

      This is not about knowing black slang. This is about college students who are incapable of writing in the English language. This is about college students who have so poor a grasp of grammar that their ability to get decent jobs will be materially impaired if they don’t get it corrected. And rather than accepting constructive criticism that their English skills suck, they protest that “Hey, we’re minorities, you can’t hold us to the same standard as the rest of society. We aren’t capable of speaking or writing in the way that the rest of society communicates.”

      This isn’t about “White English”. This is about being able to communicate in the same language as the business world and society in general. What you are arguing for, Paul, is that blacks should be held to a lower standard because they are incapable of doing anything else. Also, you argue for isolating blacks in a subculture so that they cannot develop skills that translate into success in the greater world around them.

    • mbecker908

      At any reputable graduate school, and I would question UCLA in that front, it’s foundational that when presenting academic research – which is what graduate school, especially at the doctoral level, is all about – your spelling and grammar and you use of APA or MLA formatting is the difference between life and death.

      If you can’t spell, if your grammar is poor, if you don’t understand appropriate academic formatting, and academic language, you’ve got no business in graduate school, period.

      It’s instructive that these particular students are in the so-called school of “education”. Other than race/gender “studies” there is no lower bar for entry and no lower bar for matriculation than education.

      • jim_m

        Sad to say but most graduate school disciplines are more about ideology than they are about competency.

  • Walter_Cronanty

    If you want to know what’s wrong with our education system, read both stories from The Bruin. These are grad students in Education and Information Studies [wtf is "Information Studies"?], whining about a “hostile and toxic environment for students of color” because someone has pointed out their errors in spelling and grammar.

    But wait, there’s more. If you wonder why they’re whining, check out the professor’s response. He wants to set up a “…town hall meeting… to begin a dialogue. “Many of (the demonstrators’) individual stories were very touching and I feel something ought to be done to address their concerns,” he said in the letter.”

    Very “touching,” indeed. Why one poor soul described the awfulness of her life as a grad student: ““As a woman of color, I should not have to get up every single day to have my identity questioned. … I am tired of it,” she said, crying as she spoke. “I’m tired, and it hurts me so much.”

    http://dailybruin.com/2013/11/14/ucla-grad-students-stage-sit-in-following-recent-discrimination-report/

    http://dailybruin.com/2013/11/20/students-defend-professor-after-sit-in-over-racial-climate/

    On so many levels – YIKES!

    • jim_m

      That’s fine. I doubt a single Fortune 500 company would employ a single one of these morons, except maybe as a janitor. Have fun paying off your student loans earning minimum wage because you can’t land a decent job without being able to speak the same language as the rest of the business world.

      • Walter_Cronanty

        Then you and I will be paying: their student loans, their food stamps, their Obamacare subsidies, their Section 8 housing, etc., etc. Oh, and don’t go questioning that poor woman’s identity when you’re making all those payments.

        • jim_m

          We already do so we get the status quo.

    • Commander_Chico

      The Daily Bruin uses Disqus, too, so I left a comment:

      It’s all about their feelings, the poor dears. Flunk them all out so they can find their true calling – obviously should not be inflicted on our kids in the school system with graduate degrees in education.

      • Walter_Cronanty

        RAAACIST!!!11!

      • jim_m

        I’m hoping that you missed something in the copy and paste because your comment is not grammatical. Or was that just intended as irony?

        • Commander_Chico

          Nope, I’m not a teacher, can write with excessive ellipses.

      • Retired military

        Chico

        Since we are on a subject you are intimately familiar with.

        “As I said before, try answering what people say, and not try to put words in others’ mouths, debate goes better” – Chico, Famed Wizbangblog poster

        1. Do you consider Oprah racist since she called for the deaths of millions of non black people because SHE FEELS that they don’t like her because she is black.?

        2. Why is it that Oprah,the Lamestream media,
        Reid, Pelosi, and other major dems have called
        people racist simply because they oppose Obama’s
        policies. Yet when they oppose those same
        policies when espoused by Bill, Hillary. Reid,
        Pelos, Gore, Kerry, etc etc they weren’t
        considered racist then?

        3. Why are people called racist terrorist anarchist (as show above ) when Al Franken who did the same thing wasn’t called Racist? Do you feel that it is because he is a democrat and the people doing the call just playing the race card because that is all they have?

        4. Why are people called racist anarchist terrorist (as show above ) when they called for the delay of all or part of Obamacare and Obama who is unconstitutionally doing this not called a racist anarchist terrorist? Do you feel that it is because he is a democrat and the people doing the calling are just playing the race card because that is all they have?

        • Commander_Chico

          Give it up, RM. I answered those questions to the best of my ability and gave my opinion. Don’t blow a gasket.

          https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRBTPG53I8r8cHe5UBpq3yINYZiyPXzY2-APfNj3iwLjSTC6bcT

          • jim_m

            I answered avoided those questions to the best of my ability

            FIFY

          • Retired military

            No Chico you didn’t. What’s the matter? Cant take your own advice?

            “As I said before, try answering what people say, and not try to put words in others’ mouths, debate goes better” – Chico, Famed Wizbangblog poster
            Shiney’s are not accepted here.

          • Jwb10001

            Also while you at it, try answering why you accused a Vietnam vet of spitting veterans. Like you did me a few threads back.

    • Walter_Cronanty

      I hate to reply to my own comment, but I have a question. Ever since I read the article about the “woman of color” crying about being tired and hurt because “…every single day [I] have my identity questioned…,” I’ve been wondering: What the hell is she talking about? What Critical Race Theory jargon have I missed?

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        You may have overlooked something, but you haven’t missed a damn thing.

        • Walter_Cronanty

          In today’s oh-so-politically correct society, I’m curious as to what motivates people. I’m fascinated by how we’ve become more self-absorbed, self-centered and narcissistic. It’s all about “feelings.”
          Can you imagine this Country if today’s attitudes were transposed back on the early colonists, or the settlers going west? Hell, we’d all still be living in England – nobody would have taken the risks necessary to make this Country what it is, or at least was before Obama. They would have all been lying in a fetal position back in London, crying and hurt because someone had questioned their “identity.”
          I hate to be as pessimistic as Westlake, but I really don’t see things going well for this Country. I’m on the back nine of life, and I can’t say I’m at all envious of those who are younger.

  • GarandFan

    Having taught report writing at the local PD Academy at one time, I can tell you that the majority who flunk out do so because they cannot CLEARLY put their thoughts on paper. I actually had one student who thought it was MY job to teach him spelling and grammar. He was shocked when I told him, ‘Welcome to the REAL world. Your employer already expects you to have that ability. Perhaps you should have paid more attention during English classes when you were growing up.’

  • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

    The truth is that 60% of words in English are misspelled in the … dictionary! So, I would strongly urge the spelling anarchists to do what is right and correct the English spelling system, if you want to show what is truthfully RIGHT!

    • Retired military

      Huh? Can you provide any link whatsoever to remotely back up your assertation or your statistic?

      • Brucehenry

        Yeah, that’s a silly assertion.

        • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

          Really? Click on my username and follow the link. It is all backed up.

      • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

        Click on my username and follow the link. It is all backed up.

        • jim_m

          LOL. What a crack pot. Just because you have a degree and an opinion doesn’t mean that the rest of the English speaking world is wrong and you are right. I suggest that you remain on your meds.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            WOW! You actually read my whole website in 5 min. I never stated that the rest of the English-speaking world is wrong! I am stating that the English spelling system is flawed! But, again, people ask for stats and data. I do provide those. I suggest you learn about the subject.

          • jim_m

            We asked for stats and data and you furnished opinion. There really is a difference. Your opinion seems to be that because there are variations of spelling that are not phonetic that these variations are “wrong”. That is opinion and it is an opinion that is not shared by, well, by just about anyone else with any sort of credibility.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I disagree! I have stats and I have data on that website which has a point of view as a result.

            Wrong! When thousands of phonemes are not phonetically represented systematically, predictably, logically, and reliably within a spelling system, we can state that calling the system a system is flawed. It is just a mess. 60% of the words in English are misspelled. Would you buy a car if you knew that 60% of its parts are faulty?

          • Brucehenry

            Your logic is completely haywire. Even if your premise is valid — and that’s just for the sake of argument — it doesn’t follow that the words in the dictionary are currently misspelled, only that YOU THINK they should be spelled differently, according to the new, “reformed” rules you wish to impose.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Don’t you love it when people cannot even admit the obvious! It really weakens the rest of your argument. Even expert linguists who have PhDs admit that the English spelling system is a mess! So, admit I am right or lose all credibility!

            Yes, thousands of words in the dictionary are misspelled violating the rules of the English spelling system, which is largely flawed, but I digress! So, you want people to continue to violate these rules? You think that this is good? These words are spelled this way and, even though they are not an actual representation of the way they are pronounced, they should be misspelled? These words do NOT follow the rules! Why are you asking people to break rules, laws?

            All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.

            Arthur Schopenhauer

          • Brucehenry

            Whether the system is a mess or not is not the point. You are not the Spelling Police, at least not yet. You asserted that 60% of English words “are misspelled in the dictionary.” That is your opinion. You think words should be spelled phonetically. But that’s NOT the current rule.

            The current rule is that English words are spelled as the spelling has evolved over the 4,000 or so years the language has been evolving.

            I agree that the idiosyncracies of English spelling are maddening — a mess, if you like. That doesn’t mean the words in the dictionary are misspelled, Einstein.

            As a matter of fact, it is the definition of “correct spelling” to say a word is spelled as it is in the dictionary, you loony.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            “Spellings attempt to transcribe the sounds of the language into alphabetic letters” (Wikipedia) If a means (is written) b, then a should always means (be written) b. Simple enough for you, Einstein? Oh! Well! No! Because in your perfect world that does not need to be so. Of course, in your world, there are rules for whites and there are rules for everyone else! Right? Words in the English language are misrepresented in the dictionalry! PERIOD! Or should I write PERIUD? Oh! Sorry! That’s going to give you headaches to learn another code, albeit more logical and reliable! The hell with that! :)

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Master’s Candidate citing Wikipedia?

            The Ivory Tower has fallen further and faster than even I thought.

          • Brucehenry

            Hey, I thought you were “out of here.”

            But thanks, Peter, it’s been entertaining. My daughter stopped by and when I told her I was arguing with someone who asserted that 60% of the words in the dictionary were misspelled she laughed and laughed!

            Again, good luck with your campaign! Since you are a better writer and more persuasive than George Bernard Shaw I assume you’ll have much more success than he did.

          • jim_m

            …reason demands that we follow nature rather than servilely continuing upon the erroneous path of our predecessors… — Gilbert Romme, Comité de l’instruction Publique, in defense of the Revolutionary Calendar

            Your proposition for changing the written English language is little different from the attempt to concoct a new calendar for revolutionary France. Your attitude is almost identical in your contempt for anyone who does not share your Utopian vision

            [the system has been preserved by] the blindness of men who continually preferred to suffer rather than change any of the idiotic habits of their fathers

            Let’s just say that M. Romme and his ideas are on the scrap heap of history and his calendar is considered one of the great fiascoes of the French Revolution. You will at least have company where you are going.

          • jim_m

            We can state that it is not consistent. It is rather difficult to conclude that a system which has given birth to great literary creations is so badly flawed that it does not work.

            So per your analogy you would claim that the car doesn’t work, but obviously it does work because people succeed in communicating via the written word daily. In fact we are succeeding in doing so here and I can state that 60% of our words are not misspelled.

            What you are hung up about is some OCD issue that you are unhappy that the spelling rules fail to be consistent in a manner that pleases you. As I mentioned before, there are drugs for OCD, you should stay on them.

          • Brucehenry

            Ohhh, slay, as my daughter would say.

          • jim_m

            You misspelled sleigh. ;-)

            Which brings to mind, what would this idiot do about all those homophones which sound the same but have decidedly different meanings? He’s really just advocating for making the language less meaningful and for diminishing the ability to communicate effectively.

          • Brucehenry

            I don’t think this guy is an idiot, but I do think he’s about as wrong as a non-idiot can be and still not be a bona fide idiot.

            ADDING: you should read the comments. Some commenters DO advocate adoption of Esperanto fer chrissake.

          • jim_m

            crack pot then.

          • Brucehenry

            No, after further discussion with him downthread I’d say you got it right after all.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I don’t think Brucehenry is a non-idiot, but then I am not saying he is not! :)

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ah! We get to the root of the issue! You think that English which is used by a huge number of people –and continues to be– is a great language and that because a lot of literary works have been written using it, it should be therefore deemed a great language. However, I never stated that English is an awful language. Its spelling system is. Big difference! Its systerm can be learned, that is obvious! Inasmuch as anyone can ride a bike with a wrapped wheel, it remains that a new wheel would be advantageous! However, the English empire forced people to adopt English, directly or indirectly. As far as I know, people in Papua New Guinea –and in many other coutries in the world– did not decide one day to drop their OWN language for English. Most people learn it because it is a language that has been forced onto people, because it enables them to get ahead in many ways. The prevalence of something (VHS VS Beta) does not indicate that is it better or best! We know there is lots of junk food everywhere, but we know it is JUNK! Similarly, the English spelling system –just in case you did not get the allusion– is JUNK!

          • Brucehenry

            No, genius, the “root of the issue” here is your assertion that, and I quote, “60% of words in English are misspelled in the… dictionary!”

            Such an assertion is your opinion, unsupported by any expert or any facts at all.

            What you perhaps SHOULD have said is that “60% of English words should be spelled differently, more phonetically” or words to that effect. Then maybe you wouldn’t look quite so silly.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            60% of words in English are misspelled in the… dictionary! At least! I guess you want me to show you a page with 170,000 words and their phonetic misspellings? No one told you to make inferences? If 60% of 7000 common words are (and that has been demonstrated), it follows that more complex words are too!

            The English spelling system is called system, but it does not behave as such! One should not call it a system, if it unreliable! I call it a mess! If words are not spelled phonetically, reliably, then they are misspelled!

          • Brucehenry

            IN YOUR OPINION, but not in the opinion of the rest of the English-speaking world, crackpot.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            This is not an opinion! It is a decent inference based on 7000 common words and based on the unstressed syllable issue, as stated before!

            The rest of the English-speaking world are not experts in linguistics! They were forced to learn the stupid language because their parents spoke it! Jeesh!

          • Brucehenry

            One doesn’t have to be a linguistics expert to know whether a word is misspelled or not. You know how to find out if a word is misspelled? LOOK IT UP IN THE DICTIONARY.

            The rules of spelling, in English and as far as I know most languages, aren’t “always spell a word as it is phonetically pronounced.” No, the rule is, “spell the word as the spelling has evolved over the centuries.”

            This may be illogical and lead to a deeply flawed system, but what are ya gonna do? It’s how shit is.

            But, as I said, good luck with your campaign to change the rules. It will be an uphill fight. I think you’d do better to bite the bullet and try to get us all to speak Esperanto, lol.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Many words used to be spelled differently in the past ! So which version is right? The last one? :) And the last one after that? :) No, the right spelling of a word is it phonetic spelling! That’s easy to learn!
            It makes sense! Why should some parts of words or words should be spelled phonetically and others not? That does nto make sense! Do you fit your car with a couple oval tires? That would be different! Why do we use 4 round tires?

          • jim_m

            Incorrect. Which is the right spelling of to, too and two? Which is the right spelling of meet and meat? Slay and sleigh?, rain, rein and reign?

            What you want to do is strip the language of its nuance and meaning. You want to dumb the language down to prevent expression and as Bruce asserts you want to control it so that it becomes useless as a tool for communicating ideas so people move on to using a language that does do that.

            People use English because it does those things for them. It does provide nuance and meaning that are clear. What you advocate is newspeak without the fascist agenda that backs it.

          • Brucehenry

            I was hoping we wouldn’t press your “fascist” button, but you are right this time. Just this time, mind you! :)

          • jim_m

            We haven’t. I said there wasn’t any.

          • Brucehenry

            I know, but when that word gets used by or around you I start preemptively rolling my eyes.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Oh! Homographs are problematic for you? I guess many people who use other languages that have lots of those must be dumb! But, English has many of those!

            Maybe we should have different spellings for all homopgraphs?

            Ya, seeing a to for a too probably gives you a heart-attack! The turht is that you are good at remembering that one has one more o than the other! WOW! You must be smart!

            You are an anarchist! You like all spelling rules to be broken!

          • Brucehenry

            Again I am not arguing with you over whether or not the rules should be changed. What I am telling you is that, under the CURRENT rules of English, not the ones the voices in your head tell you are current, the words in the dictionary are NOT “misspelled.”

            Get it now? Jesus H. Christ what a buffoon.

          • jim_m

            Told you he was an idiot. (sorry idiots, I know that is unfair)

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            The current rules of English should require that many words should be spelled differently! YOU are wrong! “I am” … “you ar” is just one example ouf of thoudands that indicates that many thousands of words do not follow the spelling rules of English!

          • jim_m

            Should require, but don’t. Once again, the words are not misspelled. That you consider them misspelled according to your own OCD interpretation of how phonetics should be applied is not relevant.

          • Brucehenry

            Perhaps you noticed your use of the word “should,” there, Petey. Indicating that even YOU know that you’re wrong.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ya! So? That does not follow!

            And YOU should learn to write and stop giving others lessons. “Indicating that even YOU know that you’re wrong.” is a fragment.

            Yes, they should, but some people like you do not want the language to follow the rules! Yes, they should! They are not! Instead, you prefer to force people to break the rules, probably with the imperative that this is right!

          • jim_m

            Its a blog comment section, not the editorial page of the WSJ nor is it Bruce’s attempt at the great American novel nor is he writing a prospectus for his business offering.

            No one is forced to break the rules. The rules can be learned by all and only a slight effort is required to follow them.

            You are proposing that the rules of spelling be changed to coincide with the rules of pronunciation. This has never been the case.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Yes, and Neanderthals did not use the wheel. Good thing some humans discovered that little invention and changed things! Ditto for fire! I guess you would have been the one dissuading them!

            Is change such a hard concept for some people?

            Ah! The rules can be learned by all? Really? Assuming this is so, which it is not, according to my experience, the point that I am making in my blog is that it takes so much more time to learn to read (decode) and write (or costs more) compare to other languages. I guess you enjoy paying more taxes or having lower productivity.

          • jim_m

            I suggest that you go look at the history of the Dvorak keyboard to see how well adopted notions are such as yours, which purport to be more efficient and ‘better’.

            What I am suggesting is that your claims that it is unusable are negated by the facts that it is the common language for international business and science. Immigrants to the US do not seem to have a great deal of difficulty learning the language.

            Your assertions are not supported by observed fact.

          • Brucehenry

            From the book I mentioned downthread:

            Various distinguished minds have grappled with this problem. The more spoken English seemed standardized on the air, the greater seemed the need for a simplified spelling system. Such proposals were often heard during the interwar years. In 1930, a Swedish philologist, R.E. Zachrisson, proposed an international language, essentially English, to be called “Anglic” For all its logic, its drawbacks can be easily demonstrated in the Anglic version of a famous sentence: “Forskor and sevn yeerz ago, our faadherz braut forth on this kontinent a nuw naeshon, konseeved in liberti…In 1940, the British Simplified Spelling Society mounted a campaign for New Spelling which lobbied hard for government approval. Perhaps the most famous champion of simplified spelling was George Bernard Shaw, who bequeathed part of his large fortune to the cause of a more regular English spelling. But at the time of writing, new generations of schoolchildren are still grappling with a spelling system that dayes back to William Caxton.

            So you see, Peter, that despite the wishes of you and George Bernard Shaw, the rules of spelling haven’t been changed quite yet. I’m sure you’ll let us know when that DOES happen. It hasn’t yet.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Duly noted. Appropriately filed.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            If letter a is pronounced b, then a should always be pronounced b and vice versa. If not, then there is a mistake. Get THAT through your thick skull?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            The root issue here is that your failure to master the idiosyncrasies of a language you admit you were not born to has resulted in a deep frustration that insists that YOU must be right and that the English Language should change in consequence.

            Have fun storming the castle.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Wll, if you say so, you must be right! :) I am just an immigrant and I should shut up and learn from my master who is benevolent … always not!

          • Brucehenry

            And do you get the difference between “should” and “is”?

            See, one of those words denote subjectivity, the other objectivity. Opinion vs fact, as it were.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Of course, not. I am an idiot! Thanks for enlightening me, or should I write enlitening? Or is?

          • Brucehenry

            You should look it up in the dictionary, then you’ll know how to spell it correctly.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            But, what letter should I look up to know how to spell “phonetic”? F or ph? O or U? C? or K?

          • Brucehenry

            Try ‘em all. Process of elimination. Should keep you busy for a while.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            That’s efficient! And you wonder why you are trillions in the hole? Where is your enlightened Bush nowadays, anyway? “Fool me once, shame on you; Fool me twice, shame on me!”

          • Brucehenry

            Aaaand again, my argument with you has nothing to do with whether or not the rules SHOULD be changed. As I have said, it is that the rules HAVE NOT been changed, at least not yet, so the words in the dictionary ARE NOT misspelled.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            They should though! That’s my point! THey are misspelled!

          • Brucehenry

            Oh my God what a buffoon.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            What a sheep shot!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            You should just learn to deal with the idiosyncrasies of the language that continues to frustrate you so.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Me? They don’t frustrate me! They frustrate kids! If the “oo” phoneme can be written 5 different ways and the “ee” phoneme, 6 different ways,… apparently, in total, 200 + ways to represent some phonemes, it is logical that this would impact decoding. How the hell are kids able to decode words if some letter has several spellong representations?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            And here we have one of the strengths of the English Language:

            Denial: It’s not just a river in Egypt.

            For the non-Native speakers, that should parse as:

            De [The] Nile: It’s not just a river in Egypt.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            If we were feeling kind, we’d suggest you quit while you’re behind. Instead, please do carry on. It’s a refreshing change of pace.

          • J.L. Parker

            hi. pardon me, i just stumbled in, but this is the most exciting comment thread i think i’ve ever encountered. here you are, all of you, debating the legitimacy of written english with all the conviction internet access can inspire! that seemed horribly sarcastic, i’m afraid, but i did mean it most sincerely. this is wonderful! i have a question for the instigator of this…discussion. mr. mare, i have skimmed the posts on your website (admittedly quite quickly), but it isn’t immediately clear to me what, exactly, you believe to be the benefit of changing the way words are spelled in english. (i wish i could use more elegant syntax, but due to the confusion surrounding your claim, i’m trying to use a phrase that is suitably ambiguous. ought we to change the rules of spelling, the spelling itself? one is perplexed.) do please reply and explain to me what it is you want to accomplish with this orthographical overhaul.

          • jim_m

            My understanding from what Pete posted was that his claim was that there are people who have difficulty in learning how to spell and that this prevents them from ever learning English correctly.

            Further, he claims that English spelling is so difficult to learn that it takes years and years of effort and that considerable expense could be saved by converting to his system which would be so easy that children would master the written language in a fraction of the time.

            Neither proposition is really supported by any data, which is not necessarily his fault since where are you going to be able to do any real comparative study? But worse than that he ignores the costs associated with his proposal, both financial and cultural.

            His ideas are Utopian and as such are completely unworkable. There are abundant examples of people trying to impose such Utopian solutions on societies. They all end up with a lot of dead bodies, even the ones like this which are about cultural issues and not necessarily political. As I point out the only way to get people to adopt such a system is to force it upon people.

            Perhaps most frighteningly, he possesses a rock solid belief that he is doing everyone a favor. In that respect there is nothing that anyone can tell him that will dissuade him from his path and there is no cost to others that he will ever account as being significant enough to change his direction.

          • Brett Buck

            Given that there are at least 3 misspellings and grammatical errors *in your own post*, I suggest you are living in a glass house.

            So you don’t edit them:
            “does nto make” – does not make

            “a couple oval tires” – a couple of oval tires

            “the right spelling of a word is it phonetic” – is its phonetic

            I leave the rampant unnecessary use of exclamation marks to speak for itself.

            Even the resident liberals can see what is wrong with this theory, and they are masters of misreading and torturing the language to their own needs.

            I admire your passion but, in all seriousness, you need to address your emotional issues.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Interesting! Funny that you focus on 3 issues and neglect to mention the rest of the post (which has no issues)! Why the lopsided analysis? You could have mentioned the x number of words that has no issues! 99% right is not so bad, is it?

            However, let’s look at those alleged 3 errors, shall we!

            1st, nto : Is that a spelling error or a typo? That’s a typo. It also indicates that I don’t use a spellchecker! How many do, pretending that they can spell? :)

            2nd, a couple oval tires VS a couple of oval tires: Of course, the 2nd is more common and right, but had I not forgotten the , between the 2 adjectives, the first one would be correct. This is a case of forgetting a comma. If you look at all of my posts, do I do that often or at all? NO! So, let’s call that a case of human error and bad typing. I use 6 fingers. I am not a great typist!

            3rd, it phonetic: Again, you would be hardpressed to find many instances where I use it for its in all of my posts. This is not a it’s VS its issue, which is a grammatical issue. I would suggest that this is again a typo!

            So, you found three typos (which you describe as spelling and grammatical errors), all this in the hope to discredit my thesis! How lame do you have to go to discredit people? I know it is common in your country (let’s assume you are for the US*) to do this with the sexual exploits of politicians, where you somehow link sex with the ability to govern, but the rest of the world is not that stupid! This is a very weak link! In fact, there is no link at all here.

            However, I do like to use “!” for style and effect. It is true that I seem to be ! happy. Not sure why? Mea culpa! I will try to refrain from doing so. I will not criticize your inability to make paragraphs, though! :)

            Now, considering the sp. and gram. errors were not and the use of the exclamation mark is hardly a major issue, can you please stick to analyzing the content instead of concentrating on fluff or tertiary issues?

            Now, let me analyze your content! Fair? You were not able to recognize that these errors were typos. You do know that this was an easy analysis which really does speak about your ability to analyze! Maybe I cannot spell or use grammar (or type, as it turns out), but you cannot analyze –at least, not well!

            However, there is further proof of this. You seem to connect making spelling/gram. errors and/or the proposal of a reform with a sign that I have emotional issues! Sorry, but I cannot connect the two or three! This is again a sign that you are not intellectually capable of analyzing. Furthermore, there is nothing in your reply that addresses the thesis of my posts, AKA the reform!

            In other words, your attempt at doing a character assassination has failed miserably, exposing your abilities to analyze matters as weak.

            Fair?

            * Not a great assumption, since I have nothing to go by, but I love kicking the the US system whenever I can. Oh! Jim andf others, BTW, I do that for all countries, including Canada and Belgium! I am not a patriot, radical sheep! :)

          • Brucehenry

            Jim is correct. You asserted that words are “misspelled” but what you demonstrate is that you think the system is flawed. And that’s ALL you demonstrate.

            BTW assertions are not “backed up” by a link to a website full of your own crackpot opinions.

          • jim_m

            Yep. His argument boils down to, “because I said so”.

          • Brucehenry

            English is indeed quite an idiosyncratic language. Doesn’t mean words are “misspelled” in the dictionary.

            Maybe we should all be speaking Esperanto, Pete?

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Nope! My arguments boils down to, “because many experts said so”! Big difference!

          • Brucehenry

            List the “many experts” who have stated flat-out, as you have, that 60% of the words in the dictionary are misspelled.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Masha Bell has used list of common words and 60% of them don’t add up! WHY is it so hard for you to admit the obvious? Jeesh! Look up the phonetic representation of most words! It is wrong! One does not need an expert to figure that one out!

            I am out of here! This ego-based conversation is not going anywhere.

            You want to prove to yourself (I guess) that you are more intelligent and you are right.

            The emperor has no clothes!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Use whatever orthography you choose.

            I’ll be selling popcorn.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Oh! Orthography! WOW! You know another word for spelling system! Well! You must be so smart! :)

            The Brits stole many things from people around the world and, I guess, they kept French words (that they did not spell properly)! Their language is not English per se. In truth, it is a bastard language.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            As previously noted, English is indeed the bastard offspring of Frankish knights and Saxon barmaids, and has been mugging other languages for vocabulary since birth.

            Your test tube language is no more likely to prevail in the marketplace of ideas than earlier efforts have.

            You remain free to pursue your monomania.

            We remain free to laugh at you.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            The history of “experts” being demonstrated to be in error (in the fullness of time) is a long and storied one.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            BTW, assertions are backed up if the link to the website (that can be accessed by clicking on my username) contains a large number of assertions and data that are all referenced and which forms a coherent point of view.

          • jim_m

            which forms a coherent point of view

            Also known as opinion.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            One should also note that in English there a no true synonyms, and that coherent and apt most certainly are not.

          • Brucehenry

            Aaaaand again, your “coherent point of view” seems to be that English is structurally flawed and in need of reform by some governing body, like the French Academy or whatnot.

            That may be so (although I would differ) but the assertion you made on this thread, that a large percentage of the words “in the dictionary” are misspelled, is NOT backed up by your link, at least not as far as I waded through it.

          • jim_m

            Indeed. The words in the dictionary are not misspelled by Pete’s own admission. Because he admits that in current usage they are spelled in a fashion that he would alter.

            The truth is that if the words were spelled the way he wants them to be they really would be misspelled.

          • Brucehenry

            The way his site jumps from subject to subject and changes fonts and typesets reminds me of something our esteemed “moderator” might post, only more argle-bargle-y.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I guess when one loses an argument, one can always focus on colours, typsets, and font! :)

          • Brucehenry

            Yeah, I’M losing the argument. LOL.

          • jim_m

            Yes, you certainly did on your web site.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            That’s your opinion which is totally irrelevant to the debate. Again, not facts! No data!

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Of course, they are misspelled according to strict phonetic rules!

            If you think I should spell “English” with an “e”, but it sounds like a short “i” as in “ink” (or “glish” for that matter), then I guess you can impose that to the world! Oh! Wait! That’s how the word given to this perfectly ill-designed language is spelled or –rather– misspelled! Imagine! Even the name of the language is misspelled!

            And that’s Peter, not Pete! Was that a typo or a spelling error? Come on! Get it right! :)

          • Brucehenry

            Languages aren’t “designed,” Peter, either for ill or good. They evolve. Except made-up languages like Esperanto, which was a failure from the gate and will never ever catch on.

            I’ve heard the arguments for an Academy to “regulate” and “reform” English. Some have more merit than others, but languages which USED to be used as a lingua franca, such as French, and which adopted an Academy, are no longer used as a lingua franca, are they, now? And even the ones who have a governing body still are stuck with various quirks.

            English, for all its idiosyncracies, is extremely versatile, which is one reason why it has become the lingua franca even in countries that were not conquered by the British Empire.

            Once more, finally, your assertion that these words are “misspelled” because they aren’t spelled phonetically is YOUR OWN OPINION. There is a difference in saying “that word is not spelled phonetically” and in saying “that word is misspelled.”

            Hey, good luck with your campaign to regulate and reform English spelling and grammar rules. You’ll need lots of it with “arguments” as meritorious as the one you’ve advanced here.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            There have been several “designed” languages (Esperanto anyone?). None have prospered.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes, as I mention above.

          • jim_m

            Yes, but English does not follow strict phonetic rules to determine correct spelling so your point is non-valid.

            Furthermore, pronunciation is malleable and changes over time or with regional accents and/or dialect. So what you are really advocating is spelling the language according to how it is pronounced the way YOU pronounce it. Please. You simply aren’t that important.

          • Brucehenry

            Damn good point. The word “great” for instance, which we pronounce as “grate” was for centuries pronounced as “greet.”

            The French Academy, whose efforts have produced a stultified and non-versatile French language, would be proud of old Peter, here.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            If 60% of 7000 common words are misspelled, it is not hard to infer and extrapolate that more complex words are –at least– misspelled at the same rate! Actually, it is probably much worse, considering that many of those words are made up of many syllables (increasing the statistical probability that they are misspelled) AND that many of these words have unstressed syllables, which are usually pronounced as a schwa phoneme or sound, but often represented with a different letter. The schwa phoneme should be represented with a “u” as in “but”,… because it is pronounced that way. Sadly, it is not written with a “u”!

          • Brucehenry

            The key word here is your first: “If.”

            “If” you were correct that 60% of simple English words were misspelled, you might have a point. But you aren’t and you don’t.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            You should take up Korean/Hangul.

          • jim_m

            So here’s the question:

            Would you consider it wrong to correct their spelling so that it should conform to current usage or would you say that correcting their spelling is wrong even if it materially reduces their ability to get and keep a decent job?

            Which is more important: The ideological stand on spelling? or educating people to function well in adult society?

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            So, here ‘s the answer:

            A stand against anything that is wrong (and we can establish it is wrong because the preponderance of the evidence shows that this is so) is not well accepted from the people who stand to lose if a change occurs! YOU, I suppose! White people with slaves did not like the end to slavery one bit! I guess you would have continued to brainwash kids to mistreat black Americans because that would have allowed them to function in the society of that time! Right? Wrong!

            Under the current system, in the short-term, it would be idiotic to force people to learn something that would be useless! However, I have never stated that we should. You are alluding that I did! I did not!

            However, I have stated in the website that my plan is for a long-term plan! I figure 20 years. How could have missed that? After all, it is alluded to in the explanation under the title of the website! The idea is developped in detail in the website.

          • Brucehenry

            Well, good luck with your campaign, Brainiac!

            (BTW, isn’t there some law similar to Godwin’s to cut down on all these slavery analogies?)

          • jim_m

            No. Analogies to slavery have to be allowed in order to enable the left to properly express their self loathing.

          • Brucehenry

            See, I knew we wouldn’t get through a thread without an …ahem….incident… of “the left” or “fascism” or whatever.

          • jim_m

            I thought the newspeak reference was accurate.

          • Brucehenry

            Yes, it was, I reluctantly admit.

          • Brucehenry

            In the 80s, I believe, BBC and then PBS aired a series called “The Story of English,” and published a companion book. You should read it. It has a chapter dealing with why English-speakers never adopted an Academy for the language as the French did.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            ALL English-speakers did not want an academy? All? There was a vote? How so? Well! Tell me why!

          • Brucehenry

            I can’t remember all the verbiage, but the upshot was that it was a good thing, as it would have robbed the language of nuance and versatility, as Jim notes above, and as the adoption of the French Academy robbed the French language of the same.

            But I still have a copy of that book, and I think I’ll re-read it, so thanks for that! It’s available on Amazon, too, I think.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Nuance and versatility? How so?

            The Academy robbed the French language in nuance and versatility. Really? Can you give me an example?

          • Brucehenry

            These are matters of opinion, of course, and subjective judgement. But it stands to reason that English, with it’s vastly greater NUMBER of words, would be more versatile and nuanced than French.

          • jim_m

            Not to mention that English incorporates French and German words as well as words form many other languages whose rules for pronunciation vary. By instituting some ossified academy to determine what words may be properly used you restrict the migration of these word into the English lexicon. That is the ultimate result of the French Academy and the primary reason why people no longer use French as a common language of science, education, politics etc.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            The byproduct of Frankish men at arms trying to get dates with Anglo-Saxon barmaids, English has been pursuing other languages ever since, mugging them for vocabulary.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ah! No example! Empty argument, not backed up with anything! And you mock me for bakcing it up with tons of quotes and research and data on my blog! The nerves! Cognitive dissonance at its best!

            Words can have multiple meanings! One can combine words and make idioms! One cannot just judge a language by the number of words it has! It might be more efficient (in terms of numbers of words that one can use to express something though)! However, if no one can spell them and don’t use them, it does not matter, does it!

            “A few years ago, a national, literacy-language study in Australia
            revealed that during an entire lifetime, the average adult used around
            15,000 different words when speaking. However, the same study
            surprisingly found that when it came to writing, the number dropped
            significantly to around 5,000. (Keith Wright)”

          • jim_m

            It is not uncommon for writing style to differ from the spoken word. Most writing is done not to emulate speech but to clearly communicate specific ideas. I worked for years in a laboratory where we had to create SOP’s that communicated clearly and concisely. There was no room for nuance in those documents. there could be no uncertainty as to what was required. Writing often serves a different purpose that speaking.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Okay! You are right and I am wrong! Enjoy your status quo life!

          • jim_m

            No. My life will be ever changing and growing thanks to a language that changes and adopts new words at a rate far higher than the regulated languages you idolize.

          • Brucehenry

            Yeah, I’m sorry I can’t furnish an example. I didn’t wake up this morning with the knowledge that a loony was going to show up on my favorite website and tell me the dictionary was misspelled, lol.

            So I wasn’t prepared. I’m still kinda flabbergasted that you keep insisting on the point.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You cannot provide one because you don’t speak even French!

            Labelling people who disagree with you with pejorative words is a sign of immaturity, no matter what you say.

            Bye!

          • Brucehenry

            But using exclamation points to punctuate every sentence is a sign of deep maturity and thoughtfulness.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Oh! Now, we are going into punctuation! WOW! How insighteful this conversation has become! You must be superior because you don’t! :)

          • Brucehenry

            Ooooh oooh spelling error! “Insighteful”??!

            I punctuated with exclamation points! See how forcefully I make my point! This is how I DO now!

          • Jwb10001

            Bruce you can not correct this guys spelling because he makes it up as he goes along it’s Peter spelling. I’m going after the same standard JWB spelling, it’s what ever I happen to type that gets past the spell checker. I’m even considering adding butthurt as one word (just for you.)

          • Brucehenry

            I’ll agree to that. Conceded.

          • jim_m

            I still have not received an explanation as to why it is that if your new spelling is so much better that you are not using it in order to promote the convention.

          • jim_m

            Yes the Academy has robbed French of its versatility. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-530403/France-protects-dreaded-English-language-banning-fast-food-podcasting.html

            http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268722/Zut-alors-The-French-banned-world-hashtag–email-blog-English-intrusions-beloved-language.html

            http://www.thelocal.fr/20130524/top-ten-english-terms-sparking-a-french-resistance

            What makes English work is that we adopt the foreign words that we do not have a term for. So we get lovely words like Schadenfreude, gestalt, mittelschmerz, and terms like bete noire, esprit de corps, etc.

            By contrast, French has become obsolete as it fails to keep up with the pace of innovation and change and its users lack the ability to communicate effectively.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            The truth though is closer to this.

            AHAHAHA! YOU adopt French words! AHAHAHA! Ya! 1 out 1 million compare to English! Come on! You cannot be serious! Of course, you don’t speak French! I do! Yap! ANd I know that if English were to be freely adopted, it would ravage the French language so that it would not be recognizable in a century! Of course, you would not care! How pleasant will it be to go to Paris and be served in English? Dream on!

            The truth is that US firm have more might than the French in marketing their products worldwide. 100,000 VS 300,000+ (and many countries to diffuse it)! No contest! It also helps sell the myth that USA is a great nation, by way of movies, songs,…

            The French, like people around the world, like to use words (and other means) to showcase their traits. Using an English word might indicate that you are hip, educated, smart, that you speak English fluently,… It is common for Anglos to use French words to make them look or sound smarter,… too! But, how many of you use “couriel”, huh? NONE of you! WHY? Read this message again until you get it!

            However, this debate has shifted. The Academies’ beef is mostly semantic(s). My gripe with English is its spelling.

            I realize that you are so afraid that the language will disappear from the face of the earth if “too” becomes “to” (big roll of the eyes) (or vice versa), that it will be dumbed down! IT IS DUMB! Its spelling system is! Get that through your thick skull. To spell to or too will not make it dumb! It is just an easy way for you to think that you are smarter because you can use the right one!

            Anyway, spelling is not really the big issue, but decoding is, learning to read! That is the issue! But, you like to pay more taxes and have kids be stressed out! The truth is that the idiots who can memorize this silly spelling mess are supposed to be smart! What?

            Much ado about parrots! Dodo birds! Sheep! And dinosaurs!

          • jim_m

            So you claim that you want an English that is easier for people to understand and yet you are against such movement in other languages.

            For what would be the downside of a French language that converged with English usage? It would remove an example of another language that you could idolize and not facilitate your loathing of your own culture. Your whole act is nothing but a pose to look sophisticated by opposing your own culture. You have little in the way of cogent argument to support your claims but you have a lot of bile against your own culture.

            Go hate yourself somewhere else.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Yes, English … easier to decode/read/spell!

            Other languages? Not sure where you read that I am against French or other languages made easier. Please, quote me. French –to take just one– does not have a huge problem with spelling. It could do with some tweaks and ditto for decoding. The major issue with French is its grammar, irregular gender, though, and I am for improving that as well!

            The downside of English entering French? French being English! At least the French pronounce English words like they are French. Good think that most English words imported in French are monosyllabic because they are easy to spell and decode. Some of them are actually French words like “obsolete”, but that were archaic.

            Jim, stop judging people and making yourself look superior by expressing your opinion and making it sound as if it is the truth! I’ve got a degree and close to a master. My profs. indicated to me time and time again that I am not stupid. Who do you think I am going to believe? jim_m? Come on! Give your head a shake!

            Maybe you might want to consider learning from others, from time to time!

          • jim_m

            Of course you are going to believe the people who are stroking your ego. But then the whole problem with academia is that you are so interested in what you and your colleagues think and you denigrate the opinions of anyone else. The reality is that you know a great deal in a very narrow focus but have little ability to apply your knowledge outside of that area and you believe that anyone who actually lives in that environment (in this case English speakers) cannot possibly know as well as you do what is best for them.

            Your conceit is epic. You actually think that you know better than hundreds of millions of people who speak the English language. You cannot possibly perceive what a complete loser you look like to everyone else.

            And yes, I have had 5 years of French but I do not consider myself a speaker anymore. I am still familiar with the language and its construction. I think using it or any of the Latin languages as an exemplar is a mistake.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            @jim_m723:disqus Jim, I teach English-speaking kids and have done so for 15 years! I was also a learning disabilities teachers! Trust me! I have more than books to back up my claim! I have seen kids who are defeated and struggling to learn an illogical, irregular, and unreliable system! I have seen kids who were getting F’s because they did not want to write and could not read to getting A’s because they could listen to the text and could type or have their work dictated and then using a spell-checker!! I have years of experience behind my empty claims. I have seen hundreds of kids learning (and teachers teaching) struggling with this ill-fixed spelling system. You do not have the foggiest idea what it is like to learn a language like English as a second-language. My French helped me tremendously since 40% of words are from French. Pronunciation was tougher, but I could hear it around me. I was able to memorize the irregularities. Even after 35 years, I do encounter a word or two from time to time where I cannot place the right stress or where I pronounce words more phonetically that it shows. I am forever a foreigner because of it because there are no clues most of the times on how to say the vowel, except using the schwa as a default. It took me 30 years to figure out that “where” and “were” were not pronounced the same way (even though they should)!

            I also have a degree in linguistics and French literature. I have done years of research on the topic. Trust me. The barrier to entry to decoding and reading in English is an economic and social disaster for Englihs-speakers, but for the rest of the world. It could be the best of languages! I guess you do not want that! You do not want to be the best?

            But, read my blog. I know I am an idiot if I don’t suscribe to what you are saying.

          • jim_m

            So your argument is that we need to dumb English down so it is easier for children with learning disabilities to learn it?

            But I will agree with you on this: I have years of experience behind my empty claims. I believe that you very well could have many years behind your empty claims. Still, opinion does not equal data. And you have not established any economic cost and you have completely ignored the cost of switching which would far out weigh any gains in the near term.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Those aren’t bugs, they’re features, allowing the native speakers of English to identify those not so blessed.

          • jim_m

            Another thing that you miss is that the English language is more than just a dictionary or a handbook of style. It is a cultural touchstone that connects people from region to region and generation to generation.

            Do you honestly think that you can just change the entire written language and disconnect the older generations from the younger? Do you really think that people will accept having a deep connection to their children and grand children severed in the name of your idiotic ideas of what is right and good?

            Language is where we share our ideas, experiences and emotions. Yes it may not be perfect but it is OURS. How dare you come in with your academic conceit that you know better than hundreds of millions of people and demand that they destroy this connection that they share from generation to generation. Who the hell do you think you are that you know better how to hand down traditions and pass along culture?

            There are those who have come before you with similar ideas. I suggest reading a biography on Enver Hoxha, who felt that he had to reinvent the history of technology for Albania. You would have been right at home in the Maoist cultural revolution.

          • jim_m

            And you are one to complain that someone is advancing opinion as truth . This whole thread started when you made the absurd claim that your opinion was “data”.

            And heavans! You are close to your Masters!!! I stand in awe of someone who has completed almost half as much education as the average member of my family (including my nieces, nephews and my own children). Degrees don’t mean that you aren’t stupid. They just mean that you learned something and could pass a test. Applying learning in a meaningful way is far trickier and degrees do not indicate that ability.

            The Greeks used to differentiate between Sophia and Phronesis. You are a clear example of someone who may possess the former but completely lack the latter.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            I suspect that Jim learns from others all the time. This too has been a learning experience, but not the kind most who set out to teach would record for posterity.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Of course, not!

          • jim_m

            Pete apparently can only learn from those who have degrees he respects and who hold academic positions that declare that their opinions are worthy of acceptance. The rest of us, we must understand, are mere slovenly peasants to whom he occasionally deigns to reveal his august wisdom.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I am all ears, but I have yet to read something of value. However, I must thank you for learning such words as “idiots”,… Is it spelledl with an “o” or with an “u”?

          • jim_m

            Is it speledl with an “o” or with an “u”?

            I would STFU about anyone else’s spelling. Just saying.

            Bruce and I have given you numerable arguments against your lies and conceit. You came here saying that you had data when you only had opinion. You then have made claims on how the whole world would be better off and yet you neglect to provide any data that suggests anything of the sort but we can draw similarities to atrocities done for the very same purpose that you are claiming we should follow your lead.

            What makes you dangerous is that you would destroy centuries of culture in the name of what you thought was the betterment of others. You have no fear of ruining lives because you are so certain that you are helping people by doing so.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            But, my website is full of data! Why are you ignoring that part! Lying by omission is still lying, you know! Do I have to retrieve every single bit of data and research or is reading more than a few sentences too hard for you?

            Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.

          • jim_m

            Your claim was that 60% of the dictionary words were misspelled. Your website contains no such data. But it contains loads of your opinion.

            Go sober up before continuing to comment. You are just making a fool of yourself now.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            LIAR!

          • jim_m

            I think that everyone who has commented on this thread would state that I am correct in my statement above. Bruce spent quite some time with you on that exact subject.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Monomaniac!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            I believe you’d spell it crétin.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Grow up, connard!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Ha ha!

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Still wainting to read something earth shattering from you guys!

            How is your great leader nowadays? Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.

          • jim_m

            Childish rantings now from the man who claims to be so educated. You’re getting a master’s degree? Not in anything useful obviously.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Obviously! If you say so! :)

          • jim_m

            Fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.

            Here’s a hint, When in an argument it is usually good form not to get so sloppy drunk that you lose the ability to spell and form coherent sentences.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            That G. W. Bush speaking. Your hero. No?

          • jim_m

            What does this have to do with politics? Like I said, go sober up.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You sound like a conservative person who does not like any change.

          • jim_m

            You sound like a man who cannot defend his ideas and therefore seeks to discredit his debate opponent on issues that are not germane to the discussion. You are weak.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You are wasting my time!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Just another lesson in the value of soi disant intelligentsia.

          • Brucehenry

            Oh my God.

            No there was no vote. But there’s no Academy, is there? Dolt.

            The French Academy was chartered by the King. The English monarchy never established one, despite many proposals for it by some of the leading lights of the day.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Very dysfunctional and immature your communication!

            I asked WHY was it not accepted? I did not ask WHO?

            Where is your example on how superior English is to French in terms of nuance and versatility?

          • jim_m

            As I remark elsewhere the establishment of an academy to oversee what words would be admitted to the language led tho the stagnation of the French language which at one time was the common language of science and politics. It is no longer because it could not adapt to new concepts and ideas. It could not adopt new words from other languages. It became a nearly dead language that changed only glacially and did not reflect the needs of the people.

            English did all those things and that is why, when you travel for a conference in medicine or physics or any other academic subject, the common language at nearly every international conference is English. Because it actually works despite your childish complaints.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I know “they” have filled your skull with ideas that English is superior … because, as you make the link, because many people use English. It does not follow.

            As I have stated, the Empire made sure one spoke it or no commerce, no food on the table,… I think the adoption of English as a lingua franca is more related to the number of colonies (slaves) you had! Of course, you had to sell your religion and your bible as well! I don’t think it was written in the local language at the time. I bet teachers made sure English was learned.

            Get of the idea that your language is superior. YOur spelling system SUCKS as much as the French grammatical system does!

            Why are some people so opposed to making things better? I guess you prefer horses as means of transportation and commerce?

          • jim_m

            Um. The fact that many people who do not speak English as a first language, use English for business and science DOES suggest that I am correct.

            It has nothing to do with how many third world colonies you had. I travel throughout the world, almost exclusively to places outside the British Empire. English is used because it communicates well. It adopts foreign words enabling foreign speakers to make themselves understood.

            Why English is used has nothing to do with spelling but forcing English into some hidebound rules system to please a bunch of utopian, OCD sufferers is not going to improve the language. It would destroy its utility.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ya, ya, believe that it is because it is superior! Ya! Ya! Whatever! It has nothing to do with the number of songs that kids hear? Nothing to do with the stupid Hollywood movies produced and sold around the word? It is a language that is easy to learn because of the many common monosyllabic words that one can use to express oneself easily: shut up, get off, … Get it?

            A baby could learn that!

            But, again, that is not the point. I am talkng about the spelling system which is recognized by experts as flawed. You are not an expert, so …! I am!

            You want to keep it full of flaws. Okay! Bye!

          • jim_m

            Hey, if you believed in your newspeak you would be using it because it is a better way to communicate. You don’t because you know it is not.

            Also…
            If you are an expert, I suggest that you have provided an excellent example of exactly what is wrong with our educational system today. It is filled with crackpots who cannot think clearly or rationally.

          • Brucehenry

            The spelling system may indeed “suck” but it IS the spelling system we use today. Therefore, the words in the dictionary are not “misspelled” as you so stubbornly and stupidly continue to insist is the case.

          • jim_m

            I’m stumped Paul. Why is it that since your spelling system is so superior for the purpose of communicating ideas, why do you not use it? Surely if it were that much better than our current practice people would be jumping on the bandwagon and naysayers like Bruce and I would be left in the minority.

            My guess is that you don’t because you would not be better understood and you know that to be the fact.

          • Brucehenry

            What Jim said, lol.

          • Retired military

            When you have Bruce and Jim on the same side against you, you are not only way out of left field you are not even in the stadium. Congrats on doing something I never thought I would see. Christmas is truly on its’ way.

            Just because you think the English language is wrong doesn’t mean that is wrong. You sound like Obama. I will it to be so it will be despite what reality says.

            Please take your crackpot opinions elsewhere. We have Chico here if we want to hear crackpot opinions.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ah! Because there are many people on my side argument, I am right! Smokers used to tell others that they were cool! Now, they are 7 feet under!

            How many times do you need to use the word “crackpot” to help you make your point? Pretty dismal that you have to!

            Ah! Retired military! I should have surmised that this is indicative of your mindset! You love rules, but not the English spelling rules! What?

            You are a sheep and a dodo bird!

            I hope the Chinese impose Chinese on you! That would be poetic justice!

          • jim_m

            How many times do you need to use the word “crackpot”

            Until it becomes clear to you exactly how you appear to the rest of the world.

          • jim_m

            Now, they are 7 feet under!

            The colloquialism is “six feet under”. Are you going to insist that we change those too to suit your OCD issues?

          • Retired military

            “How many times do you need to use the word “crackpot” to help you make your point?”

            Jim, Bruce, Others, help me out here. I think this is the first time that I have used that term. Can anyone think of another time that I have used it?

            I mean if I did use it before I apologize to that person because they are obviously not in Peter’s league.

            “You are a sheep and a dodo bird!”

            I have been called a lot of things in my time. Those 2 were never among them.

            “I hope the Chinese impose Chinese on you! That would be poetic justice!”
            I remember being told by a teacher once that one language (I think it was Chinese or maybe mandarian) is one of inflection or tone (for lack of better memory). You could say one thing with one tone and using the same words in a different tone and it would mean something else entirely. Maybe you should go onto one of their websites and preach about changing their dictionaries.

          • jim_m

            You are correct in your recollections. I think that Pete is getting upset that we simply do not accept his revealed wisdom.

          • Retired military

            I think you are the only time I have used the word crackpot. If I have used it before I sincerely apologize to that individual because they are nowhere in your league.
            Tell you what. While you are changing the dictionary around can you do something about the colors. I mean I don’t think red should be so umm red. Can you add some blue to it or something. Make it more soothing.

          • Brucehenry

            Now THAT’S funny! Talk about laughing out loud!

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            What? I am happy you did not call me “Vermin” or ” Rat” or … whatever word to cast me as a person whose thoughts are immediately void of any worth? :)

            The word “red” is well spelled … according to the rules! I am not sure what you are getting at?

          • Brucehenry

            Of course you’re not.

          • Retired military

            “I am not sure what you are getting at?”
            It isn’t the spelling that is bothering me. it is the color itself. I mean it is just sooo umm red. Can you change it for me please. I need something more soothing.
            And I wasn’t thinking of Vermin or rat. I don’t think I have ever called anyone those either. I was thinking that perhaps your local supermarket is short on aluminum foil though.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Same idea! You are trying hard tro frame me as an idiot, framing all that I say immediately as idiotic.

          • Brucehenry

            And succeeding, effortlessly.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You are wasting my time and yours.

          • Brucehenry

            LOL, What do you suppose you are doing?

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            GIve up!

          • jim_m

            That’s right Bruce. Now we see that when he is frustrated he resorts to ordering people about, attempting to silence them because people like you are too ignorant to be allowed to voice an opinion.

            Can I use the F word now????

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            What about your gun?

          • jim_m

            We are getting tremendous entertainment value at your expense.

            No one is laughing with you I assure you.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            How old are you?

          • jim_m

            What difference does it make? I am old enough to recognize that technology offers only part of the solution that you think it holds. I am old enough to recognize that older people do not utilized technology like the young do. I am young enough to work in the IT field and deal with translations and know that what you claim is pure fantasy and bullshit.

            And finally, I am old enough to recognize that people like you, who are determined to improve other people’s lives no matter what it costs those people, are willing to commit all kinds of evil in order to get their way. You have no conscience and will never credit what suffering you create in order to get what you want because you have the unshakable confidence that what you do is for their own good even when they never experience it.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Okay! It is the end of the world!

            Had you bothered reading my blog, you would know that not literate people will be forced or will have to learn the new code. Jeesh! I wish people would have more of an opemmind about things. Are all thinking short-term, navel-gazing-like term? Jeesh!

            Yes, Edison was evil! Yes, James Watt was evil! Einstein was! Newton! Galileo Galilei! Yes! All evil!

            Let’s go back to living in a cave!

            Continue to put your head in the sand!

          • jim_m

            None of them tried to force their ideas on the rest of the world. What is frightening is that you already have a plan for rolling out your ideological agenda against the will of others.

            And no I do not advocate living in a ave or anything of the sort. I advocate preservation of our culture and not destroying it at the adolescent whim of a lunatic like yourself.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ah! Preservation of errors! Amazing that you want to preserve this ill-designed, flawed, bastard spelling system! Amazing! I guess it has a charm for you! WHo cares about the millions of people who struggle to learn> Who cares about the time and the resources it takes? WHo cares about people going to jail and the people who will get killed by some kind of illiterate criminal whose only possible work is selling dogs at Wallmart or selling drugs? Amazing!

          • jim_m

            The errors are only perceived. You see errors where the rest of us see meaning and the ties to the other languages from which our words came from . You, with your tiny mind, are unable to see that the many word origins are reflected in those spellings.

            If you think that people go to jail because they cannot spell properly then you are more than just a fool. How you must hate people who think differently from you. How you look down on others who think differently from you. I’d pity you if you were less repugnant.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            While the etymology of words are interesting, again, you will be able to enjoy this for the rest of your life. So will I? So, you see changes that took place in the 1700′s and later as evil? Why is the current spelling code the right code? Because you have learned it? Maybe we should all go back to learning Shakespearian English, but you know that they misspelled words all the time at that time! Maybe they were members of El Qaida! :)

          • jim_m

            If you understand word origins you understand how to spell them. In your tiny mind you refuse to recognize these facts. You seek to create a sterile language.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ya, but that does not help the Grade 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 kid, does it?

            So, we should keep all of those errors and learn other languages to learn how to spell English? WOW! That’s really efficient! To be honest, even my “bilingual” students don’t make the connection! They might later, though and I do teach them to do it, but if the language was phonetic, none of this would be needed!

            Anyway, let’s agree to disagree.

          • jim_m

            I agree that you want to impose some idiotic solution to the written word in order to solve a problem that does not exist and you are willing to destroy hundreds of years of culture in order to get your way.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            If you cannot even recognize that there is a problem, end of discussion.

          • jim_m

            You see a problem that does not exist (at least not on the scale and in the severity that you claim it exists)and are willing to destroy culture and put people through no end of pain in order to fix this non existent problem.

            You have not a single care for what you may destroy and are fixated on the utopian society that you will create. Lenin was willing to slaughter millions to create his utopian society, I’ll bet that before it is over you would be willing to do the same.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Okay! Flock off then!

          • jim_m

            Not just stupid but malevolent as well. (and a crappy speller)

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You are wasting my time.

          • jim_m

            No one forces you to stay here, dumbass.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Right back at you!

          • jim_m

            I’ve been here since Wizbang started around 2001.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Congrats!

          • jim_m

            Funny that you complain that people are framing you as an idiot by using your own words against you, yet you struggle to demean others by questioning their IQ or their age.

            I will admit that I originally cast your ideas as stupid, but now I see that they are more than that. They are repugnant and evil.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I am the devil!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            No, you’re not that relevant.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            That’s smart?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            No, it’s wise.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Your opinion!

          • jim_m

            You obviously have chosen to disregard my post on this thread about cultural issues and traditions. You seem quite upset that these benighted fools here refuse your great wisdom and cling ignorantly to their broken language.

            I ask you then: Have you ever read the Yale Shakespeare? Having done so one becomes very aware of how much content is lost from not understanding the original Elizabethan English well.

            What you are suggesting, the complete alteration of the written language, is comparable to the change from Shakespearean English to today’s. You would render all writings from parents to their grandchildren incomprehensible. You would sever the transmission of traditions and family history in some cases irrevocably.

            What you seek is a destruction of culture in order to rebuild that culture in your own image. You seek something which is at its core rather evil.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            That’s why we have programs that can seemlessly translate these. You are looking for a problem, not a solution.

            English spelling is a mess and it is creating problems. You are choosing to ignore those. If you learned English, then others can.

            If people want to learn about old English, what would stop them?

            I have little respect for people who cannot improve things. People who are status quo seekers creep me out. Maybe we should go back to fetching water at the river.

            You are refusing to go to the website and, instead, are asking questions that are answered there. Yes, change is risky, but the status quo is too. You know there are issues. You are choosing to blame people for the spelling problem, framing them as dumb or lazy, when it is clear that it is not them, but it is the spelling system that is dumb and ill-designed.

            Vast resources are used in school to mitigate the issue, at great costs. You pay for it. I apy for it. Everyone does. But who cares?

            You are wasting my time.

          • jim_m

            I went to your website and saw a lot of academic BS that was created by someone entirely isolated from real society and without any concern for it. I saw someone who so thoroughly believes in the good of his ideas that he is willing to impose them on hundreds of millions no matter what the cost is to them and I saw someone who would discount the suffering of other people as insignificant compared to the good he was bestowing upon them.

            You claim there are “programs that can seemlessly (sic) translate” documents. Really? So you can seamlessly translate a paper document? Someone’s hand written diary? The hand written notes from genealogical research or the story of their youth?

            You have not the least bit of understanding of the destruction of culture that you call for and even worse you think that this destruction is for the good of the people that you would inflict it upon.

            I was right when I said that in your core you are evil.

            [edit] Plus I made a point about translating Shakespeare and how much meaning was lost. You are blithely claiming that we can translate everything we have today and that we won’t lose anything. That isn’t even a good lie. All translations lose some meaning and some of the nuance of what the author intended. What you are demanding is nothing short of the wholesale destruction of hundreds of years of the culture of the English speaking world.

            And you think you are doing us a favor? Someone should lock you away. You’re dangerous.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ya! Ya! BS! Whatever! Cannot think outside of the box, can you? It is the end of civilization, isn’t it? You must be an old man! Someone can scribe and input the stuff in a computer and then it can be translated. In any case,

          • jim_m

            More ad hominem attacks because you have nothing to defend your position with.

            Your solution is not seamless (not even seemless as you would say), nor does it address the loss of meaning inherent in any translation process. Once more you simply dismiss the downside of your utopian plans for everyone else. You know so much better than the rest of us what is good for us.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            And, you don’t? Annoying isn’t it?

          • jim_m

            I do. The difference is that I don’t feel some duty to force you to comply with my ideas of what is right for you.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Of course, you do! I must spell things the way you like! Worse, you are forcing me to spell wrongly, unphonetically. You are forcing millions to make spelling errors!

          • jim_m

            LOL. Yes, I make fun of you because you presented yourself as the spelling police.

            I have chided you for being a hypocrite and not spelling in the manner you claim is far superior .And I do not force anyone to learn English. Millions do so voluntarily and do so successfully because they are not filled with self loathing and hatred for their native culture as you are.

            But then this isn’t really your native culture because you are “Belgo-Canadian” so you really don’t give a rip about the culture you may be destroying. That is all upside to you.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I hold the same thoughts about French. You are trying hard to frame me as some kind of bitter evil.

            You are going to judge people for the odd typo or spelling error!

            Grow up!

          • jim_m

            I don;t have to try hard, You frame yourself as some righteous man coming to save the world by forcing people to abandon their archaic language structures for your enlightened ones. How saintly of you.

            How many have imposed themselves upon the world with similar promises? And every one of them went down the same road of oppression. What you want isn’t to free people but to enslave them, bending them to your will. Control how people can write and you control how they think and how they can communicate those thoughts.

            What you fail to understand is that what has made English so successful as a language is that it has been a collective effort of the masses, continually innovating and evolving, changing to meet the needs of society. What you advocate is a language controlled by some governmental or quasi governmental authority which just like in 1984 will ultimately control what can be expressed and communicated.

            What you fail to recognize is that the world has seen your type many times before and rejected you over and over again.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Yes, Newton, Einstein, Edison, Franklin,… These were evil people who changed the world for the worse!

            Evolving in many ways, but not its spelling!

            Yes, Galileo and Copernicus (and many others who happened to be right it was later founf out) were seen as evil.

          • jim_m

            If people wanted or needed the spelling to change they would have done so without your help. The reason you don’t change spelling is that the written word records ideas and history to be passed down through the ages. You don’t just change that on some adolescent whim like you are proposing.

            As I said before none of those you listed above tried to force their ideas on others like you are. You would force your ideas on millions to suit your ego. No one wants your help. Your own megalomania is what drives you and nothing about helping others is even the least bit involved.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Adolescent? I am a teacher. Did you miss that part?

            Of course, if I am a teacher, with a degree in linguistics and French and experience, now, you have to take me more seriously. Right? So, you want to portray me as some kind of young, no-nothing so you don’t have to take my ideas seriously.

            Can we go to the third stage yet?

            Anyway, “All truth passes through three stages. First,
            it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.” Arthur Schopenhauer

          • jim_m

            Yes adolescent. Your being a teacher has nothing to do with the quality of your ideas. Your degrees mean little about the quality of your thinking. There are plenty of PhD’s in my family and trust me, having that paper doesn’t mean you can’t be a complete moron.

            I do not take your ideas seriously because your ideas are deeply unserious,

            And as for the Schopenhauer quote, I would counter that societies went through those very stages of acceptance with the communists and the nazis. It didn’t make what they taught true then and it doesn’t now.

            But I would say that you quote does fully convince me of your self righteousness and disregard for the concerns, feelings and lives of others. I truly believe that there is no cost to others that you would ever consider relevant and no cost that would ever sway you from your course.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            It is tiring to read someone who refuses to read or refer to the first paragraphs of my website where i explain myself! It is obvious that you mind is set! Bye!

          • jim_m

            That’s OK we won’t miss you.

            One parting thought regarding change. The reality is that you can only achieve 100% adoption through force. So the acceptance part of your Schopenhauer quote comes only after you have purged society of those who object. The communists did that with the gulag and forced famines to exterminate their opponents. I have little doubt that you would see similar methods as reasonable to eliminate dissent from your ideas.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Had you read my website, you would have learned (and I’ve stated this already) that literate people won’t have to adopt this. So, you see, I am not the evil dictator that you cast me to be! You won’t be able to repudiate me that easily! No revolution! No polgrom! No Killing fields! Sorry!

            While the status quo sounds good on paper, there are casualties, but you are choosing to minimize those, OF COURSE! Typical!

            You don’t want to give an idea a chance!

            Fine!

            Die and let other people create a better world!

          • jim_m

            You will find that if there isn’t any requirement to convert that people will not convert. Someone was saying that this was an adolescent fantasy. Who was that? Oh yeah, me.

            You have never lived outside of academia, never tried to effect a change in a culture. You live in a world where everyone thinks your ideas are brilliant and only the grossly ignorant would ever disagree.

            In order to make the change happen at some point you will have to force people to adapt. Your saying so does not make that fact go away. Perhaps if you had some experience with the real world and dealing with people your ideas might gain some semblance of rationality. Until then the chances are slim to none.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I have been a teacher for 25 years, for God’s sake. Can’t you read? I know people in the private world are so mcuh smarter and better. Who are you? What have you created? What have you done? I know! You are smarter!

            That’s why my plan will be phased in, but what do I know? You knwo it all! Of course, voters like you will make sure that any new ideas will never see the day of light because you know it all!

            Are you deaf or dumb? I have told you and written in my blog that only kids will be impacted. Read that again slowly and read it again! I know! I know! It is a xstupid idea that will never work! I can easily predict what yo0ur next reply is!

          • jim_m

            In any change process there are the early adopters, those who occupy the middle ground and the stragglers. The problem with your idea is that there is little incentive for anyone to become an early adopter.

            You would say that you will teach it in schools. Good luck getting that past the parents who will see it as I have here, which is as an attack on culture. It will never be taught in schools because society has not been given a reason to accept the change.

            You will be left with forcing the change upon society.

            If you think that resistance to the metric system is strong in the US (Hell, even in the UK they still use miles for their highway system) then you have not even begun to fathom how strong the reaction against this will be.

            You are so caught up in the righteousness of your ideas that you have failed to examine how people accept change and how change in society really works. Cute quotes from philosophers doesn’t mean that you understand change. In fact it is pretty damned good evidence that you understand change very poorly.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Bye!

          • jim_m

            Yeah you keep saying that but you never really go.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            bye :)

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            You conflate age with wisdom in an era when the majority of an American Generation has grown old without ever growing wise…

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ya, ya, you know it all and others are idiots, especially if they disagree with you!

            Grow up!

            The quote fits you to the “t”!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            I quote none other than myself, as the lack of a block quotation, italics, and quotation marks indicate.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Grow up!

          • jim_m

            Says, the idiot who proposes that we should have multiple written English languages because THAT will be so much easier.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Others can’t call you WASP, but you can call others idiots!

            I rest my case!

          • jim_m

            You furnish proof of the fact with every post you write.

            I do not furnish any such proof and I am not a WASP. But it is revealing that you should chose to stereotype me with a bigoted anti white label. It suggests that you have deeper issues with white western culture and with white men in general.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ya! Ya! Fix your country and your language first!

          • jim_m

            My language isn’t broken.

            But you are displaying a very interesting, if somewhat stereotypical, academic self loathing of western culture. You are also displaying a desire for totalitarian control over what you consider the uneducated masses that is really unattractive.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            So, anyone who disagrees with you and wants change is a despot! WHAT?

          • jim_m

            You have just said that you would have forced elocution lessons to standardize pronunciation and to eradicate regional accents.

            Now who id the despot, the one who wants to control and manipulate society to fit his insane Utopian vision, or the one who wants people to be free to choose to maintain their culture and language?

            Sorry but your Maoist fantasy is nothing more than that, fantasy.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Eradicate accents! AHAHAH! Oh! Noooooooo! They will be scared for life! Poor souls! :)

            Would you eradicate me?

          • jim_m

            I think exposing you as a dangerous fool would suffice.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            “Qui veut noyer son chien l’accuse de la rage” (Voltaire)

          • Brucehenry

            Can’t argue with logic like that, huh? I mean, the unanswerable “Whatever!” This guy is a genius.

          • Retired military

            “. You pay for it. I apy for it”
            In your universe is the word pay spelled different ways depending upon who is doing the paying. I cant tell if you simply misspelled the word or are using your own dictionary.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I said you are wasting my time. I don’t know your IQ, but it is a pretty easy inference. My errors are typing errors, obviously! That’s pretty pathetic if you are trying to discredit me for a typo or two! You are wasting my time.

          • Retired military

            Peter
            You claim I, Jim and Bruce are wasting your time. You have said good bye like 20 times in various replies. So why not just go back to your little blog and write in your own language and stay there. Stop telling people on this blog to go to yours. If we were interested or agreed with your philosophy then we would gladly go to your site.
            In addition, you claim I am pinging you for typos yet you are saying that you want to completely change the spelling of 60% of the English language. I was simply trying to clarify exactly what you were saying and whether you were using your own spelling or the English spelling,
            You make ref to my IQ, age etc. It is in the 130-135 range. I play chess at about the 1200 level. I have 15 years of schooling and hold a bachelors and 2 associates. I am 53 years old. Now that you know all that what difference does it make to your arguments.

            This thread has now got more comments than 95% of threads on this blog. You try to bash GW Bush as well. Why not go to sites like Democrat Underground or KOS. They have more posters there and maybe they will be more receptive to your brilliance.
            In the meantime, do go away mad. Just go away. But if can ever do something about that darn color red come back and let me know.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            And, you have not respected any of my goodbyes! Why can’t you look at your actions critically for a change because that’s pretty dysfunctional?

            We seem to match in a lot of ways, yet, you and your friends started to use words like nutbars and such first. When I retaliated, you took exception! Again why can’t you look at your actions critically for a change because that’s pretty dysfunctional? A little respect is needed!

            Your claim that if we change the spelling to be phonetically more regularly, using the existing spelling rules, would deprive people of a culture, of the history of words,… does not wash because my reform (and the reforms of others) would be phased in at school one grade at a time one country at a time (not because that would be best, but because it would get the show rolling). As I have stated before, it would not affect current literate people. While I am impressed that you think about Grade 1 kids who would not know that the word “comprehend” comes from the French “comprendre” because it would be written ” cumpreehand” now, it would not be so. It is clear that they could make the connection and even so the French spelling would not help them in spelling the word, it would not help them in reading either. There are not many totally bilingual kids. It would not help them one bit learning to decode. However, they would be able to decode the word using the spelling rules in no time and they would be able to spell the word in no time. The saving in time and in resources (teachers) would be immense. Finnish is a phonetic language and kids can learn to decode words after a few months of school the system is so simple, so phonetic. You do understand that struggling to learn to read for several years, trying to learn all of those exceptions, is costly and affecting national labour productivity, criminality, self esteem. You do care about those, don’t you?

          • jim_m

            You have not addressed how you will deal with accents and regional variations in pronunciation.

            I find it more than a little arrogant that someone who is not a native speaker of English (having been born and raised in Belgium) that you presume to tell native English speakers what is best for them.

            You are completely clueless. You have yet to provide a single piece of data on how any money will be saved by these changes. You say that children will spend less time having to learn spelling and reading but you do not make the claim that this will translate into fewer years of schooling or in shorter school years. So in reality there is no cost savings because school is more than just reading and writing.

            That is just one more reason why I tell you that your ideas are little more than adolescent fantasy. They are based on a complete lack of understanding on how the world works and how people live their lives.

            Oh, and the only way to have people “respect your goodbyes” is to simply not respond on this thread any longer.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Oh! How dare a foreigner to tell how to speak and write your F*CKED up language? If you can’t clean your house, who will? Clean your house! And stop complaining you lazy ….

            You continue in disrespecting me by indicating that I am clueless. Why should I take that seriously considering how F*CKED up your language is?

            Money: If the decoding of the language can be learned in 1/3 or 1/5 of the time, it stands to reason that you will not need the number of learning assistance teachers that are paid in schools now. There are 3 learning assistance teachers (total salary $250,000) in my school, 2 of them dealing with reading issues. Now you can extrapolate and multiply by the # of schools around the Commonwealth. Easier decoding will mean a reduction in the need for those teachers. Finland has fewer of these teachers since kids can learn to decode quickly. Furthermore, teachers in their classrooms must spend extra time to teach those irregular words (spelling tests). They could spend time teaching things that matter like critical thinking, more math, … incidentally, word problems would not represent such a problem if decoding was easier!

          • jim_m

            How dare a foreigner to tell how to speak and write your F*CKED up language?

            Yeah, pretty much. The point being that you see a problem that native speakers do not experience. Why should native English speakers change their language, culture and society to please some dim witted adolescent language teacher from Belgium? Because some idiot Walloon thinks he has a better idea? Not very likely.

            Your claims about cost savings are more centered on bureaucratic bloat than they are on easier reading. There were no such assistants in my schools (or in my children’s) so I am going to guess that they are pretty much unnecessary.

            Your experience in Canada is not reflective of the experience in the entire anglosphere.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Unnecessary? Not in Canada! We try to help kids here. But then Canada scores higher than the US on PISA. So does Finland! How many people in your jails, shot,…? What a F*CKED UP country the US is thanks to WASPs like you!

          • jim_m

            Yep more bigoted name calling from the man who holds himself as an educated superior. Keep on with the demonstration of how empty your character is.

            As I said, your experience in Canada is not reflective of the entire English speaking world.

            As for PISA scores, they do not indicate a problem with the English language but they indicate a problem with the educational system in general. Funny how you, with the one tool of writing, think that everything must be due to the area that you specialize in.

            Criminality is not due to how people write. I suppose you will claim that there will be no more crime if we adopt your idiotic ideas? Of course you won’t because even a dolt like yourself understands that criminal behavior is far more complex than that, but you do think that your audience is that stupid since you make the claim that crime will be reduced.

            That may work in the isolated academic circles that you travel in where everyone is too busy congratulating each other on how wise they are to actually take a critical look at what you are saying, but it doesn’t work anywhere else.

          • Retired military

            Actually if you want to call me something then WASC is more precise.
            White anglo saxon Catholic.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Thank you for so eloquently reinforcing my earlier description of your issue.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Which is?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Thus:

            The root issue here is that your failure to master the idiosyncrasies of a language you admit you were not born to has resulted in a deep frustration that insists that YOU must be right and that the English Language should change in consequence.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            YOUR opinion!

            Failure to master the idiosyncrasies of a language? And, proof is where? Haven’t you been told to substantiate your arguments when you write them? I might not know anything about English (ahahaha). Did you fail in Paragraph writing class 101? That’s taught in Grade 4! :)

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Actually, were you to diagram that sentence, you would find that while it is long, it is not a run-on sentence.

            That skill (sentence diagramming) seems to have fallen from academic favor.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            YOUR opinion!

            Failure to master the idiosyncrasies of a language? And, proof is where? Haven’t you been told to substantiate your arguments when you write them? I might not know anything about English (ahahaha). Did you fail in Paragraph writing class 101? That’s taught in Grade 4! :)

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Which is?

          • Retired military

            You have made it clear you are not American and not a foreigner. If the English language bothers you so much why don’t you umm go back to where you came from. Seems simpler than trying to reeducate 300 million people.
            BTW do you prefer
            PHuck off
            or PHuk off
            or Phuc off
            or Fuc off
            or FUK off
            or some other spelling.

          • jim_m

            So you do realize that your so called slow rolling reform of the English Language will force children to have to learn 2 forms of English, both the new and the old? Or do you presuppose that trillions of dollars will be spent in translating every single English language document published over the last few hundred years?

            And you expect that children will read and write in one language and that their parents will do so in another? As I said, you are forcing people to learn 2 forms of the same language.

            Have I mentioned recently that your ideas are an adolescent Utopian fantasy and devoid of any understanding of human nature and how people live in the real world? Every response you type proves that I am correct.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            It is unreal that you could make that leap, that inference! Why do you again fixate on problems that do not exist. Beside, why can’t you read my blog where it is explained? (I hope you are enjoying reading this with the formatting issues. You could go to my blog and read it with the formatting. BUt, you are probably too stubborn.)”I
            believe that instead of trying to force everyone to change the way they
            write (and read), we should regularize English at the school level
            first and phase the change over two decades –at least– modifying
            English spelling ever so sightly, as indicated in the “fixes” page,
            where Masha Bell or Dr. Yule’s recommendations or systems would be
            followed, in a committee of experts, teachers, parents, politicians, …
            belonging to as many Commonwealth countries wish to participate (video
            conference please to make it easy and feasible). They would vote on what
            the best system should be. Another system could be invoked and a debate
            could occur over 3 or more systems. I think the system that look to
            modernize English have a better chance to succeed. English has a logical
            system, but there are just as many exceptions as there are rules. So,
            the idea is to use the existing rules and regularize all the exceptions.
            By introducing this kind of change at the school level on a gradual
            basis starting with K or Grade 1 classes, we would solve many issues
            that other systems have not been able to solve. Teachers would likely be
            the one group that would need to teach a new system. As a teacher, I do
            not see many teachers embracing this kind of change because it would be
            so onerous on them. Their own materials would be useless, would need to
            be revamped, and they would need to learn the new system. I am pretty
            sure teachers unions would be fighting this for … decades.But,
            if we were to slowly introduce this change, it would take about two
            decades to be phased in. Older teachers who are towards the end of their
            career could teach different grades that are still teaching using the
            old system or we could have a system where parents could have a say as
            to which system their kids could learn. In the MEANtime, we could have
            younger teachers who could be trained to learn the new system and be
            phased into the system by, say, 2020 for seeing 2020. This approach
            would comfort the general public in that they would not be required to
            learn the new system. We would thus have two parallel languages (the old
            and the new form) being phased in and phased out, respectively. I am
            not suggesting this reform would be easy, but if announced 10 years in
            advance, most teachers (new and old) could get prepared for the change.
            Often, as a teacher, I have experienced changes created by a new
            minister or new director too eager to make his or her mark to impress or
            get promotion. Again, it is the system that would be failing us here.
            It will take a formidable change in the minds of the population where
            the whole of the population is considered and individual needs are
            taking a back seat! That would be –in my view– a huge cultural shift
            in some cultures where the individual matters more than the group, where
            elections are won for short-term plans, where capitalist gains from
            institutions that have invested in education programs using the old
            system might need to evolve… We might need more than 10 years to
            change things! Let’s see how smart humans really are at changing
            systems. A reform in other systems might be needed for other reforms to
            take place! After all, other reforms like the ones about climate changes
            and ecological issues take time and hard work to be implemented, if
            they get implemented at all. And, the sad reality is that, until these
            issues are dealt with, a spelling reform might not be worth much
            politically as children are not going to get you any votes!”

          • jim_m

            Your cut and paste is unreadable crap. Fix the formatting.

            But from what I can be bothered to read it is more fantasy. It doesn’t matter how you spin it, you will be teaching children a different written language than their parents. You will not be teaching children to read the current language. Children will be locked out of existing learning without getting instruction on the current English language.

            What you are proposing is a way to create a permanent underclass that is excluded from the learning of the last few centuries because they cannot access the scholarly journals and writings.

            It will be of no comfort to parents to know that thir children will not be able to write a thank you note that they can understand or that grandparents can understand.

            You claim that you have experienced problems created by people trying to make their mark on the educational system. I suggest you look in the mirror to find a prime example of such a person.

            There is nothing wrong with the current system and Utopian fantasies will not make it any better. What you propose is something that will create endless problems and a permanent gap in learning. But then I suspect that such a gap is exactly what you seek. You seek to create a situation where you and your peers are elevated into a permanent elite where the ruled underclasses are incapable of ever threatening your position because they lack the knowledge to do so.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Go to my blog, you lazy WASP!

            Ya, ya,… 60% of 7000 common words are not phonetically written in English and you give ME advice! AHAHAAHAHAH!

            The pot is black and you are holding it!

          • jim_m

            Oh, now you come out with bigoted invective. Now we see the true nature of the elitist snob who wants to create a permanent underclass that he and his academic friends can rule.

            I have no problem with the fact that words are not phonetically written. The way they are written points to the word origins and informs us of what the word means.

            You should take some time to watch the National Spelling Bee. Sure, these kids are in the top 0.1 % of spellers, but that isn’t the point. They decode how to spell words by understanding their meaning and origin, not by the sound alone. There is so much more information that they receive by doing so.

            Often, if you are able to figure out how to spell a word by understanding the origin and meaning then you can do it in reverse and if you can read a word you can then decipher its meaning and origin. Strict phonetic spelling will obliterate such ability.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            These kids are parrots! They do not know how to speak those languages!

          • jim_m

            Try reading it again, this time for comprehension.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Run on sentences are not allowed!

            Parrots, they are! Just parrots!

          • jim_m

            respond to the content M Coward.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I did! Learn to read!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Jetez la poutre de ton œil.

            Et pourquoi regardes-tu la paille dans l’œil de ton frère, tandis que tu ne vois pas la poutre dans ton œil?

            Hypocrita, eiice primum trabem de oculo tuo, et tunc videbis eiicere festucam de oculo fratris tui.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Google translate won’t do, pal! Totally useless French!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Some might accuse you of being redundant:

            Totally useless French!

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Espèce de con!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Perhaps we should have left the Germans in peace after they kicked over your country for the second time in 3 decades…

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Perhaps we should have left the Germans in peace after they kicked over your country for the second time in 3 decades…

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            And you did it for free! Check Marshall Plan! You geniuses bought the whole thing, didn’t you? You send your people to get killed and then the Bushes made money after! Sad!

            Yes, we are grateful, but that does not mean that YOU went! It does not mean that we should thank you even as you are destroying the culture of the planet with your stupid H. movies!

          • jim_m

            Now we finally get the admission that he is motivated by hatred of American culture.

            And yet he thinks that we are wrong for not listening to the advise of a hateful bigot that despises white people, Christians, Americans, western culture, the Untied States and personal liberty.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I must HATE the USA because I do not like your stupid movies! AHAHAHA!

            There is a leap, genius? AHAHAHA!

          • Jwb10001

            Probably has more to do with your “destroying the culture of the planet” comment than it does with your dislike for our movies. But then I try to read posts before I comment on them.

          • jim_m

            JWB has is right. You don’t have to like movies. I think a lot of them are quite stupid. However, I do not think that they are “destroying the culture of the planet”, which of course is quite impossible since American culture is part of “the culture of the planet”. So what you are really against is American culture, in fact so against it that you consider it as something alien to the rest of the world and clearly something to be isolated and suppressed.

          • Jwb10001

            I don’t really blame people for disliking some of the corrosive nature of our culture but, no one is forcing them to engage with it. It’s called freedom, Americans are free to be jack asses Peter is free to ignore them, it seems he can’t so that becomes our fault.

          • jim_m

            I think that it has been amusing to see how you have relinquished any intent of defending your ideas and instead has resorted to attacks on people’s intelligence, their presumed lack of credentials (and therefore the right to opine on the subject), their race, their religion and their culture.

            I think it all reveals that your ideas are far more about controlling other people and imposing your will upon them that they are about literacy or anything of the like. Your ideas are about creating some sort of Utopian dream and therefore you believe that anyone who opposes you must be deficient in some manner so you end up seeking reasons to dismiss your critics for other causes.

            It’s a diseased way of thinking that you have.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Espèce de con!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Jetez la poutre de ton œil.

            Et pourquoi regardes-tu la paille dans l’œil de ton frère, tandis que tu ne vois pas la poutre dans ton œil?

            Hypocrita, eiice primum trabem de oculo tuo, et tunc videbis eiicere festucam de oculo fratris tui.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            You should really ask, and answer, this question of yourself:

            Why do you again [continually] fixate on problems that do not exist.[?]

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            60% of words are misspelled in your F*CKED UP language! Problems do exist! Get your head out of the sand!

          • jim_m

            According to the opinion of a bigoted academic from Belgium who speaks English as a second language.

            Lets just say that you do not stand out as an authority as much as you present yourself as a strident ideologue with a very tenuous grasp on reality.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Aren’t you white, Anglo-Saxon, and protestant?

            I am not an academic! I am a teacher in a school! Can’t you read? I am fluent in English as much as you are! In fact, I probably could beat you!

            And you, what are your credentials? Born in the US? AHAHAHA!

          • jim_m

            No I am not M. Bigot.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            That was not the question!

          • jim_m

            You asked Aren’t you white, Anglo-Saxon, and protestant?

            I replied that I am not.

            and you remain M Bigot.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I don’t call others IDIOTS!

          • jim_m

            I only call them as I see them.

            I can go back to crackpot if you prefer. Either would be both descriptive and correct.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Your comment is indicative of your intelligence. POOR!

          • jim_m

            My IQ is 148. Deal with it.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Mine is 163! Deal with that!

          • jim_m

            I don’t care. In fact it does not surprise me that your IQ is high. You are still the isolated, adolescent thinking fool that I said you were before.

            I know people with IQ’s in the 190′s. One in particular is not that bright really, especially when it comes to understanding the logical conclusions of her ideas and certainly not in understanding the impact of her actions upon others.

            In your case I would venture to say that a high IQ doesn’t mean that you aren’t a sociopath.

          • Jwb10001

            Clear demonstration of the truth of “first liar has no chance” This guy is clearly insecure he can’t stand not having the last word, he questions people’s IQ while overstating his own. Has something he wants to sell but if you don’t want to buy it he calls you names and questions your intelligence. Great way to gain support for what ever it is he’s trying to push off on us underlings.

          • Jwb10001

            Clear demonstration of the truth of “first liar has no chance” This guy is clearly insecure he can’t stand not having the last word, he questions people’s IQ while overstating his own. Has something he wants to sell but if you don’t want to buy it he calls you names and questions your intelligence. Great way to gain support for what ever it is he’s trying to push off on us underlings.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You people could provide me material for a stand-up comedy routine! AHAHA! I know of people with 250 IQ and that are not that smart too! AHAHAHA!

            How many unemployed in yoru country?

            WHat is the national debt like?

            Fix that and then talk to me!

            Fix your spelling system!

            Can’t you fix anything?

            Oh! No! That would be fascism!

          • jim_m

            None of these relate to illiteracy so I can only conclude that your proposal has more to do with a hatred of the US and the English speaking world than it does with literacy.

            And yes state imposed solutions that dislocate society are only possible in a fascist or totalitarian state.

          • Retired military

            “I know of people with 250 IQ ”
            I think the highest score on record is in the 204-210 range. Beyond that the tests are kinda meaningless.

          • jim_m

            Alas that there are no standardized tests for common sense. I suspect Pete would not score very high on one if there were.

          • Jwb10001

            Ha now that’s funny. This is what happens when someone is so immature they feel the have to have the last word on every single post.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Yes, one component of intelligence is the ability to get jokes or sarcasm! I think you failed that part!

          • Retired military

            “Yes, one component of intelligence is the ability to get”
            jokes or sarcasm! ”
            Spoken by the man who didn’t my reference to changing the color red because it is umm so red.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            That was such a lame joke!

          • Retired military

            But you fell for it.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Nope!

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You people could provide me material for a stand-up comedy routine! AHAHA! I know of people with 250 IQ and that are not that smart too! AHAHAHA!

            How many unemployed in yoru country?

            WHat is the national debt like?

            Fix that and then talk to me!

            Fix your spelling system!

            Can’t you fix anything?

            Oh! No! That would be fascism!

          • Jwb10001

            Smart people don’t tell other people how smart they are. Mr 163 IQ.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Indeed.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Indeed.

          • jim_m

            I only said it because he has asked several times.

          • jim_m

            I only said it because he has asked several times.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Of course, they do! You did! :)

          • Jwb10001

            You want to change our spelling and yet you don’t seem to be able to read. Interesting that.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            SEEM! Your opinion,… for what it is worth!

          • Jwb10001

            That best not be a correction to my spelling ace. You’re not qualified to correct anyone’s spelling.

          • jim_m

            I think that his desire to make English spelling strictly phonetic comes from the fact that his own grasp of English spelling is tenuous at best.

          • Jwb10001

            I just love the condescending “your opinion for what it’s worth”” commenting too. Just reeks of self importance doesn’t it.

          • jim_m

            And never mind that it has already been established that it is only his opinion that English spelling is incorrect. He chooses to use a standard that is foreign to make that determination but his opinion is not opinion, he demands that it be considered fact.

          • Jwb10001

            Well it’s his opinion for what it’s worth …. LOL

          • jim_m

            No, he didn’t. I did and only in response to your many insinuations about my intelligence and at least one direct question from you regarding my IQ.

          • Retired military

            “Mine is 163! Deal with that!

            Proof that book smarts aint all they are cracked up to be.
            Also proof that just because you can take a test well doesn’t mean that you can function in a real society.

          • Retired military

            And spelled correctly.

          • Retired military

            “I don’t call others IDIOTS!”

            Is that because none of them could come close to you in the subject?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Don’t act like an over-educated idiot and you’ll be called an idiot far less often.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Ne l’utilisez pas.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Stop pretending you can write French! Here, google translate this: espèce de con!

          • Jwb10001

            Stop pretending you can change how we spell things.

          • jim_m

            Yeah so tell us, oh wise one, how you will spell words like car and wash. Because if you go to New England, car is pronounced without the ‘r’ and if you go to places like central Illinois wash is pronounced ‘warsh’.

            So your phonetic solution doesn’t work even within the United States because the language is pronounced differently.

            I have asked at least twice how you propose to deal with this flaw in your plan and you have yet to provide an answer. And I suspect that the reason for this is simply because you haven’t even thought of it. Your experience of English is so narrow that it simply doesn’t occur to you that there are regional variations of the spoken language that make the premise of phonetic spelling unworkable.

            But that’s OK. Idiots like you never let reality intrude upon their dream of forcing some Utopian fantasy on others.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Different forms of English for different countries!

            Didn’t think about thaaaaaaat, you genius … apparently not!

          • jim_m

            That’s even worse!!!!!!!

            You are right. I didn’t think you were THAT stupid, but you have proven me wrong in my assessment of you. Not only are you proposing some adolescent fantasy but you are a blithering idiot as well.

            So you would then have a different English taught in Boston from Chicago and yet another one taught in St Louis!.

            I was right. Your plan really is to create an underclass that is incapable of communicating meaningful ideas.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Huh!???? Boston is not a country, last time I checked!

          • jim_m

            I asked if you would spell words differently because people in different regions pronounced them differently. Your answer was yes, that you would. English is spoken with dramatically different pronunciations throughout the US. Anyone who gets out of the faculty lounge would know that.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Yet, they can use the current F*CKED UP spelling! Could nto be any worse!

            Dramatically? AHAHAHA! You mean you don’t understand them? AHAHAHA! You don’t understand much! That much is true!

          • jim_m

            Yes it is worse because with your idea you have people in the same country who cannot read the same language. Currently we have a single language that follows a rule that is uniform throughout the world regardless of regional pronunciation. You would substitute it for a language that is written regionally and potentially incomprehensible to anyone who does not pronounce it the same way.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I would remove accents by a national education elocution program!

            Let me predict that you won’t like that either!

            What do you like is the status quo! Illiteracy rates are sky high, but who cares?

          • jim_m

            Aha! So you are going to institute a fascist campaign to stamp out cultural identities. Nice.

            Historically, illiteracy rates are rather low compared to the rest of human history.

            (Bruce, I hope you will forgive my using the F word above, but I think you have to admit when this guy is saying what he is saying above that it does apply)

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Oh! No! Remove accents! Oh! No! Armageddon! It is better to have high illiteracy rates!

            Where are your facts? Mine are on my blog!

          • jim_m

            If the trade off is wholesale destruction of culture, then yes it is .

            I suppose as a foreigner you cannot see that this is what you are proposing, but it is.

            As for facts, you are going to claim that literacy rates were higher in the middle ages than they are today? My statement is obvious on its face.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            The end is near!

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            The end is near!

          • Brucehenry

            If you mean Fuck this guy, F-word away! :)

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Why don’t you start with the Chinese?

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            And the topic is?

          • Jwb10001

            Because clearly he has a hard on for the US.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Why don’t you start with the Chinese?

          • jim_m

            You do realize that children pick up their spoken language from their parents so your statement that this would be done in stages from the early elementary school forward is a lie.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Wrong! You do realize that they pick up ORAL language from their parents! The reform is about reading and writing!

            Proof 101 that you are not that smart!

            Let me find facts. I am the authority on this!

          • Jwb10001

            Not according to your eliminate accents program, comrade.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            The accents would be shaped in Grade 1. Learn to read and understand, GOP!

          • Jwb10001

            Of course they would, kids never listen to their parents talk and would never pick up any accents at home. Maybe you’re you talking about taking kids away from the parents and putting them in some sort of Peter the Great run institution for the elimination of accents and non Peter approved spelling. Learn to think!

          • jim_m

            Let me hazard to guess that his response would be that if it is necessary to stamp out illiteracy then he would absolutely remove children from the custody of their parents because whatever the trauma to the child or destructive effect on society, it is nothing compared to the ravages of illiteracy which are responsible for all criminal activity, poverty, unemployment, wars, etc.

          • jim_m

            Your reform is about making the written language phonetic so therefore making the spoken language uniform throughout the nation would be necessary for your reforms to work.

            Proof positive that you have not thought your ideas through, that they are the result of an adolescent world view and that their author has no contact with the real world and certainly no contact with anyone who would give him proper criticism of his ideas.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Consistency does not appear to be one of his strengths.

          • jim_m

            I would say that thinking things through is not his strength either.

          • Retired military

            “I would say that thinking things through is not his strength either.”
            Here Jim let me fix that for you

            “I would say that thinkingis not his strength either.”

            Much more accurate now..

          • jim_m

            You do realize that children pick up their spoken language from their parents so your statement that this would be done in stages from the early elementary school forward is a lie.

          • Jwb10001

            Not enough for you that we don’t spell to your liking we have to talk to your liking too?

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            And, klids who cannot spell and read is fine! What is most important?

          • Jwb10001

            Are you reading posts before you respond to them? Or do you have some physiological issue that forces you to have the last word no matter if it makes sense or not?

          • jim_m

            Let me give you a metaphor from my world:

            A cancer patient is in the hospital with an infection. The Infectious disease doctor comes in and looks at the immuno suppressive drugs she is one and orders them to be discontinued because she cannot fight off the infection when she is on them. The Renal doctor them comes in and sees all these high strength antibiotics that are damaging to the kidneys and has them discontinued because her kidney function is impaired. The oncologist then comes in, and understanding the complete picture has all the drugs reinstated because he knows that the patient cannot live without all of them.

            You are like one of the first two doctors. All you see is your narrow little focus and you cannot see or respect the value of the other parts. You see that literacy is the one and only priority and if that means a severe dislocation of society, a significant destruction of culture, and a loss of learning, then that is OK because the only thing you can value is literacy.

            But for the rest of us, we see the full picture and see that while literacy is important, there are other priorities and your solution creates far more problems than it solves.

            As I have repeatedly stated, your solution demonstrates a degree of adolescent thinking and a fantastic view of the world that is founded on a lack of realistic understanding of people and the world around you.

          • jim_m

            I’m sorry. Kudos to you Pete. You really had me going. Now I realize that your blog and this whole idea is nothing more than a parody.

            No one with any sort of education would propose having multiple English languages, effectively destroying a common language held by hundreds of millions of people.

            Great joke. I should have known that no one could really have been serious about such an idea.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            He’s just trying to break up the English Speaking Mafia.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Oh! Come on! We know that anything I would suggest you will not like!

            Your credentials? Oh! NONE!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Those who can, do.
            Those who cannot do, get credentialed.
            Those who cannot do after being credentialed, teach.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Again, your credentials are?

          • jim_m

            The only credentials required are to be a native English speaker.

            No wonder you long for some unaccountable academic committee to be the authority over how people read and write their language. It must really rankle that superior intellect such as yours is not given authority over the lives of the ignorant masses.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            AHAHA! And you call me a bigot! AHAHA! Do I have any right or should I shut up for you, WASP?

          • jim_m

            I’m a Czech

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You say!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            I do.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You don’t!

          • jim_m

            I think the point is that the only credentials relevant to this discussion is that a person reads and writes the English language (preferably as a native language). SO the only necessary credential is that they “do” read and write. Your degree is irrelevant in this discussion. Your ideas have a far greater impact on society and culture and it is abundantly obvious that you haven’t thought them through.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            It’s also a quite deliberate shot at the fall of the Ivory Tower from an institution of learning to one which merely issues credentials.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            YOU set thew credentials! AHAHAA! Should they also be called Jim_m? AHAHAAH!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            I do, and quite handsomely, in a field far from my academic major, and un-related (except in intellectual rigor) from the fields in which I was extensively trained.

            IT in the Bay Area is that way.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Oh! What do you have to show for yourself?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            A paycheck, performance bonuses, and stock grants.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            So, is that relevant?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            It’s concrete and tangible. In the real world that counts for a lot.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            I suppose it makes you happy and feel important. It does not bother you that you have much more than others in relation to the work produced? I bet you deserve it. Every million. Right?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            I also spent over a decade of my life working for less than minimum wage, housed in quarters that did not meet the requirements for Federal Prisoners, and worked in excess of 80 hours per week.

            In my field I’m at about the mid point in salary, and thanks to my employer, well above in benefits and total renumeration. Even now I work (on average) more than 50 hours a week. I’ve no complaints.

            You?

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            “A paycheck, performance bonuses, and stock grants.”

            Now I know what you cryptic list meant, but it is still cryptic, so let’s leave things cryptic, shall we! :)

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            And how, pray tell, would you know that I “don’t” when you can’t know what I do, where, or for whom?

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You don’t … give credentials! AHAHA! Gotcha!

          • jim_m

            Sad that you think that some piece of paper actually says that you are competent in something. It doesn’t. Credentials only imply that you have reached a minimum standard to work in a given area, not that you possess expertise.

            That is the conceit of academia. You think that your degrees make you experts in all sorts of things. It doesn’t.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            STOP! ENOUGH!

          • jim_m

            What? Are you insulted that you have found people that refuse to genuflect before your degree? Respect is not found in degrees or in money. You want respect? Start with having some decent ideas and some understanding of human nature.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            You don’t!

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Beats having none!

          • jim_m

            Yours apparently are that you have a degree in fantasizing about language.

            As previously noted: a degree is not a sign that the person has any real competence. You are proving that quite thoroughly.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Your opinion, for what it is worth!

          • jim_m

            Happens to be correct.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Of course! Did you mark your paper in university too? AHAHA!

          • Retired military

            “And, you have not respected any of my goodbyes”

            I have never heard of respecting someone’s good byes. Tell me is that something in your language that isn’t in English?

            “Again why can’t you look at your actions critically for a change because that’s pretty dysfunctional?”

            Oh I did. I have over 300 million people on my side. You /have ummm one on yours. Yet you call me dysfunctional?

            “Your claim”

            Think you have me confused with Jim or Bruce the only thing I have “claimed” on this thread is red is not soothing enough. Have you done something about that yet?

            ” You do care about those, don’t you?”
            The last time that we changed something for a few million that made things worse for 300 million was Obamacare. How is that working out for you?

          • jim_m

            He’s from Canada. He won’t see the impact until he tries to flee to the US to get timely healthcare and finds that on account of obamacare it is no longer available.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Respect is earned.

            You have no reasonable expectation of that which you have not earned.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Ya! Money is the ultimate measurement in your country! IDIOT!

          • jim_m

            He didn’t mention money. Respect is something that you earn by demonstrating the value of your character and the merit of your actions.

            However, it is once again revealing that you hold the US in deep disdain and consider its values and traditions as things to be eradicated and not preserved. Why on earth should anyone follow your advice? What you advocate is not for our benefit, it is only for your aggrandizement.

          • jim_m

            With Bruce and I on the same side of an argument I am afraid that it isn’t Christmas that is nigh, but rather the end of the world.

          • Brucehenry

            Political opinions are political opinions, but stupid is just plain stupid.

          • jim_m

            Yes, there is a certain universality to stupid.

          • Retired military

            “And everyone knows that you cant cure stupid. There isn’t a pill you can take or an operation you can get. Stupid is Foreva”

            Sorry for the double posts.. For some reason they didn’t show up after I posted them.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Deleted the second tap.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Deleted the second tap.

          • Retired military

            “you cant fix stupid. There isn’t a pill you can take or an operation you can get. Stupid is foreva” – One of my favorite Ron White quotes.

            When you have Jim and Bruce up voting each other you are out there in LALA land.

          • Brucehenry

            Read the book I recommended. Or google it for God’s sake. Just don’t keep on insisting that the spelling rules you endorse are currently in place. They’re not.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Because there was no need, and the proponents were never able to make a compelling case, as you are currently demonstrating.

  • LiberalNightmare

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=keeping%20it%20real

    keeping it real

    A black person’s excuse for being ignorant or doing ignorant shit. The person who says that they are “keepin’ it real” usually claims to be denying pop culture and sticking with their own thing.

    Chris Rock had a good description:

    Rock: Nothing makes a happier than not knowing the answer to your question:
    (first person):”What’s the capital of Zaire?”
    ():”Shit, I don’t know that!….Keepin’ it REAL!”
    Rock: Yeah, real DUMB!

  • Brucehenry

    I went to bed last night and got up to re-read this thread. I’ve gotta say it was the most entertaining one in years.

    Jim, you were magnificent. RM, you had the best wisecrack I believe I’ve ever read here. I laughed again this morning. Even Rodney was good! I thought I did pretty well, too.

    Anyway, I wanna say thanks for the ride! It was kinda cold outside yesterday and this thread made being indoors fun.

    • jim_m

      Thank you. And I concur, it was a fun day on Wizbang. You were great and so was everyone else who participated. I had no idea that we had run the thread up to nearly 250 posts!

      I just feel bad that so many of the comments contain so many spelling errors. :o

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        It’s been an interesting change of pace.

        Is it possible that the first rule of holes is a purely English Language concept?

        • jim_m

          LOL

    • Retired military

      /bow

  • Retired military

    Wow 351 comments and 95% of them are off topic. What a thread. To the author, I apologize for asking Peter to back up his claim as that is what started all this mess.

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      It’s been amusing at any rate.

    • jim_m

      I think many have found it very entertaining.

      Who would have thought that we could find a Belgian Language teacher who would propose that the English language is deeply flawed and that to fix this in the name of promoting literacy he would create a new written language based on pronunciation and impose forced elocution lessons on the entire population in order to eradicate variations in pronunciation?

      Seriously. What are the odds?

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        Crackpots abound, and their density on the edges of Academe has been noted.

        • jim_m

          Pete has gone a long way to reinforce the stereotype of the left wing academic that hates whites, males, the US, western culture and individual liberty.

          He also reinforces the stereotype of the academic that sees himself as some privileged elite that ought to have the right to dictate to the masses how they live and how their society will be shaped.

          His open disdain for anyone outside of academia shows throughout his postings and his belief that credentials are proof of the quality and correctness of his ideas show an incredible arrogance that, until now, I thought was only a caricature but I now see that it is the reality amongst those in academia.

          • Brucehenry

            I’m thinking now that you’ve given this guy such a thrashing that YOU MADE HIM UP. He’s such a perfect foil for you, what with his advocacy of Newspeak and his weakassed mockery of conservatives and conservative positions, that I fear we were all taken in by an elaborate ruse!

            Dastardly of you, Jim! Fiendishly clever and well-executed, but dastardly!

          • jim_m

            I wish I could claim such genius. But no, I could not have made him up if I had tried. I would have discarded the idea as totally unbelievable.

          • Brucehenry

            I guess you’re right. There’s a reason that the saying exists, “You can’t make this shit up!”

          • jim_m

            LOL. It has provided a wonderful distraction.

          • Brucehenry

            You know, I’ve mentioned in real-world conversations to 4 different people this thread. Each one, when I told them I was arguing with a guy who claimed 60% of the words in the dictionary were misspelled, burst into loud laughter.

          • jim_m

            What’s alarming is that if we believe what he tells us, everyone he works with thinks that his ideas are brilliant and that those ideas are shared by many in his field.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            It’s more likely that humoring him is the only way for his co-workers to get him to shut up.

          • jim_m

            I suspect that he has never encountered any resistance to his ideas.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            From what we’ve seen here that’s entirely likely, especially in light of my earlier speculation.

  • Retired military

    Wow 351 comments and 95% of them are off topic. What a thread. To the author, I apologize for asking Peter to back up his claim as that is what started all this mess.

  • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

    60% of English words are misspelled in the … dictionary! (see my blog for data.)

    I don’t know why some professors are correcting spelling when the course is not English!

    • jim_m

      I do have to thank you for the great amusement you have provided to all of the Wizbang community. Few would have credited the idea that someone could so perfectly represent the stereotypical academic filled with self importance and prejudice.

      As a teacher (or so you claim) you should recognize that in any class with a written assignment part of the grade should reflect the student’s ability to write with correct spelling and proper grammar.

      And once more… no, the words are correct in the dictionary. Your fantasies and opinions not withstanding, according to proper usage the words are all spelled correctly.

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      Not.

      • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

        Not much content to your “Not”! They teach in Grade 4 that you should always support your argument or thesis with details or examples! Let me show you how it is done!

        It is clear that thousands of words are not spelled phonetically in the dictionary in English and they should, just like in many languages! “Orthographies that use alphabets and syllabaries are based on the principle that the written symbols (graphemes) correspond to units of sound of the spoken language: phonemes in the former case, and syllables in the latter. However, in virtually all cases, this correspondence is not exact. Different languages’ orthographies offer different degrees of correspondence between spelling and pronunciation. English orthography, for example, is highly irregular, whereas the orthographies of languages such as Russian, Spanish and Finnish represent pronunciation much more faithfully, although the correspondence between letters and phonemes is still not exact. Serbian orthography is remarkably consistent: approximation of the principle “one letter per sound”. (Wikipedia)

        • jim_m

          Sigh. The fact is that you, yourself have used any number of terse, essentially non-responsive replies on this thread.

          You have declared that a phonetic spelling of language is what you consider to be the “correct” way to spell. You have maintained that you have already conceived of a way to “seemlessly” (sic) introduce this new written language so as not to affect older generations.

          However, you have neglected to understand that there exists great regional variation in pronunciation of English within the US and I wager that there is similar variation in the UK and elsewhere.

          SO you then state that students will be given elocution lessons, but you neglect to understand that their understanding of the spoken word comes from their home environment so without remediation of the adult population your dream is impossible.

          Furthermore, you assert that regional variation of pronunciation is something that can be eradicated and that such an eradication is a positive thing for our culture. Many will disagree with this assertion as you are advocating a wholesale destruction of English speaking subcultures.

          What becomes obvious is that you, as a non-native English speaker and someone who grew up in a non-English speaking culture, place no value on our culture and see its eradication as a beneficial aspect of your program.

          What is also obvious from your comments is that you believe that people who lack credentials in linguistics lack the standing to hold any opinion on this subject and that you hold in great disdain white people, Christians, Americans and American culture.

          What is also clear is that your ideas proceed from an isolated existence where you rarely have contact with people outside your sheltered academic life and when you do you immediately discount their views as ignorant because they lack the credentials that you find to be so critically important.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            And you are more intelligent by keeping an ill-designed and flawed spelling system which, as explained at length, creates issues. YOU choose to minimize about 100,000 errors and the problems that are created by a completely chaotic spelling system (as established by virtually all linguistic authorities as per blog info) and maximize the problems that a change would create! You are the reason the USA is declining because standing still is going backwards!

            Don’t you love it when people highlight ONE spelling error to –apparently– discredit the writer, but don’t mention that they wrote thousands of words that were spelled correctly. 99.99% is not good enough, but 100,000 words misspelled is! Cognitive dissonance at its best, sign of a low IQ!

            Don’t you love it when people get hung up on ONE spelling error, but they are okay with the idea of their own dictionary having 100,000 words misspelled (as in misspelled phonetically, as they should be).

            What a sad case you are! You are the reason why the USA is in jeopardy! YOU!

          • jim_m

            Really? You are going to persist that the words in the dictionary are misspelled because the dictionary follows a system that has been used for generations and fails to follow a system that you devised? You’re a nutball.

            The “system” as you call it is “ill designed” because it wasn’t designed at all. It evolved through the adoption of words from other languages and cultures and has grown to fit the uses of the people in English speaking countries.

            Seeing as how the US out produces your native country and has a far larger immigrant population and from a greater diversity of origin you have little room to argue that our language is failing us. The fact that the US holds as high a level of literacy compared to the relative monocultures that you want to compare it to actually runs counter to your argument.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            “Really? You are going to persist that the words in the dictionary are misspelled because the dictionary follows a system that has been used for generations and fails to follow a system that you devised? You’re a nutball.”

            > At least I am not a sheep!

            “The “system” as you call it is “ill designed” because it
            wasn’t designed at all. It evolved through the adoption of words from other languages and cultures and has grown to fit the uses of the people in English speaking countries.”

            > You do realize you are speaking to a guy who has a degree in linguistics, don’t you? Duh! The point is that it could be better and “designed”! Samuel Johnson thought he was smarter that all of those French Academicians and he failed miserably as history has proven. He, like you, thought he was superior, but he wasn’t! Maybe you are trying to prove that you are smarter than your brothers with PhDs. Maybe you are, but you are certainly not very receptive to new ideas or thinking outside the box, my friend, but then age can do that to you. Your bright lights opted for no Academy (unlike many languages) and it shows! Dismally so!

            “Seeing as how the US out produces your native country and has a far larger immigrant population and from a greater diversity of origin you have little room to argue that our language is failing us. The fact
            that the US holds as high a level of literacy compared to the relative monocultures that you want to compare it to actually runs counter to your argument.”

            That’s “outproduce” one word, BTW.

            So what you outproduces us? Oh! We are not going to have a stupid argument on whose country is best, are we? High literacy? You ask people to produce data, but you don’t. Come on! On PISA scores, you are not at the top. China is! Finland is! Canada is! In terms of debt, deficit, obesity rates, incomes of rich and poor, you win though! I bet you are proud of that, hey? :)

            Patriot fool! The establishment love you guys! You will put your life on the line for THEIR wealth and with a smile to boot! You have not figured out that one yet?

          • jim_m

            It might be interesting to adjust that PISA data based on how much of a monoculture a given country is.

            And yes, our poor people are the richest poor people in the world. I am so glad that you recognize that you are jealous of our standard of living.

            Yes, English could be “designed” and it would be as crappy as French. The one lesson we have proven quite conclusively is that government control of anything is suboptimal and destined for failure. Don’t ask us to accept the failure of your European model. We don’t need it.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            “It might be interesting to adjust that PISA data based on how much of a monoculture a given country is.” So things don’t look so bad! AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

            Cheater! Typical American!

            “And yes, our poor people are the richest poor people in the world.”

            Unsupported AGAIN!

          • jim_m

            Poverty level in the US is Just below $12k for a single person, which means that there are only some 12 countries that have median per capita incomes greater than our poverty level

            And yes it would be interesting to reflect how having a monoculture effects academic performance. I suspect that since everyone comes with a uniform language and background it is much easier.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            What you demonstrably fail to understand is that English spelling and grammar were not designed; they evolved.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Like most Americans, you should travel a bit and learn! I know they brainwashed you to think the US is the center of the world, but the bad news is that it is not! Beside, it was build on the back of slaves and immigrants, Belgians included!

            Many idiots thought designing is worth it! :) You build houses without a plan?

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_reform

            People of many countries don’t! They got that part! They are smart!

          • jim_m

            Building a house is different than building a culture.

            Let’s look at government efforts to build a culture: Albania, the cultural revolution in China, The USSR, these and others like them have tried to recreate man in the image of their ideology, Perhaps you would like to impose a solution to society that would provide you with an excuse to murder millions like those countries.

            As has been noted, France created the academy and it took French from the leading language of diplomacy and education and lead to ts being replaced with English.

            Take a look at some of the most successful computer programs today, they are open source. loosely structured and without authoritarian control. The PC dominates the world computer industry because IBM allowed others to clone the system and create their own products.

            English is similar. By not having state control of the language it has rapidly evolved to serve the needs of its users. It is flexible and adapts rapidly. French is none of those. English under the control of government sponsored academy would be the same.

            What you are lamenting is that the English language is not like your native language and so you want to inflict all the same problems that you had back home.

            While literacy may be a problem (you have not established that since you have not addressed the issues of immigration in the US) it is easily offset by the advantages we have.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            “As has been noted, France created the academy and it took French from
            the leading language of diplomacy and education and lead to ts being
            replaced with English”

            Oh! Ya! That is the REASON! Stupid does not even come close to describe that argument, especially considering you are the one talking about correlation and causality! Man, you can twist any data to suit your own agenda can you?

            I bet you could prove that a meringue is an orange, if you needed to!

            The point is that English needs to be re-designed to make learning more efficient. Other countries have done it! I suppose they are stupid! China, Holland, France,… These people are all pretty stupid, aren’t they? I hope the Chinese kick your ass, one day! I really would love it!

          • jim_m

            Once again venting your bigotry and hate.

            You really don’t have anything to back up your ideas. Once confronted with an objection it is all about discrediting the person who objects rather than substantiating that you are correct.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Hate? You can know the emotional state of a person by reading words! WOW!

            Let me just say that there are about 50% of the American people I think are smart, the rest (mostly GOP) are self-absorbed, egocentric, uneducated, and greedy!

            So, I meant kick the ass of the 50% of the people who are the people above. That is probably you!

          • jim_m

            I think that Bruce would love to hear your conclusion that he is a conservative.

            And I appreciate your admission of ignorance about America and Americans.

            Let me tell you my impression of academics: Having several people of my acquaintance working in academia I have found that they are insular, isolated from the real world, without understanding of the working world, business or people who work for a living, lacking in empathy or understanding for people outside their world, and generally filled with an arrogance that they know better how to run the lives of others that those people do themselves.

            You are no different. You come here telling us how our language is wrong and we are screwed up and how you have an answer that you are going to impose upon us because we are too stupid to see things your way and any losses of culture or societal cohesion are meaningless to you because the only thing that is important is that you know better than we do how to run our lives and the lives of our children.

            I said before that you are a sociopath and a monster and I am correct in that assessment.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Oh! And the link provided is not data for you!

            Where is yours, Einstein?

          • jim_m

            I am not arguing from data for the most part I am arguing that you have not proven your case.

          • Jwb10001

            Not to mention his logic is twisted into an unrecognizable shape.

          • jim_m

            Other countries have done it! … China, Holland, France,.

            Yep. China has changed the romanized spellings of their words and names but that only affects those who deal with translations and not native speakers who would still use the pictographic written language.

            With regard to French, the changes in orthography have been minor and are not remotely close to the drastic changes you propose for English. The same goes for the Dutch. (as an aside, unless you are FIFA, the proper name for the country is the Netherlands and they refer to their language as Nederlands, but then you probably knew that and just wanted to assert your own bigoted terms for them instead)

            So there are no parallels to what you are asking for. I suppose that you feel that you are justified in what you demand because English speakers are, by your own description, stupid, and apparently you seem to believe that they deserve to be punished for their culture.

            I fail to see where there is anything driving you other than a desire to disrupt English language culture and punish its speakers because you are a hateful person. Certainly your own words refute any claims that you do it for our benefit.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Again you are comparing apples and oranges, my friend! French is not English! You are assuming that both of these languages have the same issues or the same number of issues. This is simply not the case. French is much more phonemic. It does not have 60% of its words misspelled! And the irregularity of the misspellings is regular: the “en” of “bien” does nto sound like the usual “en”, but “en” close to “i” will behave like that! So, there are patterns, irregular patterns. In English, not so or less so, way less.

            Come on! Is it so hard to admit that English is a mess?

            You are like a little kid who is afraid to tell half of the truth! You know I am right!

            I fail to see your points!

            PS: The Holland/Netherland issue is so anal it is interesting you mention it! Why do you care about this? Are you Dutch? We use the word Dutch not Nederlands in English! INcidentally, I learned a little bit of Dutch at school, so I should know! Zeer good Nederlands! Tot ziens!

            Holland is a region and former province located on the western coast of the Netherlands. The term Holland is also frequently used as a pars pro toto to refer to the whole of the country of the Netherlands. This usage is generally accepted, but some individuals, particularly from the other parts of the Netherlands, dislike the use of “Holland” as a substitute for “the Netherlands”.[1]

          • jim_m

            I am not the one making the comparison. You made this comparison by holding up French as an exemplar that the English speaking world should follow.

            Now that it is pointed out that your example sucks you are trying to claim that we are comparing apples to oranges? Please. I am just pointing out that your argument is full of holes and you are full of crap.

            And don’t go telling me how French is phonetic. The number of letters that are silent at the ends of french words would make the number of alleged misspellings in English look like a sentence fragment.

            I am not going to admit that English is a mess because it is not. I suppose that to a crackpot Belgian, who resented having to learn the language because his parents dragged him to frozen Canada when he was a teen, English might have seemed difficult. However, for the rest of us it isn’t a problem. I suggest that you take your issues to a psychiatrist and work them out, I am sure that a decade or so of therapy ought to do the trick.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            WHAT?

            Did you fail logic 101?

            No, I am pointing out that other countries have been smart and courageous enough to reform their languages. That’s all! Period! Full stop!

            YOU added the comparaison about the depth of change, which was like comparing apples and oranges. Not the same paragraph! Not the same point!The point that you made after is that French changes were minor and that changes in English as I propose will be major because English has been procrastrinating, lazy, lax, laissez-faire about the whole matter! (Of course, you keep the French spelling of laissez-faire for good measure!) I am saying that they were minor because French did not need it as much as English. French and English are not the same fruit! Get it!

            Case closed!

            As far as French silent letters are concerned, it is an issue. I never said it was not and I have been on the record for a reform of those asd well as other issues in French. Although, in all fairness, the end letter does not affect decoding as much as lose vowel digraphs in English! The end letter is predictable also: d, t, b, l, and e of course, but then if it is a feminin word and you hear the final consonant, we know there is an e there. In other words, Mr. Genius, there are patterns. IN English, there are far and few between. Okay! Don’t admit I am right! I am, but … that’s how GOP debate matters. They add points when they state something. Add nothing when the other wins the argument and then state that they win!

            If you cannot even admit the obvious, that English spelling is a mess, something that most linguists will state, then forget it, pal. I am going to do what is smart here and admit that there is not a chance in hell that we will agree!

            Let’s agree to disagree!

            STOP POSTING! It is fruitless!

          • jim_m

            The relevance of your examples of other countries depends on their being comparable in the degree of change you are demanding. The fact that you raised examples that you now claim are not examples at all tends to show that your arguments are all dishonest.

            You claim that we should be “brave” like France and the Netherlands but it is like saying that we should be brave and run a marathon whilst holding up Usain Bolt as an example.

            And now you claim that the whole comparison is inaccurate. Then why bring up other nations at all? I will tell you why you did: Because you thought that you could get away with a lie and make people believe that what you are asking has already been done by other nations when it has not. Your whole argument is deeply dishonest.

            And I will not stop posting because it so clearly frustrates you that you cannot have the last word. Stop being such a megalomaniac and admit for once in your life that you have major issues. Don’t forget to make that appointment with the shrink. It will do you good. (yes, I noticed that you failed to address my suggestion that your issues are the root of this whole thing. I suggest to you once again that they are)

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            OKay! With all due respect you are not as smart as you claim to be and you are so immature to not accept that you are wrong and that I am right!

            STOP!

            ENOUGH!

            WE CANNOT AGREE!

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            That “WE CANNOT AGREE!” has been painfully obvious for some time. Perhaps you should absent yourself.

          • Retired military

            “That “WE CANNOT AGREE!” has been painfully obvious for some time.”
            The greatest understatement since Noah said it looks like rain.

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Why, thank you!

          • jim_m

            You are not right. You have repeatedly held up French as an example and once I point out that the example is poor you try to tell a lie that it is my example.

            You are not right. There is not a problem with English. The language is what it is. There is no need for some quasi governmental academy to determine how people use their language. That might fly in the statist nations that you are used to living in but not here.

            You have done nothing to address the concerns about preserving hand written documents or the damage it would cause to culture and society.

            You have posited economic advantages but have failed to demonstrate that the claimed problems would be solved with your proposed solution. You have not demonstrated that the other factors that may impact those issues would be ameliorated by your solution nor have you demonstrated that these factors will not continue to create the problems in the future.

          • jim_m

            Agree to disagree? Not at all.

            But here is something I think that we should agree upon: You are a prejudiced foreigner who has arrogantly presumed that he can dictate to millions of people how they should record their language and how they should teach their children and preserve their culture.

            That, I think is a concise and accurate description of who you are.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Of course, that would be the descriotion that you WANT to make of me! It suits you well!

            I am some kind of radical and you are not!

            I am emotionally unsable and you are not!

            You can impose your will on millions and I cannot!

            ENOUGH, PAL!

            BYE!

          • Retired military

            “BYE!”
            Is that a promise?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            It (demonstrably) wasn’t the first half dozen times he uttered it…

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            I’ve traveled extensively on my Uncle’s dime and lived for more than three years on the economy in Korea.

          • jim_m

            You are talking to the wrong crowd. There are quite a few people here that have traveled extensively.

            America was not built on the backs of immigrants, it was built by immigrants. There is a difference.

            As to slaves, the industrial revolution that made America was mostly in the non slave union states so once again you are telling lies.

            Do you have anything that you believe in that is based in truth? It certainly seems like you do not. I would seriously suggest that you stop saying anything about America since you have never lived here, do not understand its people, are ignorant of its history and everything you claim about it is suffused with ignorance.

        • jim_m

          Furthermore, you have established some rough correlation between literacy and phonemicity but not causation. I would note from your site that Switzerland has comparable literacy rates to the US and the UK but you make no mention of that fact.

          I would suggest that given that the US educational system lags also in mathematics and science education that it is more the educational apparatus than it is the subject matter. If you look at US educational spending you can see that spending is unrelated to educational improvement since the vast majority of any spending increase does not go toward teacher quality or to teaching materials but instead is given to administrative overhead.

          Literacy is not the result of a single factor but the product of many interrelated conditions. Reducing it down to the single issue of spelling shows reckless disregard for facts and grossly oversimplifies the issue while dramatically overstating the importance of the one issue that you study.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            “Furthermore, you have established some rough correlation between literacy and phonemicity but not causation.”

            Read Finnglish on my blog, Einstein!

            “I would suggest that given that the US educational system lags also in [..] administrative overhead.”

            And you talk to MEEEE about causation and correlation! PLEASE!

            “Literacy is not the result of a single factor but the product of many interrelated conditions. Reducing it down to the single issue of [...]”

            Correct Einstein. Read Finnglish, Einstein!

          • jim_m

            Let’s also take a moment to address the fact that you are comparing the results of Finland (a country of some 5.4 million people of which there are fewer than 1 million people of non-Finnish descent of which 1/3 are Swedes) to the US ( a country of 316 million with over 50 million people of Hispanic origin, over 15 million Asian and millions more of recent European origin).

            So you compare a small monoculture to a large polyglot culture. Perhaps you should recognize that in your straw man argument sometime, but then if you did your argument wouldn’t hold up very well.

        • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

          ‘Twas more than your repeat of your already demolished thesis deserves.

  • Retired military

    Peter
    Congrats. The longest thread on Wizbang that I can remember that is for sure. 438 comments.
    I seriously suggest sir that you seek help for your delusional assertations. Seriously. Just print out this thread (all 20 or so pages), take it to a shrink and let them prescribe something for you. If someone is pulling our leg than you seriously need help just for the extent that you have gone for this joke.
    May you have a merry Christmas as if you are for real I don’t foresee many folks visiting you for the holidays.
    For someone to seriously proclaim that they wish to change the way over 300 million (actually probably close to a billion considering foreign speaking people) speak, spell, read and write, change millions of books, the way millions of children are taught, and that is just the tip of the iceberg, means that if you are serious you are a complete narcissist megalomaniac.

    • jim_m

      What’s more he professes to do it for our own benefit. So whatever conscience he may have (assuming he has one) will not be perturbed by whatever losses or suffering he may cause.

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        A pathological altruist.

    • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

      And you are a narcissist Neanderthal!

      • Jwb10001

        oh it’s cute how you resort to adolescent name calling when you can’t make your case. Are you sure narcissist is spelled correctly, shouldn’t it be narsassis or something? I bet your parents are sorry they ever bought hooked on phonics.

        • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

          Of course, the other guy can call me and I quote: “a complete narcissist megalomaniac” and that’s perfectly okay! :) Isn’t if funny you did not write him or her a nice kind word like you did for me? Why the doouble standard?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Because you’ve given us no reason to believe you are not a complete narcissist megalomaniac? Although personally, I think you are more of a monomaniac than a megalomaniac…

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Us? Do you have multiple personalities or is it the Queen Us/we? Do you wear skirts too?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Considering you have managed to unite both the left and right of this blog community in their scorn for you and your modest proposal, I believe I chose the correct descriptive object.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            Really! 3 people is a community? AHAHAH! They say it si a crowd! AHAHAHA! I am just trying to make your language a better language! What’s not to like?

          • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

            Do you need help finding the door?

  • jim_m

    So? What do the hours of instruction per day have to do with anything? Those are set by government regulation and do not reflect actual teaching time in the language arts.

    • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

      Finnish kids (it is a fact) learn to decode in months, so they can focus on other more important things, but in less time (science, LA, math,…) ! Do I have to explain everything! Jeesh! For a guy who boasts about his IQ, you are either lying or have had a setback of sort!

      What does size of population has to do with it? The point is the 2 ling. groups did not get the same score, Einstein! Hence, spelling does matter! Get it? No! I suppose you won’t!

      • jim_m

        Again, you neglect the issues of size of country and monoculture. Finland is smaller in population than the Chicago metropolitan area. Do you really think that it is a good proxy for the United States?

        Do we have to explain the difference between and apple and an orange? Or do we need to spell it out phonetically for you to get it?

  • jim_m

    No you only give them. You would love to dictate to others how they live because you are so vastly superior in intellect that your solutions for their lives will always be better than what they could have chosen for themselves.

  • Retired military

    Peter, CS Lewis was thinking of you when he said this.

    “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated, but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”

    • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

      Yeah, verily.

    • jim_m

      It does seem apt but I think that his appearance of caring is only a veneer which hides the truth that he is filled with hate towards English speakers and primarily Americans.

      There is nothing truly altruistic about what he wants. He wants something for his own aggrandizement and casts it in terms of making things better for others, but when confronted with the damage and dislocation that he would cause he responds with ill concealed venom.

    • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

      You guys are like a pack of hyenas! Notice the way the “y” gets used in these two sentences! Yet, another example on how flawed the spelling system (if you want to call that a “system”) is! Aren’t you glad a few people improved on smoke messaging? Come on! smoke! That was so much nicer and beautiful! :)

      • http://wizbangblog.com/author/rodney-graves/ Rodney G. Graves

        To paraphrase the sage hare of the Bronx, Ah sod off ya waloon.

        • jim_m

          I think he is breaking down. His last response above is incoherent. “Smoke messaging”? Is he referring to smoke signals? Or is he talking about anti-smoking advertizing?

          Either way I believe it is indicative of a person who lacks a firm grasp of both the language and the culture that he is talking about destroying, which is probably why he can so blithely talk about destroying them. He doesn’t know all that much about them so he is wiling to throw them away in exchange for his Utopia.

  • jim_m

    What nonsense. No one is jailed because they are illiterate. more fantasy BS from you.

    And no you haven’t demonstrated that anyone is going to be happier for your having disrupted communications and destroyed their cultural heritage.

    Yes, I am sure that everyone will be so happy that you imposed your idiotic Utopian ideas upon them.

    • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

      DENY! DENY! DENY!

      YOU CANNOT STOP, CAN YOU?

  • jim_m

    A word about comparisons to Finland (since such comparisons seem to be in vogue):

    1. Finland is a monoculture (90% Finnish, 6% Swedish).
    2. Finland has a total population that is smaller than the Chicago metropolitan area.
    3. Finland’s population is spread out over many small towns so its population distribution in no way resembles that of the US in general and has no population centers that remotely compare to a major US city. The closest comparator to Helsinki, the largest city in Finland, would be Louisville, KY

    Using Finland as a comparator to the US for educational systems is dishonest. While we should strive for similar results we should also understand that the issues involved are vastly different and simply aping their system will not have the same effect here.

    • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

      The only analysis that was done on this between Swedish-speaking Finns and
      Finnish-speaking Finns was done by Taksin Nuoret,
      a university student (apparently, … because no one knows for sure who he
      is). Regardless, his comparison has not been challenged. And while it is
      not perfect, IMHO, there are many parts that are valuable. In his analysis (http://finnish-and-pisa.blogspot.ca/),
      the notion that an easy spelling system helps kids learn is compelling,
      considering we have close to a perfect controlled experiment as we
      could hope. ” “In PISA 2003 Finnish-speaking students clearly outperformed their
      Swedish-speaking peers in scientific literacy, with an average
      difference of 26 points. However, also the Swedish-speaking minority was
      doing very well, since their results were on a par with those of the
      Netherlands.” Moreover, “20,8% of the Finnish students who took part
      in PISA 2003 were
      Swedish-speaking, that is, much more than the share of the
      Swedish-speaking population (which was 5,55% in 2003). [...] This
      means that the PISA 2003 results of the Finnish-speaking students
      are actually even higher than those reported for the whole country
      (since the results reported for the whole country include results of
      both linguistic communities).” If one wants to do the same kind of
      research for other years, they can do it, but at this time, I don’t have
      the time.

      • jim_m

        I would categorize that as non-responsive to the entirety of my comment above, which was about the structural differences of their society that make the comparison potentially invalid.

        Really, if you find Finland so attractive I suggest going there. I’ve been to Helsinki, it’s quite nice. However, I would say that some things are very expensive – a cup of coffee was a bit much (equivalent to 12 Markka since converting to the euro and only about 3 Markka before that) and watching people take the ferry to Estonia to purchase alcohol to avoid the outrageous taxes was amusing.

        And don’t worry, their suicide rate is only 40% higher than that of the US. At least they can read the obituaries of all their friends who off themselves, so they have that going for them.

        • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

          Would you buy a car that has 60% of its parts faulty?
          60% of English words are misspelled in the dictionary as they are not correctly phonetically represented.

          You are not addressing the very valid comparison within Finland (between the 2 different linguistic groups which have the same educational programs and services), which is appropriate and indicating that a complex communication tool (and I would argue a complex or flawed spelling system) delays, taxes, and/or hampers kids, teachers, parents, and economies.

          It is very clearly stated in my blog that I don’t consider comparison between educational systems valid because there are too many factors at play (some countries have different budgets/support, different demographics, more time spent on certain subjects or learning,…). That is stated clearly on my website. However, I consider that the comparison above helps in make extrapolations that the complex and flawed spelling system in English does not help matters, and in fact, exacerbate poor results.

          The comparison on Finland is as close a controlled experiment as one could have one! I doubt that you will admit I am right! I can extrapolate that.

          GOP people are like that. They believe a pie in the sky fairytale, but cannot see that some mortals have been burning Earth for centuries, unaided!

          Your spelling system sucks. Fix it.

          Would you buy a car that has 60% of its parts faulty?

          Don’t deny what thousands and thousands of professors in linguistics know. The English spelling system is a mess. Many make the leap that it must affect learning. The data points to that conclusion.

          • jim_m

            It is very clearly stated in my blog that I don’t consider comparison between educational systems valid because there are too many factors at play

            You brought up Finland and Finnish on at least 5 separate occasions. Yet it seems that only language instruction has nothing to do with the educational system and the demographic make up of the country you are referring to.

            I suppose someone could be more hypocritical and more dishonest in their argumentation but it is difficult to imagine how.

            [edit] And let’s be clear: The assertion that words in the dictionary are misspelled is ridiculous on its face. No one will ever take that claim seriously and no one should. Nor should anyone take seriously the crackpot making that assertion. The dictionary spells words according to the accepted convention which makes the spelling, by definition, correct. Insisting that they are misspelled because you believe you have a better way is idiotic. You do not determine right or wrong for the 60 some nations that have English as their official language.

          • Jwb10001

            If a car had 60% defective parts you couldn’t sell it, sorta like your attempted overhaul of english.

          • http://reforming-english.blogspot.ca/ peter d. mare

            The more regular English that I would sell would sellm well to the Grade 1 kids learning English. Safly, they cannot vote! Sadly, they are a lot smarter than a lot of adults I know! :)

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE