Walter's Famous German Language Essentials Guide

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 2 May 2016 at 21:49:21 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>
> However, various recent attempts to reform English spelling 
> have for the most part failed, mostly due to inertia and the 
> presence of a substantial (and very fast growing!) body of 
> literature in current spelling, which would require a 
> monumental effort to respell. It's difficult to convince the 
> myriad writers and publishers to adopt a new spelling system 
> when the current one has been ingrained for so many centuries.  
> But hey, if Chinese could simplify the original characters (at 
> much protest, I must say), and if the Russians could pull it 
> off in 1917, who's to say we can't do it in English too?
>
>
> T

There was a spelling reform in Germany in the 1990ies. Portuguese 
spelling has been reformed several times (and there are two major 
spelling systems Brazilian and Portuguese Portuguese)[1], and in 
Spanish it has also been a to and fro (Latin America vs. Spain). 
All these languages have produced a vast body of literature too 
and still spelling reforms have been pushed successfully. So 
quantity is not an argument. First, most people don't have 
problems reading texts in older spellings, and second, it only 
takes one or only half a generation of school children to make 
the new spelling feel "natural".

The main reason why English spelling has not been reformed is the 
nasty class system that is still prevalent in GB and, albeit 
better concealed, in the USA, or in fact in any English speaking 
country. The mastering of English spelling has always been a 
social shibboleth (and continues to be), and any serious attempts 
at simplifying it are met with fierce opposition in educated 
circles. Even the few simplifications that have been introduced 
into American English, like color (instead of colour), program 
(instead of programme), or thru (instead of through) etc. are 
frowned upon and belittled by European (native) English speakers. 
The conservative spelling preserves the etymology of the word, 
they claim. This means you have to know Latin, French and some 
basic Greek to master English spelling. This clearly shows their 
bias. It is the educated elites that could bring about a reform 
of English spelling, but since they're not willing to give in an 
inch an lose some of their (imagined) superiority, this ain't 
gonna happen.

People often adopt the elites' views and oppose to spelling 
reforms, because they feel they'll "lose" what they've learned 
("it was all in vain"), and of course, what they are used to. But 
hey, it's just a coding convention. We shouldn't be too attached 
to spellings, especially if reforms make it easier to spell (i.e. 
to spell out a word as you hear it in your head) and parse text. 
It's a code to communicate, not a religion.

PS If you think that discussions about D language features on 
this forum are sometimes mad and nit-picky, you should attend a 
meeting of a spelling committee!

[1] 
https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ortografia_da_l%C3%ADngua_portuguesa#Cronologia_das_reformas_ortogr.C3.A1ficas_na_l.C3.ADngua_portuguesa