Comparing schemes

Results!

Comparing scheme results!

Eminent authors have defined the priorities of an effective simplification of English spelling to be consistency, phonetics, familiarity and brevity. Counting the number of  deviations from these objectives enables revealing evaluations of the different schemes to be made.

Consistency. The most frustrating feature in English spelling for beginners is its ‘inconsistency’. Conflicting ways of spelling a sound, or conversely, pronouncing a spelling. The more consistent the spelling system, the easier it is to learn. Saaspel’s strict attention to ‘consistency’ with only one deviation collects 15 points out of a possible 16, compared to 12 points for the Newspell scheme, and 11 for ALC.

Phonetic.  In controversial cases, Saaspel® refers to neutral continental pronunciation and spelling originating from Germanic and Latin languages. For the phonetic feature, Saaspel® with few deviations gains 11 points, compared to ‘ALC’ with 7 points, and Newspell with 6 points.

Familiarity *1.  To ease the acceptance of a revised spelling the 'traditional'  public should  be able to write without having to refer to a multitude of rules. New graphemes in red brackets

 (  ) should resemble the traditional spellings in blue brackets  (  ) , wherever practical, but not at the cost of phonetic consistency. In this respect, Saaspel® with 8 points lies behind ALC with 14 points and Newspell with 12 points. The ALC and NS advantage of familiarity with traditional spellings fades as the revised spellings are established.

Brevity is the time, space and money saving feature of a spelling scheme, in this case applied to a short passage from ‘The Star’ (pages 31 and 32) for which Saaspel takes 8 points (for 8% fewer letters), Newspell 3 points (for 3% fewer) and ALC 2 points (for 2% fewer).

The end totals before implementation would amount to: Saaspel 42, ALC 34, Newspell 33. After implementation, as the familiarity advantage reduces to zero, the end totals would  change to: Saaspel 34, ALC 20, Newspell 21, points.

Conclusion: An objective statistical  evaluation of spelling schemes is more revealing than are arbitrary discussions. Only when the ‘number’ of deviations from the essential features of a spelling scheme are registered, can the scheme be accurately assessed.

*1) N.B. ‘Familiarity’ with TS at the cost of phonetic consistency is a short sighted approach. It leaves contradictions in place that could be easily corrected, and fails to take advantage of phonetics as used throughout Europe. Syllabic abbreviations  are also  important in text writing and commercial correspondence. Spelling systems that adhere closely to traditional spelling disregard the golden opportunity to compose a modern English orthography as simple or simpler to learn than that of any other language.

Reformers who believe that comparison is not ‘objejective’ should indicate ‘in what respect’ so that corrections could be made if necessary!