Yeard AD

500-750	England, classic-Latin (lat.) gave way to Colloquial (Traditional) English
1755	England. Traditional Orthography (TO). Highly irregular published by Samuel Johnson.
1886	Paris. International Phonetic alphabet (IPA). Pronouncing guide to TO. Limited use.
1986	America. Alternative spelling for English (ALC). Semi-phonetic, alternative spelling. Limited use. By Ed. Rondthaler.
2010	England. Saaspel Pronaunsing Alfabet (SPA). Strongly phonetic, expediently abbreviated. Undergoing tests in schools  (Germany). By Roy W. Blain.

They represent the most intensive reform projects on the subject. Information can be found on them and on other spelling reform systems on the internet.



To improve English literacy standards worldwide

Traditional spellings need to be incisively simplified.  

Simplifying English spelling can be easy,  fast and cheap.  Some  British linguists make it difficult by insisting that what we already have is good enough. It may be for them, but certainly not for the struggling majority of the world’s population.  

Other `experts` insist that only the teaching methods of English spelling need attention.  Many different teaching methods have been tried at great expense as you will see below, none of which have  addressed  the main problem  of ‘chronic-phonetic-inconsistency’

Have Synthetic Phonics really been the success they claim when thousands of unpredictable Traditional spellings remain unchanged?

Dr. Robert Epstein, Ph.D., Editor-in-chief of

Psychology Today stated: ‘A simpler orthography would make learning to read easier, no matter which teaching method anyone uses!’

Maria Glod, Washington Post Staff Writer, May 2, 2008. writes:

‘Students enrolled in a $6 billion federal reading program that is at the heart of the No Child Left Behind law are not reading any better than those who don’t participate, according to a U.S. government report.

The study released yesterday by the Department of Education’s research arm found that students in schools that use Reading First, which provides grants to improve elementary school reading, scored no better on comprehension tests than their peers who attended schools that did not receive program money.’

The Daily Mail Aug. 2007. reports: ‘Twenty one billion pounds spent by the British Government over the past decade on schemes to educate children from the earliest age, has so far had no effect’.  None of this money was spent on ‘phonetic’ spelling systems.

Saaspel simplifies by consistently representing a spoken sound (phoneme) always with the same symbol (grapheme). Compare samples below all with an ‘uu’ sound like in boom:

In the 2007 British survey "The Primary Review", Durham University, revealed that: Half a billion pounds spent on raising standards in primary schools has had 'almost no impact' on children's reading skills, in England over the last 55 years.


The social harm caused by irregular spelling
British Journal of Psychology #82 : Literacy skills; Gwenllian Thorstad.

7-year-old Italians are able to read words they do not know, but 11-year-old British children cannot read words they ‘do’ know (in speech). Italian children do not need to spend as long learning literacy skills as English children do, and have more time for other studies.

Dyslexia: Comparison  (University of Salzburg and MRC London).

English children suffer from much more severe impairments in reading than do German children.

Science 291, Dyslexia: Eraldo Paulesu

Reading disorder is twice as prevalent in the United States (and France) as it is among Italian dyslexic. This is seen to be because of Italian’s ‘transparent’ orthography. English-speaking children take up to two years longer to learn to read than do children in 14 other European countries.

Institute of Learning at Hull University

Some English-speaking children need up to four more years to reach the same efficiency with irregularly spelt words as they have attained at age 7 with easy words.

The Scotsman 24. Sept. 2004 ( The Dyslexia Institute)

Poor literacy and the lack of skills caused by unrecognised dyslexia cost the UK economy  billions of pounds a year. The extra costs result from unemployment, dealing with youngsters excluded from school, and prison  and probation services.

Confusing Phonics with Phonetics.

English grammar is one of the simplest among European languages giving English scholars a flying start whereas English spelling is atrociously irregular, pulling English literacy standards down to the bottom of the ladder.

The ability of a child to memorize irregular spellings has its limits. By now, it must be clear to all responsible authorities that an uncomplicated simplification of the English orthography is the easiest and quickest solution to irregular spellings and that no matter what teaching methods  are tried,  many billions of dollars  are wasted annually getting nowhere.

Considering English is designated to become the ‘world language’  as such needs to be structured to match Latin styled languages already spoken by over one billion people in Europe and Latin America.

Otherwise it seems that the majority of the literate Anglo-American populations prefer only a  limited spelling reform, or no no reform at all. For these people, a few spelling changes is as far as they wish to go. They are insensitive to the needs of the world’s illiterate populations.

With or without Anglo-American support, an incisive phonetic reform should result in English becoming the easiest of all languages to learn, with a spelling system to be proud of at the disposal of a population of six billion people and increasing.

Let us assume two similar classes, the first being taught traditional spelling through phonics, the second being taught Saaspel phonetic spelling. They could for example be requested to study for five minutes the following twelve words, and then asked to spell them as they are dictated, but not shown.

Can class 1 spelling results based on Synthetic Phonics, compete with class 2 spelling results based on Consistent Phonetics?

Class 1
Traditional  ‘irregular’ spellings:   cruise, tomb, do, route, crew, boot, shoe, through, true,  two, queue, truth.  (12 irregular vowel symbols).

Class 2
Saaspel ‘phonetic’ spelling:   cruuz, tuum, duu, ruut, cruu, buut, shuu, ttruu, truu, tuu, cyuu, truutt. (1 consistent vowel symbol covers all ‘uu’ sounds).

This makes spelling and pronunciation of even unfamiliar words, simple and predictable to pronounce.

If a similar comparison were extended to cover a hundred words over a months time, is there any reason to believe that the result would be any different?

What phonetics do to the existing English orthography is to leave out unnecessary letters and standardize the use of the letters left in, by appointing just one letter or digraph (double letters) to represent each of the forty five spoken sounds in English. Teaching irregular spellings through phonics, demands a teacher’s expert knowledge, skill and patience for what can only result in an expensive, inadequate improvement in spelling standards.

Teaching  Saaspel requires only a CD, displaying and speaking the phonetic alphabet and a number of word lists and poems with spelling exercises in the form of games in order to reach spelling standards equal to those achieved by children in other languages. Because of the simple English grammar factor, the guidance of a teacher trained in phonics and teaching phonetic English spelling, within a few months will ensure literacy standards in phonetic English  as high or higher than those achieved in most European schools; a truly remarkable turn around.

 The degree of success with any teaching method depends also on the classroom environment, the skill and patience of the teacher and in particular the audio-visual memory capacity of the child in attaching the sound that it hears to the way it is spelt. Some children may naturally memorise a whole word, for example ‘bicycle’, while other children would remember more easily the word in short pieces, ‘bi-cy-cle’.  The short pieces better known as ‘syllables’ are the building blocks to pronouncing an unfamiliar word correctly. As one becomes proficient in reading, even a multi-syllable word can be recognized at a glance. It comes naturally with time, but like riding a bike with no hands, it should  not be done prematurely.

Improved literacy results recorded in schools will depend on entertaining and holding the attention of children during lessons. The wit of the teacher is a key factor in the learning process. The extra concerted efforts being made by teachers, children and parents when testing new teaching methods are natural and will normally influence the results positively, as long as the chosen words are phonetic (predictable).

If the basic unpredictability of English spelling is not eradicated, the manner in which spellings relate to sounds has no solid foundation. In phonics, the conventional 26 letter alphabet in which a ‘one sound-one spelling’ ideal is initially taught, children must sooner or later adapt to a one sound...multiple spellings, one spelling…multiple sounds, unpredictable orthography.

Students soon find that reading and writing no longer bring the pleasure that it seemed to have promised at an earlier age when the words chosen were simple and phonetic.  A dictionary becomes an indispensable part of writing, but even this can not help if you guess wrongly one of the first few letters of the word. The writer can be left guessing indefinitely if an inappropriate  letter has been planted at the front of a word like the ‘u’ in ‘guess’ or the extra ‘p’ in ‘appropriate’.

In other words, without the change to incisively simplified phonetic spellings, teaching methods can only scratch the surface of the problem. A small and inadequate improvement in spelling is not what the English language deserves.


Pronunciation Guides
Traditional or Saaspel or I.P.A ?

I.P.A. The International Phonetic Alphabet is inadequate as a pronunciation guide to traditional spelling. It has too many unfamiliar characters not available on standard keyboards. See three examples using the same text:

Traditional Spelling The objective of Saaspel is to consider carefully the whole subject of our modern english spelling, with a view to the initiation of such a moderate system of reform as may seem to be generally advisable. It is recognized that, for sum time to come, the usual symbols - commonly called letters - will be retained, with such values as most frequently attached to them; and that the utmost that can be expected, by way of achievement, is the removal of the most glaring anomalies and contradictions that have long been a source of trouble and annoyance to teachers and pupils alike.

Saaspel Pronaunsing Alphabet S.P.A Th objectiv ov Saaspel iz tu cnsidr cerfli th hool subject ov aur modurn English speling, with a vyu tu th inishsiaashn ov such a modrut sistm ov riform az maa seem tu b jenrli adviizubl. It iz recogniizd that, fr sum tiim tu cum, th yuzyul simblz – comnli could letrz – will b ritaand, with such valyuz az moost freeqntli atachd tu them; nd that th moost that can b xpectd, bii waa ov acheevmnt, iz th rimuuvl ov th moost glering anomliz nd contrudicshnz that hav long been a sors ov trubl nd anoiuns tu teechrz nd pyuplz aliic. N.B. (aprox. 8% fyur caractrz riqiird)!

International Phonetic Alphabet. I.P.A.

        

Unfortunately the IPA has become oversize and too inaccurate compared to the Saaspel SPA.

Saaspel is the ideal phonetic alphabetic guide to Traditional English spelling. It will assist all beginners to pronounce correctly thousands of otherwise unpronounceable Traditional English spellings, and help others who speak English well, but see an unpredictably spelt word for the first time. Even professional speakers may find themselves in this awkward position.


Experimenting with teaching methods to handle inconsistencies in English spelling continues to cost vast sums of money with little or no success. English methods of teaching are presumably as good as those in other countries; the English orthography is not. An overwhelming number of irregularities in English spelling need bold, precise, corrections. Taking an incisive step will cost a fraction of the present outlay on education but will achieve a monumental improvement in spelling, for children, dyslexics and adults, at home and abroad.

The promotion of Synthetic Phonics is presently a disturbing pedagogical distraction away from the effective advantages of ‘fonetic’ spelling. Although fonetic spellings are successfully employed in every ‘easy to spell’ European language and would obviously do the same for English, some new teaching advocates claim that Synthetic Phonic teaching methods would render fonetic spelling reform superfluous; an irresponsible misconception. 

Latin Phonetics: Two thousand years ago, the ancient Romans adopted the Latin (fonetic) alphabet, basically a logical ‘one symbol per sound’ system.

Such was the rationality of their system, wherever the legions of Rome ventured, Latin spelling was fonetically adapted to the language of the countries they occupied.

The Latin-phonetic influence on most of the easy to spell European languages is still present two thousand years after its invention. This is not the case in England following the Norman (French) occupation of the South of England in 1066 following which the French language became widely used and the use of Latin vowels confused.

The major damage to Latin phonetics is to be seen in the erratic use of vowels in English. They frequently bear no resemblance to their original Roman application and show no sign of mutual consistency even within their own ranks.

Research and Testing: Whether we consider the dozen or so European orthographies still successfully based on Latin fonetics or the hundreds of millions of people in these countries, attaining higher literacy standards than those achieved in English speaking countries, further statistical evidence in favour of fonetics should hardly be necessary.

I.T.A. She informs us: Between 1961 and 1964, research was carried out by John Downing, senior lecturer in Educational Psychology at London University. He used the strongly fonetic Initial Teaching Alphabet (i.t.a.) as proposed by Sir James Pitman, the grandson of Isaac Pitman of shorthand fame. Downing established that among groups of five year old beginners, those learning fonetic i.t.a spellings showed marked superiority to those children learning traditional spellings.

Isobel Raven writes: An independent evaluation of Downing’s work and of 17 other studies of i.t.a. led F.W. Warburton  and Vera Southgate to conclusions differing in passion but not in substance. Southgate, interviewing some 400 teachers, head teachers, inspectors and parents who had been involved in the 1961-63 experiment, found a high degree of enthusiasm for i.t.a. The interviewees generally felt that the children’s ease and pleasure in learning to read, their confidence in both reading and writing, and their early extension of reading skill to story books and other materials were distinct advantages for i.t.a. instruction. Warburton’s more measured approval of i.t.a. resulted from a review of 17 comparative studies. He concludes, the superiority of i.t.a. as a medium of instruction in the stage before transition to t.o. (traditional orthography) is well established.

This information should leave no doubt, that ‘consistent-fonetic’ spelling in any language is a major advantage.

After 1964, the i.t.a. tests were (unfortunately) discontinued in spite of the systems obvious benefits. The i.t.a. children were obliged to drop fonetics in favour of traditional spelling, sacrificing their literacy advantage under pressure from the traditionalists who failed to acknowledge what simplified English spelling could mean to illiterates and to third world countries.

Such is the logic of fonetic spelling, the i.t.a. children could have continued with both spelling systems with minimum extra effort. They would have provided all and sundry with the living proof of how easy fonetic spelling is to learn and use. Furthermore, this would have been achieved at a fraction of the cost needed with phonic teaching methods.


Saaspel: (ritn in Saaspel).

A ‘spel th saam wot saundz th saam’ fonetic sistm.

Th fonetic prinsiplz ov saaspel r cloos tu thooz ov th i.t.a.  Importnt difrnsz r saaspelz yus ov standrd ceebord simblz. No speshl letrz or caractrz r nesusri. Oulso, saaspel adirs mor cloosli tu th continental-european nd s.american yus ov latin vaulz.

Fiinli, Saaspelz yus ov ‘silabics’  culminaats in shortr text nd oftn reprizents mor cloosli th actyuul saund ov wurdz az thaa r normli spoocn.

Th Saaspel CD dicshnri iz thirtynine ttauznd wurdz long nd incluudz th saam numbr ov SMS abreeviaashnz. Ten thauznd comn wurdz r pronaunsd voocli.

Uthr edyucaashnl feechrz enshor that fonetic English can b lurned at hoom in an entrtaaning or rilaxd atmusfir nd in paralel with lurning cloosli rilaatd tradishnl English speling if so wishd. Fr adishnl edyucaashnl entrtaanmnt, th iqivlnt wrdz in uthr European langwijz can oulso b displaad in paralel yuzing th saam Saaspel instntaanius cnvurtr. 

Th plejhr ov childrn being abl tu reed feri taalz, childrnz histri bucs, jiografi bucs nd simpl arittmatic bucs at an urli aaj, can oonli b rialiizd wen English speling  iz fonetic. Litrusi then bcumz eezi, ifectiv nd inxpensiv, not just fr naativ speecrz ov english, but espeshli fr biginrz tu english evriwer.

Isobel Raven concludes: “What we need is a transparent orthography for beginners that is readable by all readers of traditional orthography, and that becomes part of the accepted way of spelling. One that operates like i.t.a. but which learners maintain throughout their lives”.

Saaspel  fulfilz theez riqiirmnts, with a comprihensiv CD, a 39,000 wurd dicshnuri + sms, a multi-langwij cnvurtr, an on-liin cnvurtr, vocal pronunsiashn giidz, spel checr, a childrnz buc, childrnz letr cyubz, a discriptiv buc fr teachrz, web siit, speling gaamz, clasruum woul chart, opshnl diacritics, nd

an aat pursent silabic shortnd cnsiis speling sistm, wel praazd bi teechrz nd nolijubl riformists fr being eezi tu reed; xept fr thooz huu r adictd tu iregyulr spelingz. 

Fr huum du we riform?  In Saaspel. Th tendnsi fr th majoriti ov english nd american speling riformrz tu prizurv th tradishnl english caractr in ther speling riform propoozlz inhibits th chans ov a yunivursl fonetic riform that wud disiisivli eez th patt tu litrusi fr th poyulaashnz ov th diveluping countriz. It seemz hauevr that moost ov wot iz ritn on th subject ov speling riform, adresz th prefrnsz ov naativ english nd american litruts huu in fact reprizent a smoul, if paurfl miinoriti (abaut won tentt) ov th wurldz popyulaashn! 

This miinoriti r oulredi litrut nd jenruli hav a gud standard ov living. They (we) get along wel with or withaut a speling riform. In contrast, in uthr parts ov th wurld, peepl r living undr desprut surcumstansz. If thaa wur aabl tu speec, reed nd riit in a comn wurld langwij, thaa cud maac direct contact with  sorsz ov help nd cud asist directing rescyu opraashnz nd a corupshn free distribyushn ov supliiz.

Ilitrut familiz r not aabl tu reed th instrucshnz on wot evr medicl matiriul thaa maa hav riseevd fr a sicnus or injuri. Th farmr canot reed th instrucshnz tu survis his tractr  or undrstand th contents ov uthr ritn matr. We in th industriuliizd wurld r tuu indifrnt tu ther pliit. We doont eevn enshor that thaa oul hav cleen woutr tu drinc. Implmenting an eezi tu lurn wurld english with wich thaa can cmyunicaat vurbli or in riiting iz th veri leest we cud duu, but even that iz blocd az long az letharjic politishnz nd unimajinitiv lingwists opooz efectiv simplificaashn ov english speling.

Much ov saaspelz fonetic speling iz familiur tu europeanz az yuzd in ther oon langwij. It iz rijectd bi sum english litruts bicoz,“it duznt luc english inuf”. Thaa faal tu grasp th importns ov an eezi tu lurn comn wurld langwij. Having a riform luc mor english, at th xpens ov it being mor dificult  fr ‘forinrz’ tu lurn iz not an opshn.

Saaspel riformz r fr th popyulaashnz ov africa, south america, asia, india, china, nd  fr dislexics nd oul peepl huu wont tu lurn a yunivursl english speling qicli, withaut th frustraating strugl with iregyulr spelingz.

Oopn miindd litruts cnseed that saaspel iz eezi tu reed, eevn at furst siit. Encurijing  risponsz cum frm peepl with litl nolij ov english huu fiind that thaa r aabl tu pronauns saaspel wurdz corectli, that thaa had not seen nor hurd bifor nd withaut nooing wot ther meening iz. Mesijz praazing th sistm nd th cd az wel az th speling sistm itself r freeqnt. 

In this ilectronic aaj, scuuling in a saaspel tiip fonetic english can b surcyulaatd araund th wurld ttruu th intrnet in minits. Fonetic CDz nd bucs can b distribyutd  in weeks; elimentri english can b spoocn nd riitn amung biginrz in les than a yir.

Litrusi iz th singl moost importnt factr in oul subjects, b it histori, jiografi, siiuns, mattmatics, comurs, law, medisn, or politics.

Saaspel impruuvs litrusi standards oulraund.

R.W.B.

www.saaspel.com   saaspel@blain.de

*    *    *

 

Saaspel fr oul peepl ttretnd with th horurz ov lurning Traditioal English