Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society J28, 2000/2.

[Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society, 28, 2002/2 p32 in the print version]

LETTERS

Letters are welcomed on any matters raised by items appearing in JSSS, or on any
observations or experiences relating to spelling that readers may wish to report.

Anglo-American variants

When it comes to choosing between UK and US spellings, I'm not sure we should rush to
simplify spellings which have not yet been simplified on the other side of the Atlantic. For
example, Americans still prefer prophecy as a noun - and while it might be better if everyone
always wrote prophesy, perhaps we should continue to distinguish the noun and verb. I also
think the Americans are right to use the spelling of practice in all cases, largely because the
word notice has the same -TICE ending.

The American spellings I'm most keen to see in British English are those related to biology, and
I wonder whether the SSS has ever tried to persuade the British Medical Association to use
forms like anesthetic and hemoglobin. I think it would be worth mentioning that fetus is
acceptable in the UK and so there's no reason why all the other US variants can't be as well
when it involves omitting silent A or O (e.g. diarrhea, gynecology and orthopedic). I would prefer
tumor, but I feel this belongs in a different category with words such as humor/humour and
labor/labour).

I have some reservations as to whether we should follow American acknowledgment and
judgment, however. Retaining the E when their base words (acknowledge and judge) have it
could well make things easier for the average person. In fact, acknowledgement and judgement
are such common spelling "mistakes" in America that they are now being accepted. Also, the E
in management has yet to be dropped in the States, and if all three words continue to be spelt
with an E it might help to maintain some consistency.
Jon Free, Ipswich, England

Danish Ø

In his article on Finnish (JSSS 25, p12), Colin Davies suggests, with reference to a symbol for
the schwa: "If we are going for fonetic spelling, we had better find a substitute for Ö that is
quicker to write, and has no dots on top."
In his article "Spelling Reform - arguments against and for" (JSSS 27, p19), Justin Rye states "
One new vowel would be handy; I' d go for Scandinavian (Danish, actually) slashed ø as in
Bjørk."

The SSS Committee has ruled that it will not consider further systems in the Personal View
series which involve diacritic symbols.

I suggest we might adopt Danish Ø as a 27th letter, to represent the ER sound as in fir, fur,
heard, were, meter, which would become før, før, hørd, wør, metør. A large number of English
words could be regularized by its adoption. I am not sure that it should be adopted for schwa,
and if it was to be, it should be at a later stage. Perhaps even Ø should come as a second
stage?

Ø does not stick out in lines of type like Ö and Ö do. The letter can be produced on a typewriter
by typing /-backspace-O. It can be written quickly by completing the circle and making a
downstroke. Finally, even the traditionalists ought to be able to accept that English owes
something to Danish as one of its predecessor languages.
Ted Relton, Ilford, England

[Journal of the Simplified Spelling Society, 28, 2002/2 p32 in the print version]

JSSS 28 2002/2: Literature Received

In the past 6 months JSSS has received the following publications:

1 eda News, newsletter of the European Dyslexia Association, Vol.6 No.2, August 2000.
2 English, the Journal of the English Association, Vol.49, No.194, Summer 2000; No.195,

Autumn 2000.
3 English Association Newsletter, No.164, Summer 2000.
4 English Today, No.63, July 2000; No.64, October 2000.
6 QUEST, the Journal of the Queen’s English Society, No.76, September 2000.
7 Reading, Vol.34, No.2, July 2000; Vol.34, No.3, November 2000; from UK Reading

Association.
8 Rechtschreibung, newsletter of the Bund für vereinfachte rechtschreibung (Federation for

simplified spelling), Zürich, No.181, June 2000.
9 Sprachreport, from the Institut für deutsche Sprache, Mannheim, Germany, 2/2000, 3/2000.