I’m from Iceland and we have these letters and I think it does make some sense. English spelling is not very good and the alphabet needs some additions and simplification. These are happening today but very slowly most notably in American English but I’d like to see some development.
Þorn is a great letter, I þink it makes sense as a replacement for th like it was historically used. Adding in þe ð is overkill in my opinion since it’s very þese sounds are already represented wiþ þe þorn.
You can still see it in “Ye old whatever” where þe Y is actually a Þ after a lot of iterations. It was always pronounced as a “th” sound.
I fiuly agree. In fact, I have a multi-step suggestion:
In Year 1 that useless letter “c” would be dropped to be replased either by “k” or “s”, and likewise “x” would no longer be part of the alphabet.
The only kase in which “c” would be retained would be the “ch” formation, which will be dealt with later.
Year 2 might reform “w” spelling, so that “which” and “one” would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish “y” replasing it with “i” and iear 4 might fiks the “g/j” anomali wonse and for all.
Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants.
Bai iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez “c”, “y” and “x” – bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez – tu riplais “ch”, “sh”, and “th” rispektivli.
Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.
Agreed, English orthography doesn’t match pronunciation very well, but what’s the point of changing th to þ if it doesn’t improve that situation? In this phrase, the thorn represents two different phonemes: While terminal th may be pronounced as þ (voiceless) or ð (voiced) depending on the English dialect, for example, ðe would be a different word than þe. Adding a new letter to the alphabet just to replace a perfectly-serviceable digraph would just add another letter to the alphabet.
If we’re gonna bother, I’d say sort out the c / k / ch situation instead.
100% agree, the c, k, s, ch situation is horrible in English when there are plenty of examples of doing it properly all across Europe. ch as č, ç for c that makes an s sound in case it’s in front a or u like Portuguese.
I don’t have issues with English spelling personally and I like how it looks but I see it as one of the least intuitive languages to spell. Letters are silent, double, triple or quadruple duty all over with tons of exceptions. I think English could really use some diacritics like ğ, ç, š for denoting when a letter does not follow a clear and simple rule like “presšure”, “thouğh” and “façade”.
But yeah, there’s no forcing anything anyway ever, it’s all organic evolution but now we don’t have a bunch go lazy monks trying to save pen strokes to advance the writing system further.
I’m from Iceland and we have these letters and I think it does make some sense. English spelling is not very good and the alphabet needs some additions and simplification. These are happening today but very slowly most notably in American English but I’d like to see some development.
Þorn is a great letter, I þink it makes sense as a replacement for th like it was historically used. Adding in þe ð is overkill in my opinion since it’s very þese sounds are already represented wiþ þe þorn.
You can still see it in “Ye old whatever” where þe Y is actually a Þ after a lot of iterations. It was always pronounced as a “th” sound.
The internet is for Þorn!
;-Þ
I fiuly agree. In fact, I have a multi-step suggestion:
I understood up to the last two paragraphs then it’s gibberish
Slow your roll, Twain
sh → c
ch → tc
kh → x
y and u have their own unqiue sounds associated with them, even if those are not used in English.
By chance, have you ever read the novel Ella Minnow Pea? I feel like you might enjoy it if you haven’t.
Thank you. <3
> Looks inside
> Unreadable gibberish
I love it.
Agreed, English orthography doesn’t match pronunciation very well, but what’s the point of changing th to þ if it doesn’t improve that situation? In this phrase, the thorn represents two different phonemes: While terminal th may be pronounced as þ (voiceless) or ð (voiced) depending on the English dialect, for example, ðe would be a different word than þe. Adding a new letter to the alphabet just to replace a perfectly-serviceable digraph would just add another letter to the alphabet.
If we’re gonna bother, I’d say sort out the c / k / ch situation instead.
100% agree, the c, k, s, ch situation is horrible in English when there are plenty of examples of doing it properly all across Europe. ch as č, ç for c that makes an s sound in case it’s in front a or u like Portuguese.
I don’t have issues with English spelling personally and I like how it looks but I see it as one of the least intuitive languages to spell. Letters are silent, double, triple or quadruple duty all over with tons of exceptions. I think English could really use some diacritics like ğ, ç, š for denoting when a letter does not follow a clear and simple rule like “presšure”, “thouğh” and “façade”.
But yeah, there’s no forcing anything anyway ever, it’s all organic evolution but now we don’t have a bunch go lazy monks trying to save pen strokes to advance the writing system further.