Please note: This website has no control over the ads placed here by Google AdSense or Tripod. Caveat emptor.

Simpler Spelling
Word of the Day
Archive of Discussions
October-December 2012

Click here for today's suggestion.
Click here to return to the archive index.
Click here for a list of possible future words.
Click here for the principles that govern the selection of words.

Munday, December 31, 2012:  "eucalipt" and "eucaliptus" for "eucalypt/us"

Y midword should be pronounced as a long-I ("cyan", "dynamo", "hydration", not short-I: "eucalipt" and "eucaliptus".

Sunday, December 30, 2012:  "deveate" and "deveant" for "deviate" and "deviant"

Why do so many words in traditional spelling use I to represent a long-E sound? That makes no sense. We have the model of "create" to show how today's words should be spelled: "deveate" and "deveant".

Saturday, December 29, 2012:  "carracal" for "caracal"

Both A's in today's word take a short-A sound, but AR ordinarily takes a "broad"-A, the same sound as short-O ("bar", "carton", "starvation"). To show a short-A before an R-sound, traditional spelling often doubles the R ("carrot", "barrel", "garret").  Let's do that here: "carracal".

Friday, December 28, 2012:  "brovvo" for "bravo"

Given the similar word "brave" and the fact that today's word is spelled with a single consonant after the A, the reader has the right to expect a long-A here. In actuality, the A is "broad", the same sound as short-O. So we should substitute an O for the A and double the V to show that the O is short: "brovvo".

Thursday, December 27, 2012:  "aljebra" for "algebra"

Why on Earth would we write a J-sound with G?: "aljebra".

Wensday, December 26, 2012:  "theeater" for "theater" and "theatre"

EA is ambiguous, which has caused many people to see it in today's word as representing a single syllable (as in "beat","treat", and "seat"). Here, however, it represents two syllables, a long-E followed by a schwa. To show that, we need merely double the E before the A: "theeater".

As regards the British spelling "theatre", still affected by some people in the United States, it is irrational, because the second-E's sound precedes the R-sound. It does not follow it: "theeater".

Tuesday, December 25, 2012:  "stachue" for "statue"

T does not spell the CH-sound (as in "church"). CH spells that sound: "stachue".

Munday, December 24, 2012:  "refuljent" for "refulgent"

This seems an appropriate word for this time of year, so filled with Christmas lites. There's only one thing wrong with the spelling, a G misused to represent the J-sound. G has its own sound ("get", "go", "given"), and should be used for that sound only. J is the letter designed to express the sound in today's word. Let's use it: "refuljent".

Sunday, December 23, 2012:  "pandemoneum" for "pandemonium"

There's only one thing wrong in this five-syllable word, an I for a long-E sound. Why would we write I for long-E?: "pandemoneum".

Saturday, December 22, 2012:  "metonnimy" and "mettonimmic" for "metonymy" and "metonymic"

The first-Y in the first of today's words takes the sound of short-I. We don't need Y to represent that. I will suffice, if followed by a double-N. We can leave the second-Y as-is. In the noun, the E represents a schwa, so a single-T is OK.

In the adjective, there are two stressed syllables. The primary stress falls on the third syllable, but a secondary stress falls on the first, and the E is transformed into a full short-E. To show that, we need to double the T. The O changes to a schwa, so we don't need a double-N after it in the adjective, only in the noun. In the adjective's third syllable, which is stressed, the vowel sound is short-I, so we need to change it from Y to I and double the M after it.

Putting this all together, we get: "metonnimy" and "mettonimmic".

Friday, December 21, 2012:  "javvelin" for "javelin"

AVE should be pronounced with a long-A ("nave", "rave", "shave"). The sound here, however, is short-A. To show that, we need only double the V: "javvelin".
____________________

Note: Some people pronounce this word in two syllables, ignoring the medial-E. If they can ignore an E, they can ignore a VE. But the formal spelling should cue people to the correct, three-syllable pronunciation.

Thursday, December 20, 2012:  "haj" for "hajj" and "hadj"

We don't need a double consonant at the end of a word. One will do very nicely: "haj".
____________________

I offered "hajjy" here on August 10, 2012. Tho many people will see this word as foreign, and pronounce the A in the "Continental" fashion, as a "broad"-A, the same sound as short-O, it has been in English since around 1670, so its pronunciation has been anglicized. Still, the A does permit people who prefer to say "hoj" to do so.

Wensday, December 19, 2012:  "jyro/scope" for "gyroscope"

Why does English so often represent a J-sound with G? It makes no sense. We have J to represent that sound unambiguously. Let's use it: "gyro/scope".
____________________

My thanks to "Cargo..." for suggesting reform of today's word, tho I chose a slitely different solution.

Tuesday, December 18, 2012:  "fueneral" and "fueneereeal" for "funeral" and "funereal"

These two related words are both spelled badly. FUN starts them both, which is hardly appropriate, and it is pronounced with a long-U with initial Y-glide, which is not clear from the E after the N ("dune" and "tune" might be said that way, in British dialects, but not in standard English (that is, the language as pronounced by over 70% of all native speakers, who live in North America), and nobody in the English-speaking world says a long-U with initial Y-glide in "prune").

Common ways of showing that sound are UE ("ague", "argue", and "value") and EU ("feud", "euphemism", and "eugenics"). UE is more customary, so let's use that.

In the adjective, "funereal", there are two additional problems. The first-E does not sound like the one in "funeral", but is long. The clearest spelling for long-E is EE. Let's use that.

The second-E is also long, and is said separately from the AL, unlike the usual pronunciation of EA, in one syllable ("deal", "appeal", "conceal"). We need to show that, somehow. Doubling the second-E would work as well as doubling the first-E, even tho it may seem cumbersome to have two EE's in one word (tho we do have that in other words: "teepee", "peewee", "squeegee"). Better cumbersome but clear than streamlined but ambiguous: "fueneral" and "fueneereeal".  

Munday, December 17, 2012:  "eckinaisha" for "echinacea"

The CH in today's word represents not the CH-sound (as in "church") but a simple K-sound. So we should change it to K. After a short-E, as here, we would need either KK or CK. CK is much more commonplace in traditional spelling, so let's use that.

Toward the end of the word is a CE that is supposed to represent the SH-sound as in "shush". CE does not spell the SH-sound. SH does.

Once we fix that problem, the A before the two-letter consonant cluster SH would likely be read as short, whereas it is actually long. To show that, we could write AY, AE, or AI. Midword, AI is most common, so let's write that: "eckinaisha".

Sunday, December 16, 2012:  "dizzolv" for "dissolve"

SS should surely be pronounced as S, not Z. And the final-E adds absolutely nothing, but could lead new learners, especially outside the old-line English-speaking countries, to think it might be pronounced as an additional syllable with a long-E, as it is in "abalone", "epitome", and "finale". Actually, it is silent, so shouldn't be there: "dizzolv".

Saturday, December 15, 2012:  "carrabeener" for "carabiner" and "karabiner"

First, most people  in English-speaking countries would not expect "karabiner" to be the preferred spelling, but in Britain, it is. In the United States, where the bulk of all native speakers of "English" reside, the C is preferred, so let's use that.

Second, AR is most commonly seen as having a "broad"-A, the same sound as short-O ("car", "star", "archery"). To show a regular short-A before an R-sound, we often double the R ("sparrow", "arrogant", "barrel").

Third, the I represents not an I-sound (long as in "diatribe", or short as in "pitiful") but a long-E sound. Why would we write an E-sound with an I? The clearest representation of long-E is EE. Let's write that.

Putting this all together, we get: "carrabeener".

Friday, December 14, 2012:  "bullyon" and "bullyun" for "bouillon" and "bullion"

This Food Friday, let's simplify a word for broth that is spelled unpredictably, and deal as well with a similar word that needs to be written more clearly. "Bouillon", the broth, is pronounced wih a short-O in the second syllable; "bullion", meaning gold or silver in bulk, is pronounced with a schwa, close to a short-U, in the second syllable. Both words are pronounced just like "bull" in the first syllable, despite the extra O and I in the word for broth.

LLON does not show a Y-sound. LION does, but only between a long-I sound and a schwa in the word "lion", which is pronounced very differently from the second syllable of "bullion". If the sound is Y, we should spell it with a Y: "bullyon" and "bullyun".

Thursday, December 13, 2012:  "ajjutant" for "adjutant"

The DJ here stands in for what should be two J's, a J-sound shown by two letters to mark the prior vowel short. There is no basis in logic for treating J differently from other consonants, and not simply doubling it after a short vowel: "ajjutant".

Wensday, December 12, 2012:  "tippical/ly" for "typical/ly"

TYP should be pronounced with a long-I sound, as in "typing", but here, the sound is short-I. That is best shown by an I followed by a doubled-P: "tippical/ly".

Tuesday, December 11, 2012:  "ser" for "sir"

IR is ambiguous, sometimes being pronounced with a long-E ("irritable"), sometimes, with a short-I ("iridescent"), and sometimes, as here, with the sound most commonly spelled ER ("bird"). Since the sound here is the one most commonly written ER, let's write that here: "ser".

Munday, December 10, 2012:  "rellish" for "relish"

RE is a common prefix, usually pronounced with a long-E. Today's traditional spelling looks as tho it should be pronounced ree.lísh and means "to lish again". To break from that pair of potential misunderstandings, we need only double the L: "rellish".

Friday, December 9, 2012:  "parradise" for "paradise"

AR is most commonly pronounced with a "broad"-A, or short-O (the same sound), as in "car", "star", and "partner". But here, the sound is short-A, as in "arrow", "barrel", and "parry", all of which employ a double-R to mark that sound. Let's use that convention in today's word too: "parradise". 

Saturday, December 8, 2012:  "obstinit" for "obstinate"

ATE should be pronounced like that word itself, as would rhyme with "hate", "gate", and "mate". Here, however, the last syllable rhymes with "it", "fit", and "quit". So let's spell it like that: "obstinit".

Friday, December 7, 2012:  "milleum" for "milium"

There are two things wrong with this medical word. First, a single-L permits a reader to see the first-I as long. It is not. To show that it is short, we should double the L.

Second, the I in the second syllable represents neither of I's own sounds, long as in "tidy" and short as in "it". Rather, it represents a long-E. Why would we write an E-sound with an I?: "milleum".

Thursday, December 6, 2012:  "hypertrikosis" for "hypertrichosis"

This scientific word contains a CH that represents not the CH-sound (as in "church") but a simple K-sound. We have a K. Let's use it: "hypertrikosis".

Wensday, December 5, 2012:  "gul" and "seagul" for "gull", "sea gull" and "seagull"

There really is no need for a double consonant to close a short vowel at the end of a word. One consonant can do that quite nicely ("dig", "pun", "hot"). Still, most consonants are found doubled in at least one common word ("ebb", "stuff", "mitt"). We can get rid of most of these double consonants unless doing so would create a new homonym (e.g., "add" to "ad"; "off" to "of"; "barbell" to "barbel"). That is not a problem with today's words.

"Gull" is usually a noun but is also infrequently used as a verb, so in a few verb forms, "gul" would take a second-L before a suffix is added ("gulled", "gulling"). That is, however, standard practice with a single-consonant at the end of a verb ("dot/ted", "rub/bed", "bag/ged"), so does not present a reason not to save a letter with these words in most locations. "Seagull" is, in any case, not a verb, so we don't need to worry about doubling the L before a verbal suffix.

Nor do we need a word space between the "sea" and the "gul(l)": "gul" and "seagul".
____________________

My thanks to "Firewall..." for "gul".

Tuesday, December 4, 2012:  "fruwition" for "fruition"

FRUIT, which starts today's longer word, is a word to itself, pronounced in one syllable. But in the longer word, the same five-letter sequence is supposed to represent two syllables. How is the reader to know not to read it as, simply, frúe.shan? Let's make plain that there are three syllables: "fruwition".

Munday, December 3, 2012:  "ekinoderm" for "echinoderm"

The CH in today's scientific word (for a class of marine animals that include the starfish and sea urchin) represents not the CH-sound, as in "church", but a simple K-sound. English has a letter for that sound, K. Let's use it: "ekinoderm".
____________________

My thanks to "Unicycle..." for this suggestion.

Sunday, December 2, 2012:  "dalmaishan" for "Dalmatian"

"Dalmatian" is a type of dog. It doesn't need a capital letter, any more than does "poodle" or "cocker spaniel". The next problem is that the last syllable sounds as tho it should be spelled TION, but it's not. The sound at the beginning is SH, as in "shush", so let's spell it with an SH, and leave the AN at the end. But a two-letter consonant cluster, SH, would suggest that the preceding-A is short, whereas it is actually long. So let's write that sound with AI, as in "paid", "aim", and "abstain": "dalmaishan".

Saturday, December 1, 2012:  "carnij" for "carnage"

AGE is ambiguous. The reader should be able to rely on AGE being said with a long-A ("age", "stage", "rampage"), but here, the sound is a schwa so close to a short-I that we might as well write it with an I. More, the GE does not represent a G-sound (as in "get", "gear", and "gecko"), but a J-sound. We have a J. Why would we write a J-sound with GE?: "carnij".

Friday, November 30, 2012:  "bravoddo" for "bravado"

The A in ADO is ambiguous, sometimes being pronounced with a schwa ("ado": a.dúe), sometimes with a long-A ("tornado"), and sometimes with a "broad"-A ("avocado"), the same sound as short-O. Here, the sound is short-O, so let's substitute O for the second-A, and double the D to show that the O is short: "bravoddo".

Thursday, November 29, 2012:  "ameeno" for "amino"

The sound in the second syllable is long-E. Why would we write an E-sound with an I?: "ameeno".
____________________

Note: There are apparently some dialectals in Britain who actually pronounce this word with an I-sound. They should conform to standard speech, but if they refuse to conform, they can make a great show of their pride in their dialect by continuing to use the spelling with an I.

Wensday, November 28, 2012:  "trivvit" for "trivet"

There are two problems with this word. First, in location as well as strikingness, is that T-R-I, meaning "three", is most commonly said with a long-I ("tripod", "triangle", "triceps"), so the reader should be able to rely upon it being said with a long-I here, especially in that it is followed by a single consonant, V, and then an E. That forms a pattern that commonly signals a long vowel before the consonant  ("drive", "strive", "arrive"). So the reader has two cues that suggest powerfully that the I should be pronounced long, whereas it is actually pronounced short. To show that the I is short, all we need do is double the V.

The second problem is that the E in the second syllable is actually pronounced as a short-I. So why is it an E? It shouldn't be: "trivvit".

Tuesday, November 27, 2012:  "sluvven/ly" for "sloven/ly"

OVE should be pronounced with a long-O (for instance, in "clove", "rove", and "overt", by Jove). Here, it is pronounced with a short-U — not even an O-sound of any kind. If the sound is U, we should write U. And if it's a short-U, we should double the consonant after it to show that: "sluvven" and "sluvvenly".

Munday, November 26, 2012:  "ror" for "roar"

OA is ambiguous, sometimes being pronounced as long-O ("boat"), sometimes in two syllables ("boa"), and sometimes, as here and in "broad", as the AU-sound (as in "haul"). In "roar", the A is not even needed to show the sound, since if we drop it, the reader will still know how to pronounce what remains: "ror".
____________________

My thanks to "Dogs..." for this suggestion.

Sunday, November 25, 2012:  "parrable" for "parable"

AR most commonly takes a "broad"-A (the same sound as short-O), as in "bar", "star", and "carbon". Here, the sound is a regular short-A, which is more clearly shown by a double-R, as in "arrow", "barrel", and "carrageenan": "parrable".

Saturday, November 24, 2012:  "midwiffery" for "midwifery"

Altho the letter sequence WIFE, which in itself is an English word learned early and said with a long-I, is part of today's word, it does not, here, refer to a female spouse, and is said with a short-I. The meaningful part of the four-letter sequence WIFE is the three-letter sequence WIF, which is Old English for "woman". The ERY after it is said as two syllables. That is, the E stands alone. It does not go with the prior WIF.

But the spelling misleads some people into mispronouncing the longer word with a long-I, and sometimes even into dropping the third syllable entirely, as to make this a three-syllable word pronounced mid.wíef.ree. No, that's wrong. It's pronounced in four syllables, mid.wíf.er.ee. To show that, we should double the F, whereupon all the rest falls into place: "midwiffery".

Friday, November 23, 2012:  "linggweesa" for "linguiça" and "linguica"

This Food Friday word presents three problems. The most obvious is the cedilla under the C, because English does not use diacritics either above or below letters, and most people in the English-speaking world have no idea how to get a Ç/ç to appear in typed material. If the cedilla is dropped, the word turns into "linguica", which plainly looks as tho the C (which appears before an A) should be pronounced as K. No, it represents an S-sound. To show that, we need merely replace the Ç with S.

The second problem is that the reader cannot know whether the NG represents the sound in "singer" or "linger", with a "hard"-G sound. It has a hard-G, so we should show that by writing a second-G.

The third problem is the I in the second syllable, which represents neither of I's own sounds, long as in "icon" and short as in "it", but a long-E sound. If the sound is long-E, why would we write an I? Let's use the clearest spelling for long-E, two E's. That spelling offers the additional virtue of suggesting that the word's stress falls on the second syllable, which it does: "linggweesa".

Thursday, November 22, 2012:  "inturr" for "inter"

"Inter" looks like the prefix that means "between" (differing only in lacking the hyphen of the prefix, "inter-") but is in no way related to that term, and is pronounced differently. The prefix takes stress on the first syllable; the verb "inter" (meaning, to bury) takes stress on the second syllable.

There are two good ways to spell the sound in the second syllable of the verb, ER and UR. ER, already used in the traditional spelling, doesn't do the trick. "Intur" would also fail to show the stress on the second syllable. If we double the R, however (on the model of "err" and "purr"), "interr" might work, but "inturr" seems to me a stronger indicator of stress on the second syllable, so I vote for that: "inturr".

Wensday, November 21, 2012:  "hellicon" for "helicon"

The E in today's word (for a kind of tuba used in marching bands) is short, but the reader cannot know that, since there is only one L, and a word that starts the same, "helicopter", has two pronunciations, one with a long-E. To show that in this word, the E is never long, we need to double the L: "hellicon".

Tuesday, November 20, 2012:  "givvaway" for "giveaway"

As with yesterday, we have today a word with one V that should have two, because the vowel before it, in the same syllable, is short. Indeed, IVE in the traditional spelling should be seen as having a long-I ("hive", "chives", "arrive"). The E serves absolutely no useful purpose, but only confuses the issue. Let's get rid of it, so we add one letter, take one away, and end up with a spelling that is the same length but much clearer: "givvaway".
____________________

I offered "giv" for "give" here on June 7, 2004.

Munday, November 19, 2012:  "frivvolus" and "frivollity" for "frivolous" and "frivolity"

We have in today's first word a letter that many people seem to think should never be doubled. Like J in yesterday's word, V is just another consonant, so should be doubled to show that a vowel (a) before it, (b) in the same syllable, is short. In "frivolous", the V meets those two criteria, so should be doubled. In "frivolity", the V goes with the following syllable, so should not be doubled. What should, however, be doubled is the L, to show that the O is short.

The OUS in "frivolous" has no OU-sound, so let's drop the O: "frivvolus" and "frivollity".

Weekend Edition

Sunday, November 18, 2012:  "egzajjerate" for "exaggerate"

There are two things wrong with this word. First, the X is ambiguous. The X in the EX at the beginning of a word is usually pronounced like KS ("exclusive"), but it could be pronounced like GZ ("exist"). X itself can also be pronounced like KSH ("luxury"), GZH ("luxurious"), and even Z ("xylophone"). So the X has to go, to be replaced by the GZ it actually represents.

Second, GG ordinarily represents a ("hard") G-sound after a short vowel ("egg", "bagged", "nagging"). It can, equally reasonably, represent a G-sound followed by a J-sound ("suggest"). What GG should never sound like is what it represents here, a simple J-sound. We have a J. Let's use it, and treat it like any other consonant, doubling it after a short vowel: "egzajjerate".
____________________

My thanks to "yaora..." for this suggestion.

Saturday, November 17, 2012:  "derrelict" for "derelict"

A single-R followed by E makes the sound of the E before it very unclear. Is the word pronounced déer.likt, dáir.lict (on the pattern of "there"), dér.e.likt, or dér.a.likt? People who happen to know the word from hearing it, know how to say it, but people trying to learn to read, and esp. the hundreds of millions of people outside the English-speaking world, at any given time, who are trying to learn English from written materials, have no clue from the spelling how to say this infrequently heard word. The pronunciation is dér.a.lìkt. We could write that as "derralict", but some people say the second-E as other than a schwa, so let's just leave that E: "derrelict".

Friday, November 16, 2012:  "chechy" for "ceci"

Today's Food Friday word is the originally Italian word, in the plural, for chickpeas. It is pronounced with two CH-sounds, as in "church", but has no written-H. It needs two. It also needs the -I at the end to be changed to -Y, since -I could be pronounced as long-I ("alkali", "hippopotami", "stimuli"). -Y is not completely unambiguous ("quality", "qualify") but is more likely to be pronounced correctly: "chechy".

Thursday, November 15, 2012:  "bunggalo" for "bungalow"

There are two problem areas in today's word. First, the NG is ambiguous. It might or might not have a hard-G sound, but there's no way for the reader to know. It does, and we can show that simply by adding a second-G. Second, OW is ambiguous, and can be said with an OU-sound ("how", "now", "brown") or long-O ("show", "know", "flow"). Here, the sound is long-O, which we can indicate clearly, simply by dropping the W, which also saves us a letter: "bunggalo".

Wensday, November 14, 2012:  "ajoin" for "adjoin"

We don't need DJ to show a simple J-sound. J by itself will do quite nicely here, since the first syllable is only a schwa. ADJ- suggests both that the A is a full short-A, when it's not, and that the word takes its primary stress on the first syllable, when it's actually on the second: "ajoin".

Tuesday, November 13, 2012:  "turquoiz" for "turquoise"

Altho there are three pronunciations for this word in different parts of the English-speaking world (túr.kwoiz, túr.koiz, and túr.kwoz), they all agree that the S represents a Z-sound, so no one should object if we change the S to Z. All three pronunciations also agree that the last sound in the word is the Z-sound. So who can object to our dropping the needless-E?: "turquoiz".

Munday, November 12, 2012:  "slej/hammer" for "sledge/hammer"

DGE is a preposterous, and preposterously long, way to spell a simple J-sound. We have a letter J. Let's use it: "slej" and "slejhammer".
____________________

My thanks to "fishstick..." for this suggestion.

Sunday, November 11, 2012:  "russle" and "russler" for "rustle" and "rustler"

The T in today's words is silent, and we should drop it from the spelling, lest people start pronouncing it again, as some have with the silent-T in "often". In place of the T, we should use a second-S to make plain that the U is short: "russle" and "russler".

Saturday, November 10, 2012:  "fillips" (-head screwdriver) for "Phillips"

PH is an inexcusably absurd spelling for the F-sound. We have an F. Let's use it. As for the capitalization, it's not necessary, because altho this type of screw and screwdriver is named for a particular man, American inventor Henry F. Phillips, we don't keep the capital on a lot of words derived from proper names, such as "diesel", "graham cracker", and "ampere", so we don't need a capital here: "fillips".

Friday, November 9, 2012:  "mellanoma" for "melanoma"

ME, which starts today's word, is a word to itself, pronounced with a long-E. The following single-L in "melanoma" does not tell the reader any differently, so the reader can perfectly reasonably read the E as long. Alas, it is short. So we need to cue the reader to that, which we can do by doubling the L: "mellanoma".

Thursday, November 8, 2012:  "lik" for "lick"

We don't need two consonants at the end of a word to show a short-I. The sound is K, and the C is superfluous: "lik".

Wensday, November 7, 2012:  "kinnestheezha", "kinnesthesis", and "kinnesthettic" for "kinesthesia", "kinaesthesia", "kin(a)esthesis" and "kin(a)esthetic"

INE should be pronounced with a long-I ("fine", "dine", "divine"). In actuality, the I is short in all of today's words. To show that, we should double the N.

The SIA is said not with an S-sound, but a ZH-sound, so we should write ZH. But if we do write ZH, a two-letter consonant cluster that would ordinarily mark the preceding vowel as short, we need to show that the vowel sound before it is a long-E, which we can do easily by writing EE.

In the adjective, a single-T leaves unclear the sound of the preceding-E, which could be long. It's actually short, and we can show that plainly by doubling the T.

And thus do we arrive at: "kinnestheezha", "kinnesthesis", and "kinnesthettic".

Tuesday, November 6, 2012:  "ignis fachuus" for "ignis fatuus"

The first part of this unusual term for will-o'-the-wisp is fine. But the second has a CH-sound spelled T. T does not spell the CH-sound: "ignis fachuus".

Munday, November 5, 2012:  "hoohplah" for "hoopla"

OO has two sounds, long as in "food" and short as in "good". We have in the word "ooh" a cue to show the long-OO, and we can use that spelling here.

The second problem with today's word is the -A at the end, which would ordinarily be pronounced as a schwa ("arugala", "cola", "formula"). Here, however, it represents a full "broad"-A (as in "father"), which is the same sound as short-O ("upon"). The present spelling is the consequence of the word's origin: "French houp-là! command (as to a child) to move, take a step". At the end of a word, -AH would be clearer: "hoohplah". 

Sunday, November 4, 2012:  "jipsy" for "gypsy" and "gipsy"

Why would we use a G for the J-sound? And why would we use a Y midword for a short-I sound? GY is an especially poor choice, given that the Y at the end of the word takes a different sound. The spelling "gipsy" at least solves one of those problems, but as usual, the better spelling, with the GI, is the alternate, and the worse, with the GY, is the standard! Let's get rid of both of those defective spellings, tho, and use JI: "jipsy".
____________________

My thanks to "Robert..." for this suggestion.

Saturday, November 3, 2012:  "flachulent" and "flachulence" for "flatulent" and "flatulence"

T does not spell the CH-sound, as in "church". CH spells the CH-sound: "flachulent" and "flachulence".

Friday, November 2, 2012:  "ennema" for "enema"

ENE is ambiguous, in that it could be pronounced with a long-E ("scene", "gene", "neoprene"). Especially is the sound unclear here in that there is a word that differs by only one letter ("edema") but is pronounced e.dée.ma. So we should double the N to show that the first-E is short, and the word's stress falls on the first syllable: "ennema".

Thursday, November 1, 2012:  "deppilate" for "depilate"

There are a couple of problems with this word. First, DE- is often pronounced with a long-E ("decent", "deviate", "defense"), but here, the sound is short-E. We can show that by doubling the following-P. That will also solve another problem, which is that in the present spelling it is not obvious where the word's stress falls. It falls on the first syllable: "deppilate".

Wensday, October 31, 2012:  "cerammic" for "ceramic"

A single-M renders unclear the sound of the A. Is it long (as in "amiable")? Is it short (as in "amicable")? It's short. To show that clearly, we should double the M: "cerammic".

Tuesday, October 30, 2012:  "brouz/er" for "browse/r"

There are two things wrong with today's words. First, OW is ambiguous, being commonly pronounced both long-O ("show", "know", "bestow") and as the OU-sound ("now", "brow", "allow"). Here, the sound is OU, so should be written as OU.

The second problem is that S is used for the Z-sound. Why? We have a Z. Let's use it: "brouz" and "brouzer".
____________________

My thanks to "Gator..." for this suggestion.

Munday, October 29, 2012:  "aracnid" for "arachnid"

CH should represent the CH-sound, as in "church", but here it stands in for the K-sound, which has much better spellings. One is C at the end of a word, or before a consonant or the vowels A, O, and U. In today's word, we can make the K-sound plain simply by dropping the H, which leaves a C in one of the circumstances in which it is read as a K-sound. Let's save ourselves a letter and make plain that the consonant here is not the CH-sound: "aracnid".

Sunday, October 28, 2012:  "trikkinosis" and "trikkiniasis" for "trichinosis" and "trichiniasis"

Why would we write a K-sound with CH? We have the letter K for that sound. Let's use it. In today's words (both relating to the same malady), we need a double-K, to show that the preceding I is short. This is especially important in that the prefix TRI is customarily said with a long-I. But the TRI in today's words is not that prefix, but part of another prefix, TRICH-, which takes a short-I.

We might use CK rather than KK to show this short-I, but that would yield "TRICK-", which would produce confusion with that familiar word, to which today's words bear no relation whatsoever. So KK is better: "trikkinosis" and "trikkiniasis".

Saturday, October 27, 2012:  "shakko" for "shako" and "shacko"

Today's word has two spellings (as above) and three pronunciations (sháak.oe, sháe.koe, and shók.oe), as various dictionaries see things. But as the second spelling, "shacko", shows plainly, the proper pronunciation has a short-A. Let's remove all doubt, by doubling the K: "shakko".

Friday, October 26, 2012:  "romonno" for "Romano" and "romano"

We don't need to capitalize this name of a cheese. We don't, after all, capitalize "cheddar" or "provolone". So that's the first fix for this Food Friday word.

The second is to replace the misleading A, which does not represent either of A's basic sounds, short as in "at" and long as in "ate". Rather, it is a "broad-A", which is the same sound as short-O, which would be a lot clearer to new readers, who see "Roman" as a familiar word. "Romano" is not said like "Roman" plus a long-O. Rather, the vowel sound of the second syllable is short-O, which we can show clearly by O with a doubled N after it. That would simultaneously show that the second syllable takes the word's stress: "romonno".

Thursday, October 25, 2012:  "parramoor" for "paramour"

There are two problems with today's word. First, AR is most commonly pronounced with a "broad"-A, or short-O (the same sound): "bar", "car", "startle". That is not the sound here, which is a regular short-A. That sound is more clearly written with a double-R ("arrow", "carrel", "barrister"). So let's double the R.

The second problem is that there is an OU, but no OU-sound. The actual sound is a long-U with no initial Y-glide, which is often written OO ("boor", "poor", and, esp., "moor"). OO is only one letter off from the current spelling, and clearer than other possible spellings. "Parramure", for instance, would be seen as having a Y-glide. "Parramur" wouldn't do. So let's use OO: "parramoor".

Wensday, October 24, 2012:  "orojjeny", "orojennesis", "orojennic", and "orojenettic" for "orogeny", "orogenesis", "orogenic", and "orogenetic"

Let's fix a little family of related scientific words that refer to the geological process of mountain-making. The base word and all derivatives employ a G for a J-sound. Why? If the sound is J, we should write J.

In the base word, we need two J's, to show that the J-sound ends its syllable, the preceding-O is short, and the word's stress falls on the second syllable. In the derivatives, we need only one J because the J-sound goes with the following syllable.

In "orogenesis" and "orogenic", we need to double the N, to show at once that the preceding-E is short and that the word's stress falls on the third syllable.

In "orogenetic", we need to double, instead, the T, to show at once that the preceding-E is short and the fourth syllable takes the word's primary stress. Putting these little fixes together, we get: "orojjeny", "orojennesis", "orojennic", and "orojenettic".

Tuesday, October 23, 2012:  "mol" for "moll"

Altho this is an old-fashioned word not much used today, it does occur from time to time, so should be made plain. It is parallel in spelling to "boll", "roll", and "toll", which have a long-O, and to "doll" and "loll", which have a short-O. So the reader cannot possibly know from the spelling how to pronounce it. That should never be the case with alphabetic writing, because the very purpose of an alphabet is to convey sound.

"Moll" has a short-O, and thus rhymes not just with "doll" and "loll" but also with "pol" (informal term for a politician). Since "pol" is clear as to sound, let's use its form, drop an L, and at once clarify the pronunciation and save ourselves a letter: "mol".

Munday, October 22, 2012:  "lable" for "label"

The present spelling would be fine if words that rhyme with it took the same form. But when "able", "fable", "table", etc. take a different pattern, it's an imposition on new learners to force them to remember that there is an exception to that pattern. It is easier just to conform "label" to the usual pattern. Besides, some readers might see "label" as sounding like (Patti) "LaBelle". So let's also prevent that misreading: "lable".
____________________

My thanks to "Caste"... for this suggestion.

Sunday, October 21, 2012:  "icthammol" and "ictheol" for "ichthammol" and "ichthyol"

Why is there a CH in these paired words, when there is no CH-sound (as in "church")? The sound is K, and if we simply drop the H, what remains will show a K-sound plainly.

The other issue in these words is the Y in "ichthyol". Midword, it is much better to reserve Y to a long-I sound ("hydrate", "dynamite", "plywood"). Here, the sound is long-E. Why not just write an E?: "icthammol" and "ictheol".

Saturday, October 20, 2012:  "hemmimorfite" for "hemimorphite"

There are two problems with today's word for a mineral sometimes used as a gem. First, the sound of the first-E is unclear because of the single-M after it, which might go with the following syllable, as does the second-M; so the first-E might be long. But that E is short, and the following-M ends the first syllable. We can at once show the short E and cue the reader to the fact that the first syllable takes a secondary stress, by doubling the M.

The second issue is the indefensibly absurd use of PH to represent a simple F-sound. Pronouncing P and H in sequence does not make an F-sound.

There's a third area some people might like to see changed, the I in "hemi", since they pronounce it with an unstressed long-E. But dictionaries insist it's a short-I, so we can leave it, and anyone who wants to say a long-E can just say it without express permission from the spelling: "hemmimorfite".

Friday, October 19, 2012:  "grunyon" for "grunion"

This Food Friday, let's fix the name of a sardine-size California (and Baja California) fish that is to be caught only with the hands, not any kind of fishing gear. The word contains the three-letter 'run' ION, which is a word to itself, pronounced with a long-I. That is not the sound here, where the ION equates with the YON of "canyon". The word is believed to have originated in Spanish in the form "gruñón", which is parallel to the Spanish form of "canyon", "cañón", so it is appropriate to write this word in the same way as the reformed, English version of that word: "grunyon".

Thursday, October 18, 2012:  "filligree" for "filigree"

We need to double the L in this word to make plain that the I is short, not long as in "filing", "beguiling", and "piling". Altho single-L's after short vowels are extremely common in the chaos we absurdly call the present "spelling system", it is unreasonable to require learners of English to distinguish L from other consonants after short vowels. If the preceding vowel is short, we need to show that. This is esp. important in a word like "filigree", where the reader will wonder why the L is not doubled, as in "fill", so might think that it's because the I is long, not short. Let's just double the L after short vowels: "filligree".

Wensday, October 17, 2012:  "effloresse", "effloressence", and "effloressent" for "effloresce", "efflorescence", and "efflorescent"

There is no reason for there to be a C in these words. The sound is S, and no new learner of English (be it a child in an English-speaking country or a student of any age studying English as a Second Language anywhere on Earth) would, on hearing any of these words, think the S-sound should be spelled other than with one or, because the E-sound before the S-sound is short, two S's. To show that the base word's stress falls on the last syllable, we can leave an E at the end (as in "finesse", "largesse", and "politesse", which should serve as the model for today's words): "effloresse", "effloressence", and "effloressent".  

Tuesday, October 16, 2012:  "dopameen" for "dopamine"

-INE should be pronounced with a long-I, as in "fine", "dine", and , esp., "mine", but here it's pronounced with a long-E. To show that, we should rewrite the last syllable of today's word with EE: "dopameen".

Munday, October 15, 2012:  "shatoyant" for "chatoyant"

This is an interesting word, etymologically speaking. It means, in jewelry parlance, "reflecting a single streak of light when cut in a cabochon", like a cat's-eye gem, and indeed, the word comes from French, a "special use of present participle of chatoyer to change luster like a cat's eye, equivalent to chat cat + -oy- v. suffix + -ant -ant"! The only problem with its spelling, in English, is that it uses the French pronunciation of CH, which is the sound of SH in English. Thus, all we have to do to make this word plain to readers of English is change one letter, the C, to S: "shatoyant".

Sunday, October 14, 2012:  "berril" and "berilleum" for "beryl" and "beryllium"

These related words both have absurd spellings. First, Y, midword, should be reserved for a long-I sound, as in "hydrate", "tycoon", and "pyromaniac". Second, a single-R leaves unclear the sound of the preceding-E, which could perfectly well be read as long. In actuality, it's short, and the way we ordinarily make that plain is by doubling the following consonant. Those two flaws would apply to both of today's words except that in "beryllium" the R goes with the second syllable, so doesn't need to be doubled, tho the R in "beryl" does, since it closes the first syllable.

In "beryllium", there is at least a double-L, to show that whatever vowel precedes it should be seen as short. But why would we write a Y to show a short-I sound and an I to show a long-E sound? If the sound is E, let's write an E: "berril", "berilleum".

Saturday, October 13, 2012:  "ajacent" for "adjacent"

Why on Earth is there a D in this word? If the word were spelled "adgacent", you might see the point of a D, in suggesting that the G takes its "soft" sound, like J, tho few readers would see DG in such a place as indicating a J-sound, even tho we are supposed to see DG before M as representing a J-sound in words like "acknowledgment", "dislodgment", and, esp., "judgment").

The sound here, however, is J, and there already is a J in the spelling. Why would we need a D before it?

Worse, the present spelling reminds one of "adjutant", in which the D cues the reader to pronounce the initial-A as a full short-A, and put the word's stress on the first syllable, whereas the initial-A in "adjacent" is a schwa, and the word's stress falls on the second syllable. So the D not only serves no purpose, but actually confuses the issue of how the word is to be pronounced. Let's just drop it, OK?: "ajacent".

Friday, October 12, 2012:  "tretinnoewin" for "tretinoin"

Today's medical term is a perfect example of why scientists shouldn't be allowed to coin words. The multiply-confusing spelling they came up with is a combination of three elements, "t(ri-) + retino- (Greek rheti´ne resin) + -in". No English-speaking person would see that from the spelling they devised. Indeed, no ordinary English-speaking person would know how to pronounce this word at all from its bizarre spelling.

The E before a single-T could easily be read as long, whereas it is a short-E or schwa. The OI will be seen as being one sound, as in "point", "anoint", and "disjointed", but it is actually said as two sounds, as in "go in".

And the word's stress pattern will be perceived as three syllables, stressed-unstressed-stressed (trét.i.nòin), whereas it is actually four syllables in the unexpected pattern tre.tín.oe.win. All in all, if the coiners of this word were vying for 'Most Preposterous Spelling of the Year', they could hardly have done better. Let us make the sound of this word clear: "tretinnoewin".

Thursday, October 11, 2012:  "shareea" for "shari'ah", "shari'a", "sharia", "shariah", and "sheria"

This word, for Islamic law, is most commonly spelled, in the United States, "shariah". That is parallel in spelling to the female given name "Mariah", but "shariah" has a long-E rather than long-I sound. So that spelling has to go. This spelling would show its actual pronunciation clearly: "shareea".

Wensday, October 10, 2012:  "ruay" for "roué" and "roue"

English does not use accents, so the acute accent must go. The OU does not represent the OU-sound. Rather, the sound is long-U, so the U can stay, but the O has got to go. The E, without an accent, is seen as silent, but it actually takes the sound of long-A, which, at the end of a word, is best shown by -AY. Putting this all together, we get: "ruay".

Tuesday, October 9, 2012:  "fentermeen" for "phentermine"

There are two problems with today's word. First, the sounds P and H do not combine to form an F-sound, the sound here, so the PH must be replaced by F. Second, -INE should be pronounced with a long-I ("mine", "fine", "combine"), but the sound here is long-E. We can show that clearly by replacing the -INE with -EEN: "fentermeen".

Munday, October 8, 2012:  "optommetry", "optommetrist" and "optomettrical" for "optometry", "optometrist", and "optometrical"

A single M leaves unclear the sound of the preceding-O. In "optometry" and "optometrist", the O is short, which should be indicated by doubling the following-M. In "optometrical", the M goes with the following syllable, so should not be doubled. In "optometrical", the E is marked as short by the two-letter consonant cluster TR, so doesn't need a double-T for that. However, doubling the T would be helpful in showing the different syllabic stress in that five-syllable word from the other, four-syllable words: "optommetry", "optommetrist", and "optomettrical".

Sunday, October 7, 2012:  "mit" for "mitt"

We don't need two T's at the end of this word to mark the I as short. One T will do very nicely, and every letter we can drop in spelling simplification saves us some effort and ink or toner: "mit".
____________________

My thanks to "Music..." for this suggestion.

Saturday, October 6, 2012:  "lyr" for "lyre"

Y, midword, is regularly pronounced as a long-I, so we don't need a silent-E after the R that follows the Y to show the Y to be long. Let's just drop the needless E and save ourselves a letter: "lyr".
____________________

My thanks to "garden..." for this suggestion.

Friday, October 5, 2012:  "immijry" for "imagery"

AGE is a word to itself, pronounced with a long-A. That is not the sound here, which is, rather, a schwa so close to short-I as to justify expressing it with an I.

The initial-I in today's word is also short, tho IMA, a female given name, has a long-I. To show that the sound here is short-I, we should double the following-M.

ERY at the end of "imagery" has given rise to the spelling-pronunciation ím.ij.er.ee, but the E is there only to show that the G that precedes it takes its "soft" sound, the sound of J. The E does NOT represent a syllable to itself, and once we replace the GE with J, that spelling-pronunciation will vanish, which is all to the good: "immijry".

Thursday, October 4, 2012:  "hemmeedemmeesemmeequaver" for "hemidemisemiquaver"

This unusual word from the field of music has three single-M's that leave unclear the sound of the preceding E's. They are all short, so all the M's should be doubled.

In addition, the three I's represent neither of I's own sounds, long as in "item" and short as in "it". Rather, the sound is long-E, which is shown most clearly by EE. So let's write all three of those long-E sounds as EE.

These changes would give this word 24 letters, but it already has 18 letters in its traditional spelling, so it's a stretch to suggest that 18 letters is fine, but 24 would be onerous: "hemmeedemmeesemmeequaver".

Wensday, October 3, 2012:  "jennuflect" for "genuflect"

Why are there so many words in traditional English spelling that use G to represent a J-sound? We have a J (not all languages do, but English does). Let's use it. Secondly, a double consonant after the E would make clearer than a single consonant that the E is short. So let's double the N: "jennuflect".

Tuesday, October 2, 2012:  "fillibuster" for "filibuster"

A single-L leaves the reader unclear as to the sound of the preceding-I, which could be long ("filing", "riling", "bilingual") or short ("filial", "filigree", "ability"). Here, the I is short. To make that plain, we should double the L. The rest of the word is fine: "fillibuster".

Munday, October 1, 2012:  "emboalden" for "embolden"

A two-letter consonant cluster such as LD should mark the prior vowel as short ("aldehyde", "builder", "elderberry"), but the O here is long.

Midword, we could write a long-O as OE ("banjoes", "echoed"), OA ("toast", "coal"), or even OH ("kohl", "kohlrabi").

OE, however, often takes other sounds ("canoed", "coed"), so we should probably avoid that combo midword.

OA occasionally has other sounds midword ("board", "coalesce"), but is most commonly pronounced long-O.

OH might be clearest, but many established readers might think it "looks funny" and "un-English". All in all, then, I think the best choice is: "emboalden".
___________________

"Bold" was offered here as "boald" on Febuary 2, 2012.

Click here for today's suggestion.
Click here to return to the archive index.
Click here for a list of possible future words.
Click here for the principles that govern the selection of words.

Please send comments and suggestions to: Fanetiks@aol.com.