Hyperlink-Spelling (aka orthography)
Spoken vs. written language: word form and spelling
Word form
Spelling (orthography)
Principles of writing
Syllabary
Ideograms
Alphabet
Runes, runic alphabet, aka the futhorc
IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet)
English spelling
OE spelling
Caedmon‟s Hymn
Middle English spelling
French influence
Ormulum
Chancery English
Caxton and the advent of printing
EModE spelling
The Great Vowel Shift (GVS)
Standardization of spelling
ModE spelling
Spelling reform; reform movements and reforms
Simplification
Regularization
Derivational uniformity
Reflection of pronunciation
Indication of stress
Pronunciation spellings
Hyphenation
Individual words
The New Spelling
Language planning and policy
Authorities (dictionaries, manuals of usage)
Spellers
Dictionaries
Manuals of usage
Spelling pronunciations
Scottish English
Non-standard spelling
Archaisms
Nonce and advertising spellings
Literary practices
Dialect spellings
Eye dialect
Literary comedians
Texting literature
Informal spellings
Word formation, borrowing, and spelling
Acronyms
Borrowings
Clippings
Hyperlink-Spelling (aka orthography)
Spoken vs. written language
Word form
Spelling (orthography)
(Principles of writing)
(Rules of English spelling)
(Historical practice)
(Present-Day practice)
Spoken vs. written language is a contrast which reflects two aspects of the same phenomenon. The
spoken language is primary in the sense that it is learned before the written language is. Indeed, speakers
of a language can be fluent and creative users of the language without necessarily being literate at all.
Furthermore, numerous languages spoken in today‟s world do not have a writing system. The written
language is, in the sense just mentioned, secondary, but it is not just a reflection of the spoken language
from which is somehow abstracted. It relies on different ways of expressing the distinctions which
speech makes by means of tempo, pitch, intonation, and stress, but it cannot replicate them fully, just
as it cannot reflect the voice quality of the individual speaker. On the other hand, handwriting, too, in
very individual and cannot be copied by speech style or voice quality. Furthermore, the written
language can make use of symbols (e.g. @, , , ), tables, diagrams and other figures – all of which
cannot be reproduced in the spoken language or at least not easily.
The spoken language is more immediate (usually restricted to people close by), generally more short-lived
(bar a recording), more spontaneous, and more individual while the written language is more
independent of the circumstances of its production, accessible over a longer period of time, often
carefully planned and even edited, and subject to conventions of standardization, including spelling in
particular. Written grammar tends to be fussier and more complex than spoken grammar, but also
more generally free of the lexical vagaries like and stuff, fillers such as like or y’know, false starts (well, I, I
… she finally said yes), hesitiation signals (uh), and redundancies (I liked it – it was really good, absolutely tops)
of speech. Perhaps because of these differences many speakers of the language consider the written
language to be the “real” language and miss the point that the two forms of the language fulfill
different functions, each appropriate and legitimate in its own right.
As far as English is concerned, there are probably quite a few speakers of the language besides young
children who are not (functionally) literate. On the other hand, as English spreads across the world as a
global language there are probably very many users of the language who are more comfortable with the
written than the spoken language, esp. since spelling is highly fixed while accent varies enormously.
Word form is the shape of a lexeme on a particular occasion, including an identical sequence of letters or
sounds. Example: Herkneth to me, gode men - Wives, maydnes, and alle men - Of a tale that ich you wile telle
(Text 4.6) has eighteen different word forms; in other words, both occurrences of men count separately
as do me and ich, which are two forms of one single lexeme (the 1st person singular personal pronoun).
A word form is the concrete, physical occurrence of a word and may be graphic or phonetic in nature;
indeed, it may be tactile (e.g. in the braille alphabet) or visually signed in sign language. In contrast, a
lexeme is abstract, which means that the repeated occurrence of the “same” word form can only be
interpreted as the occurrence of same lexeme more than once.
Spelling (orthography) is the conventional means of representing language in the written medium.
English uses the Latin alphabet for this, but once also used runes. The principle of English spelling is
– despite its bad reputation, which itself is due largely to a lack of serious spelling reform – phonetic.
Many of the exceptions are due to borrowing or to sound changes (see also archaisms) which have
occurred since spelling was fixed. Examples: <ea> is regularly used for /i/ as in <beat>, but uneven
change means that quite a few exceptions exist where the pronunciation is /e/, e.g. <death>, and a
few where it is /e/ <great>.
(Spoken vs. written language: word form and spelling)
Principles of writing
Syllabary
Ideograms
Alphabet
Runes
IPA
(Rules of English spelling)
(Historical practice)
(Present-Day practice)
Principles of writing can be realized in a wide variety of ways. Some languages use a syllabary, some use
ideograms or a logogram system of characters, others, like English use an alphabet. There are also
rebus-supported systems of writing.
A syllabary makes use of graphic symbols which stand not for a single sound (or phoneme), but for a
combination of sounds, usually a consonant + vowel combination, which together make up a syllable.
Japanese uses a syllabary, as does Cherokee. Example: the following comes from a chart of the
syllabary used to write the Cherokee language. As you can see, the first line combines an initial /ts/and
the second line an initial /w/ with the vowels in each column: a – e – i – o – u – . All told the
Cherokee syllabary consists of some 85 syllabograms.
Ideograms are characters said to correspond to “ideas” (meanings) rather than to pronunciations.
Chinese is the best known example of a language with a writing system made up of ideograms. The
total number of characters which are available for Chinese may lie close to 50,000 even though
normally well educated users of Chinese can manage very well with between three and four thousand.
Example:
is the character for hànzì “Chinese character.”
English stands in distinct contrast to Chinese inasmuch as it uses a phonetic writing system or alphabet.
English does, of course, use holistic symbols such as <#> or <%> or <$>, and, indeed, it always has
as we see in the use of <7>, a character from the Tironian notes (devised by Marcus Tullius Tiro, 1034 BE), the secretary of Cicero, as a stenographic short-hand ), which stands for ond “and” in much the
way that <&> (ampersand) does today. English sometimes indulges in the fun of a text containing
rebus forms (a rebus is picture or symbol which resembles the intended sound or spelling). Example:
(A poor old man was driving a pig to market with a whip tied to its leg when by some accident the pig
got loose. The man ran after him, but piggy es[caped] …
While the example just given is a bit older, we should not forget that people still love the ludic element
in such texts and play it out in texting or e-mail language.
Alphabet is a system of written symbols which represent sounds. In our case, an alphabet, but which one?
For there are quite a few. Examples:
(Greek); а б в г д е (Cyrillic);
(Hebrew); or a b c
d e (Latin)? OE used runes in the very early period, but OE spelling adopted the Latin alphabet with
the phonetic values of the letters associated with it and added new letters to represent some of the
sounds which differed from Latin. These graphs include thorn <þ>, which is used for present-day
<th>, as is <>, called eth. In Text 2.1 <þ> occurs initially only, as in þis “this” or þā “the/those
(nominative plural)”; and <> elsewhere, e.g. fri “peace, refuge” or oerne “other, second, next.” Both
of them are pronounced either as voiceless// or voiced //depending on their position in a word
and the stress pattern of the word. Wynn <ƿ> for /w/ is a further graph used in OE, but not present
in the Latin alphabet. A final, slightly unusual letter is <æ> as in þær “there, then.” It is called “ash”
and is pronounced as a low front vowel, for which the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) uses
the same symbol /æ/.
Very limited use was made in OE of distinct capital letters. However, the differentiation began to grow as
the Carolingian script spread in the period after the 9th century. The parallel existence of both uncial
(majuscule) script and Carolingian minuscule script led to a capital-lower case distinction (Color plate
no. 2.2 Mercy and Truth [Carolingian minuscule]). ME added the letter yogh <ȝ> for /j/, /g/, and
//. In the long term the Latin alphabet was adopted in its classical form with 23 letters. During the
EModE period printers ceased to use the letters unfamiliar to present-day readers of English even
though <y> sometimes served as a replacement for earlier <þ> (see Text 6.2, where ye stands for both
the and thee).
In EModE <i/j> and <u/v> stood in complementary distribution: Initial <v> was used not only where
ModE has <v> as in vallies but also where it has as in Vranias; medial appears in both
huntresse and loue (see Text 6.4). The letter <j> was still rare at the beginning of the period; instead 
was used for both the vowel (him) and the consonant (Iesus). Furthermore, we often find <y> where
ModE has : Text 6.2 has both hys and his.
The present English alphabet of 26 letters was finally established when it added three new distinct
graphemes: <w> replaced wynn and a once truly double ; and the two pairs of complementary
allographs <i/j> and <u/v> became as distinct graphemes and for vowels and <j> and
<v> for consonants from the end of the Renaissance on.
Other letters than the familiar twenty-six do, in fact, crop up, but these are either printers ligatures like
<œ> for <oe> as in fœtus and <æ> for <ae> as in mediæval or they are graphs (letter forms)
borrowed along with foreign words. Examples: <ç>, <à>, and <ï>, all from French as in façon, vis-à-vis,
and naïve; <ñ> from Spanish as in señor; or <ö> from German as in föhn.
Runes, runic alphabet, aka the futhorc (from the names of the first six runes, as given in the table
below) make up an alphabet used, among others, by the Germanic peoples mostly for inscriptions.
Some of the letters resemble ones in the Latin alphabet; other may have come from Northern Italian
alphabets. The following table reproduces the futhorc (see also Color plate no. 2.1 Runic Pin):
feoh (f)
ger (j)
ing ()
ur (u)
thorn (þ, th)
eoh (eo)
éel ()
peor (p)
dæg (d)
ós (o)
rad (r)
eolh (x, k)
ac (a)
cen (c/k)
sigel (s)
æsc (æ)
gyfu (, g/j)
Tiw (t)
yr (y)
beorc (b)
ior (ia, io)
wynn (w)
hægl (h)
eh (eoh) (e)
nyd (n)
mann (m)
is (i)
lagu (l)
ear (ea)
Relatively few texts written using the furthorc have been passed on. Text 2.2 is one such example,
taken from the Ruthwell Cross (erected in the 7th century) in Southern Scotland and bearing a excerpt
from the poem “The Dream of the Rood.”
IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet) (see following chart found at IPA_chart_2005.png). The IPA
offers an alternative set of symbols used to designate sounds unambiguously. If used broadly each
phoneme in a language is assigned one symbol. Example: the <j> in jet, the <dg> in lodge, and the <g>
in privilege are all /d/. A narrow transcription is more strictly phonemic and distinguishes allophonic
variants such as monophthongal [e] and diphthongal [e] for /e/ as in late.
(Spoken vs. written language: word form and spelling)
(Principles of writing)
Rules of English spelling
Rules of OE spelling
Rules of ModE spelling
(Historical practice)
(Present-Day practice)
English spellings follow a relatively straight-forward set of phonetic principles. The reputation of
English spelling is, however, notoriously bad. This lies in the fact the realization of the principles draws
on a large number of traditional spellings which themselves go back to differing conventions of both
spelling and pronunciation. Above all, English orthography has been relatively resistant toward
spelling reform. Among the important traditions we must count (1) the presumed phonetic quality of
the vowels associated with the letters of the Latin alphabet in OE times; (2) French writing
conventions which were adopted in part in the period after the Norman Conquest; (3) differing
regional spelling traditions based on sometimes clearly differing regional pronunciations of English;
(4) the unhistorical remodeling of spelling to conform to the etymological sources of individual
words; (5) the maintenance of older spellings despite often major changes in the pronunciation, as due,
for example, to the Great Vowel Shift; and, finally, widespread borrowing from other languages along
with the foreign spelling conventions. All of this is coupled with a great inertia in undertaking
reform. There were some modest, but widely accepted changes in the EModE period or shortly after
it. But even the limited reforms generally prevailing in AmE have not been embraced within the BrE
spelling tradition.
OE spelling (2.3.1) did not have the strict convention of spaces between words that we are familiar with.
Although most texts used a modified Latin alphabet, not all did. There were, furthermore, regional
differences in spelling which had in part to do with regional differences in pronunciation, but also with
different scribal traditions. Since by far the largest number of OE texts which we have fall within the
Wessex standard, the latter point is not very prominent. For texts which reveals both sorts of
difference, see Text 2.6 and the discussion of it in 2.5.4 (see also below Caedmon’s Hymn).
The OE spelling of the consonants was much more regular than ModE spellings are. The most
inconsistent was the spelling of the fricative. The graph <þ> did not distinguish between the voiceless
and voiced allophones [] and []. Likewise <f> could be /f/ or /v/ and <s>, /s/ or /z/. This was
not a problem however, since the voiceless fricatives /f, , s/ were restricted to initial or final position
while /v, , z/ were medial. Examples: and forgyf us ūre gyltas, swā swā we forgyfaþ ūrum gyltendum (from
the Lord‟s Prayer, Matthew 6:12 qtd from Carpenter 1891: 52) “And forgive us our debts, as we
forgive our debtors,” where the initial and final <f> in forgyf are both /f/, but the second <f> in
forgyfa is voiced /v/. In contrast, <sc> is always the voiceless fricative //. Example: biscopes
“bishops.” And <cg> is always /d/. Example: ecg “edge.” The letter <c> is somewhat difficult to
interpret. Before the front vowels and <ea> palatalization was generally the case, giving us /t/, as
in ciricean “church”; elsewhere <c> is /k/, as, for example, in cyning “king,” diacones “deacon,” or drincæ
“drinks.” In much the same manner <g> may be /j/ before front vowels, as in dæge “days,” gif “if” or
in the verbal prefix ge-, but // elsewhere, cf. gylde “(re-)pay” and scillinga “shillings” (examples from
Text 2.1). One final ambiguous letter is <h>. At the beginning of a word it has the value of /h/, as in
him “him” (3rd person dative) or hām “home,” but it is /x/, like German <ch> or Spanish <j>, before
a consonant, as in Æelbirht or at the end of a word as in feoh “property” (ModE fee).
The letter-vowels are assumed to have been pronounced much like their “Continental” values, but the use
of macrons – or long marks – over the vowel letters in many editions of OE texts is a purely
convenient modern convention based on the presumed length of the vowel, viz. long <ā, æ, ē, ī, ō, ū,
y> with a macron and the same letters without a macron as short. For two vowel-letters together in
words like feoh or gebiege we assume a diphthongal pronunciation /eo/ and /iy/ (cf. Hogg 1992 or Blake
1996 for details on OE pronunciation).
Blake, N. (1996) A History of the English Language. Houndsmill: Palgrave.
Carpenter, S.H. (1891) “The Sermon on the Mount,” In: An Introduction to the Study of the Anglo-Saxon
Language. Boston: Ginn, 49-55.
Hogg, R.M. (1992) “Phonology and Morphology,” In: R.M. Hogg (ed.) The Cambridge History of the
English Language. vol. I. The Beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: CUP, 67-167.
Caedmon’s Hymn is a late 7th century composition which exists in several different versions. The
manuscript from 737 gives us some idea of Anglian usage, and this can be compared to West Saxon
usage. The choice of words in the two versions below is identical with the exception of l.5, which has
Anglian scop aelda barnum “created, the High Lord, for men”, but West Saxon sceop eorðan bearnum
“created the earth for men.” The major differences are to be found in the vowels. It is widely
recognized that West Saxon underwent a process of diphthongization which does not show up in
northern texts. Vowel qualities also seem to have varied. Some apparent differences are, however,
probably only spelling conventions. Since the two texts come from different regions and from
difference times, the variation may be due to either factor or both. The following table, drawn from
material in the texts, is only a selection of the spelling contrasts (see Text 2.6 and the discussion there;
Blake 1996: 69-73; 115-119).
Early Anglian (Northumbrian, MS of 737)
Early West Saxon (1st half of 10th century)
metudæs maecti
meotodes meahte
end his modgidanc,
and his modgeþanc,
2
The Creator‟s power and His conception,
uerc uuldurfadur,
sue he uundra gihuaes,
weorc wuldorfæder,
swa he wundra gehwæs,
The work of the Father of Glory, as He of every wonder
Anglian
West Saxon
Spellings
metuds
meotodes
<> vs. <e> for [e]; the former: an older (or archaic)
form
maecti
meahte
<c>+C vs. <h>+C for [ç]
modgidanc, -, tha
modgeþanc, eoran, þa
<d/th> vs. < /þ> for [/]
uerc uuldurfadur
weorc wuldorfæder
 vs. < w> for [w]
-fadur
-fder
<-ur> vs. <-er> for later <-er>; the former an old
genitive
Excerpt from “Cædmon‟s Hymn”: 2009
Following the early, 7th century literary primacy of Northumbria with Bede and Caedmon, as represented
by the preceding text, the literary and political center moved southward to Mercia in the 8th century.
Evidence of the Mercian tradition is to be found in the Life of St. Chad, which is preserved in a 12th
century manuscript, but employs 9th century spelling. This text suggests a pre-Alfredian interest in
translation and reveals a relatively standardized language (Blake 1996: 76). But clearly Mercian power
and the Mercian literary tradition (see Cynwulf) were destroyed by the Norse incursions.
Consequently, West Saxon was to be the standard language, and its spelling what we are most likely to
meet with.
Blake, N. (1996) A History of the English Language. Houndsmill: Palgrave.
Middle English spelling could no longer rely on the orthographic system introduced in connection with
the standardization of West Saxon. Although the West Saxon scribal tradition continued to be
practiced after the Conquest, the surviving standard was no longer prestigious and gradually grew
outdated by change. A number of conventions began to shift, probably largely due to contact with
French. Although no standard emerged in the early ME period, it is possible to see some more or less
general effects. One of these is that non-Latin letters fell into disuse. Eventually, <y> would be used as
a consonant for /j/ and <> would be fully retired. Examples: <i/j>: geong vs. jonge; and <g>: iff vs.
gif. <þ> and <> were being replaced by <th>: þat vs. that or oer vs. othere. Winn <ƿ> now became
rare; and , <uu>, and <w> are used in its place. Independent of these considerations <k> was
coming to be used for /k/, esp. near a front vowel, where <c> + <e, i> would lead to
misinterpretation as /s/ rather than /k/ <k> with front vowels priketh, seeken. Among the grapheme
combinations OE <hw> for /hw/ was somewhat illogically reversed to <wh>, probably under the
influence of other combinations (see ModE spelling) which used <h> as a diacritic, esp. <th>,
<ch>, and <sh/sch>. In the north and East Anglia <qu, u> and in east Midlands <w-> were also
used for /hw/. By this time <c, sc> had been replaced elsewhere by “French-inspired spellings” <ch,
sch> (ibid.: 130).
An account of changes in the spelling of the vowels is considerably more challenging since there were
significant regional differences in pronunciation. A few examples will have to suffice. OE <y>,
originally rounded front /y()/, had become <e> in the southeast, but rounding was retained in the
southwest where , a French spelling, but also <ui> and <uy> occurred. High back rounded /u/
was frequently spelled <ou> in French fashion, esp. in French borrowings licour, flour. And the raising
of OE ā to // led to the use of <o> or <oo> goon, hoot; and <> began increasingly to alternate with
<e> or <a> frd ~ ferd or sahte ~ shte (Blake 1996: 118).
As was the case in OE, in ME, too, there were regional differences which showed up in spelling.
Northern
Southern
ModE
Sanges sere of selcuth rime,
Mony songes of dyuerse ryme
Many a song of different rime,
Inglis, frankys, and latine,
As englisshe frensshe & latyne
In English, French, and Latin.
to rede and here Ilkon is prest,
To rede & here mony are prest
Each one to read and hear is pressed*
þe thynges þat þam likes best.
Of þinges þat hem likeþ best
The things that please them all the best.
Text 4.8: Parallel excerpts from Cursor Mundi, Northern (Cotton) and Southern (Trinity) versions
Pronunciation (through spelling):
Northern English has /a/ for OE ā, where Southern English has // (sanges-songes; also S: mony)
Northern <s>, probably /s/ for Southern <ssh> // (Inglis-englisshe; frankys-frensshe)
Spelling (with no consequences for pronunciation):
Northern English tends to for Southern <y>, but cf. l. 4 (thynges-þinges
Northern has <th> twice and <þ> twice; Southern has only <þ>
Blake, N. (1996) A History of the English Language. Houndsmill: Palgrave.
French influence on the spelling of English became an important and lasting factor in the ME period.
The most significant influence was on vocabulary, but French also reinforced or initiated structural
innovations and influenced spelling. Examples: <qu> for OE <cu> or <cw> quod, quen; <ch> instead
of OE <c> for /t/ chapel, pynchen; <sch> or <sh> instead of OE <sc> for // frendschipe or shoures; and
the distinction between /f/ and /v/ as well as between /s/ and /z/, which were positional variants of
<f> and <s> in OE, is now made maintained by <f> vs. <v/u> over vs. OE ofer. The new letter <z>
was introduced where OE usage would have made do with <s> as lazar “leper” < Lazarus. Gradually,
<th> replaced <þ> and <>, but then as now no orthographic distinction was made between // and
//. And, finally, the representation of the vowels underwent changes due in part to French.
Examples: <ou> instead of OE for /u/ shoures, oure; <> was to disappear in favor of either
<e> or <a>.
Ormulum (see 4.2.3), written in the second half of the 12th century, is one of the key texts in respect to
spelling in ME. This early northeastern text (the author Orm(in) wrote it in Bourne, Lincolnshire)
reveals the author‟s efforts at using a more standardized form of the written language. Although Orm
does not seem to have had imitators. He took great care to distinguish the three sounds, /, j, d/
otherwise represented by OE <> by using two (or including a special <g> with a flat top, three)
distinct graphemes. Orm distinguished between // using <g> and /j/ or /x/ using <>. Example:
grimme “grim, fierce” vs. iff “if” (Text 4.5: Admonition from the Ormulum, second half of 12th
century).
Especially fascinating is his system of indicating long vowels by letting them be followed by a single
consonant only while short vowels were followed by doubled consonants. Examples: þiss boc iss
nemmnedd Orrmulum forrþi þatt Orrm itt wrohhte. “This book is named Ormulum for Orm created it”
(“Preface to Ormulum, ll. 1-2), where all the vowels are short except those in boc, the ‟s of
Orrmulum, and in forrþi; the <e> of wrohhte is presumably short. Short and long vowels, which had
not been orthographically distinguished in OE, were differentiated here: the short ones were followed
by double consonant-letters and the long ones by only one, e.g. l. 5 follc (“folk, people”) // vs. l. 7 god
(“good”) /o/. This indicates that the long-short consonant distinction of OE had presumably been
lost (Blake 1996: 125). Orm also sometimes used single accents to mark long vowels (l. 2 tór “difficult”)
or double ones (l. 7 üt “out”).
Blake, N. (1996) A History of the English Language. Houndsmill: Palgrave.
Chancery English, the language of the government administration in London was available as the basis
for spelling from about 1400 on. The clerks of the Chancery were trained into a system of writing
which was highly standardized. Furthermore, clerks from outside the Chancery were also schooled
there. Since the documents produced in the Chancery had high prestige and were circulated
throughout the kingdom, people everywhere were exposed to this kind of language. Yet absolute
uniformity was not demanded, and the actual process of standardization was slow in developing.
Example: if/yf was normal after 1430, but yif/yef/ef continued to occur after this date (Blake 1996:
176ff). A study of the Paston letters show the spread of standardized spellings. In the period 14691479 the letter written by Edmond Paston for his mother Margaret reveal the move from initial <x->
to initial <sch-> and then soon after to initial <sh-> in the word shal(l) (ibid.: 180). Despite the spread
of spelling standards, a fair amount of variation persisted right up into Shakespearean times and well
beyond (see EModE spelling).
A brief look at two English translations of a short passage from the Bible (Genesis 1: 3) into English show
some of the changes in orthography. The first is a Wycliffe translation (1385; see Color plate no. 5.2
Wycliffe. Gospel of St. John); the second comes from the King James Version (KJV) (1611; the
Shakespearean period, but reflecting conservative usage):
ME: Wycliffe: And God seide, Lit be maad, and lit was maad.
EModE: KJV: And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
(Genesis 1:1-5 from: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Bible_(Wycliffe)/Genesis#Chapter_1)
The text can be understood by a ModE-speaking readership, but there are quite a number of
unfamiliar looking words. They reflect both differing pronunciations and different conventions of
spelling. In a few cases the syntax is in need of comment (see Text 5.2). Spelling:
seide: interchangeability of <ai> and <ei>
lit: use of <> for [ç]
maad: use of double letter-vowels to indicate a long vowel, here: /a/
In Genesis 2:7 we find the following: “Therfor the Lord God formede man of the sliym of erthe, and brethide in to his
face the brething of lijf; and man was maad in to a lyuynge soule. According to Samuels <ij>, as in lijf is typical of
the Central Midland spelling system (Taavitsainen 2000: 143), which was based on the dialects of
Northamptonshire, Huntingdonshire, and Bedfordshire. This orthography was current before 1430 and
continued to be written till the later 15th century. It was distinct and well-defined, i.e. not like “the
„colourless‟ system, which forms a continuum in which the local elements are muted” (ibid.: 135).
Examples of Central Midland Standard:
Central Midlands
ModE
Central Midlands
ModE
Central Midlands
ModE
sich
such
mych
much
stide
stead
ouun
given
ony
any
si
saw
Plus: ech(e), aftir, it, itt, þoruþ, þorou, eyr(e), eir(e), “air,” bitwix, brenn, bisy, ie, ye “eye,” fier, heed, lyve, moun
(“may” plural), puple, peple, renn, togidere. (ibid..: 137)
Over a longer period of time the Central Midlands type of English was prominent in scientific writing
centered in Oxford, but also – due to Wycliffe‟s importance for it – in the Lollard movement. As such,
Central Midlands written English was definitely a rival standard to Chancery English
Blake, N. (1996) A History of the English Language. Houndsmill: Palgrave.
Taavitsainen, I. (2000) “Scientific Language and Spelling Standardisation 1375-1550” In: L. Wright
(ed.) The Development of Standard English 1300-1800. Cambridge: CUP, 131-154.
Caxton and the advent of printing were perhaps to most significant factors in leading to standardization of
spelling. Printers, the first and best known of whom was William Caxton (c. 1415~1422-1492), could only
profit from standardization of the language in vocabulary, dialectal forms, grammar, but above all
orthography. However, the relatively uniform spelling which emerged in printed works long existed side
by side with the often very idiosyncratic practices which even extremely learned writers such as Samuel
Johnson had (see EModE spelling) in their private correspondence or journals.
Regularization spelling was the first stage in the standardization process. While Elizabethan spelling was still
extremely varied – and tolerant of variety – the Restoration (after 1660) put an end to (most of) the
variation in orthography.
EModE spelling (6.3.1, 6.3.1.1- 2, 6.4.2) culminated in the adoption of standardized spelling and punctuation.
There still was some variation (cf. bere and beare; standard and standerd), but by this time spelling is already
very regular and quite similar to present-day conventions. This does not mean, however, that EModE and
ModE spelling were identical. What is characteristic about orthography in the EModE Period is that it
underwent a high degree of regulation in the hands of the printers. For modern eyes 16th and 17th century
spelling seems strange and irregular at times. On the whole, however, there was a great deal of agreement
coupled with a fair amount of toleration of alternative spellings.
Public spelling was determined by printers, who failed to make the adjustments which would have brought
English orthography more closely into line with the traditional values of the letters in the Latin alphabet.
Quite the contrary, respect for learning and a recognition of the etymologies of numerous words led to
changes which made their spellings more Latin-like, e.g. dette became debt (< Latin debitus), amonest became
admonish (< admonire), vittles became victuals (< victualia) (cf. Blake 1996: 203f). Not only did the older and
the newly introduced spellings often exist side by side, private spelling practices also often contained
archaic and idiosyncratic forms which even such luminaries as Dr. Johnson practiced. Although known
for “fixing” the standard, Johnson deviated considerably from it in his letter-writing orthography. The
spelling used in letter-writing is characterized by points (i-iii) (Osselton 1998b: 40ff):
(i) contractions, e.g. &, wch, ym, licce, punishmt, tho, thro, thot, etc. (from letters of Addison‟s, 1st decade of
18th century); some went back to medieval manuscripts; but the practice continues today (see
13.2.2). Contractions reached their peak in the early 18th century;
(ii) phonetic spellings, e.g. don’t, I’ll, „twill; possibly as markers of style;
(iii)retention of older spellings, e.g. diner for dinner (Johnson); cutt (Pope), esp. the diversity in the
spelling of past tense and past participle forms in {ed}, e.g. saved, sav’d, save’d, sav d; lackd, lackt,
lack’t.
(iv) a further convention no longer practiced is the use of diacritic (macron or cedilla) over a vowel to
represent a following <n> or <m>. This was carried over from manuscript traditions. Example:
<-o> for <-on> as in Skelto for Skelton.
The following text, a short selection from William Lily‟s grammar (posthumous 1523), illustrates early
EModE spelling usage.
In speache be theſe eight partes folowinge: [list of the parts of speech]
Of the Noune.
A Noune is the name of a thinge, that may be ſeene, felte, hearde, or underſtande; As the name of my hande in Latine is
Manus: the name of an houſe is Domus: the name of goodness is Bonitas.
Of Nounes, ſome be Subſtantiues, and ſome be Adiectiues.
EModE used the “long <ſ> in non-final position, a practice which continued well into the 18th century.
There are numerous cases of final silent <e>‟s which are no longer written (noune, thinge). The word
Adiectiues illustrates for <j>, non-initial for <v>, and the capitalization of (important) nouns, a
practice that was common from the mid-17th to the mid-18th century and lingered on, at least in letterwriting, until the end of the 18th (Osselton 1998a: 459). The following passage, one hundred and eighty
years later, is taken from Isaac Newton‟s Opticks.
Exper. 8 ... The Book and Lens being made fast, I noted the Place where the Paper was, when the Letters of the Book,
illuminated by the fullest red Light of the solar Image falling upon it, did cast their Species [“image”] on that Paper most
distinctly … (cf. Text 6.4: Isaac Newton. Opticks, 1704)
The title of his book also illustrates the use of <-icks>, where ModE has <-ics>. Final /-k/ was also
spelled <-ique> in words borrowed from French, cf.
8 July. To Whitehall to chapel, where I got in with ease by going before the Lord Chancellor with Mr Kipps. Here I heared
very good musique, the first time that I remember ever to have heard the organs and singing-men in surplices in my life. (cf.
Text 6.1: Samuel Pepys: Excerpts from his diary, 1660)
ModE retains <-ique> only in a few words to signal final stress as in physíque (as opposed to phýsics). For a
closer look at 17th century spelling see Plimoth Plantation.
Osselton, N.E. (1998a) “Spelling-Book Rules and the Capitalization of Nouns in the Seventeenth and
Eighteenth Centuries,” In: M. Rydén, I. Tieken-Boon van Ostade, and M. Kytö. A Reader in Early
Modern English. Frankfurt: Lang, 447-460.
Osselton, N.E. (1998b) “Informal Spelling Systems in Early Modern English: 1500-1800,” In: M.
Rydén, I. Tieken-Boon van Ostade, and M. Kytö A Reader in Early Modern English. Frankfurt:
Lang, 33-45.
The Great Vowel Shift (GVS) (6.3.1.2) brought significant change to pronunciation. The GVS is a chain
shift involving the long vowels of ME. It is not fully clear just when this shift began though it is
generally assumed to have begun in the ME period (Lass 1999: 72f; Bailey/Maroldt 1977: 31; see 5.3.2).
However, the full extent of the shift is best located in the EModE Period. This may be assumed on the
basis of the mismatch between spelling and pronunciation which came about in the course of the shift.
Continental values for <a> are generally low front vowels while English “long” <a> is a raised and
usually diphthongized vowel: long /e/ or diphthongized /e/ as in bake, make, rake. This conclusion
depends on the existence of a sound-to-spelling relationship that is largely congruent with the
Continental phonetic values of the vowel-letters. English spelling was largely fixed by the early 16th
century and represents the stage of pronunciation reached at or before that time, but this no longer
applied by the end of the EModE Period.
Initially digraphs were introduced to express a more specifically English phoneme. This seems to have
been the case with <ea> for // as in meat /mt/ and was thus distinct from <ee> for /e/ as in meet
/met/. In the course of the GVS the // - /e/ contrast was lost and the new merged class was raised
to /i/, which is the present pronunciation. The earlier distinction is, however, still apparent in the
unpredictability of <ea> as /i/, which is the major pattern, or as /e/, a wide-spread though minor
spelling pattern. Examples: <ea> as /i/: beach, bead, each, feature, plead, read (present tense) teak, etc.;
<ea> as /e/: bread, head, read (past tense and past participle).
Bailey, C.-J. N. and K. Maroldt (1977) “The French Lineage of English” In: J.M. Meisel (ed.) Langues en
contact – Pidgins – Creoles – Language in Contact. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 21-53.
Lass, R. (1999) “Phonology and Morphology,” In: R. Lass (ed.) The Cambridge History of the English
Language. vol. 3. 1476-1776, Cambridge: CUP, 56-186.
Standardization of spelling (6.4.2) The emergence of modern scientific ways of thinking and of seeing
the world led to the founding of the Royal Society in 1660/1662. Its earliest members, including John
Wilkins, Robert Hooke, Christopher Wren, John Evelyn, and Robert Boyle, promoted all branches of
knowledge, and their curiosity about how the world works extended to language, which showed up
when the Society named a committee of twenty-two including Dryden and Evelyn to make suggestions
for the improvement of English. While an academy was never founded, Evelyn (1620-1706)
formulated an impressive program, comprising “a dictionary, a grammar, a spelling reform, lists of
technical terms and dialect words, translations of ancient and modern writers, and works to be
published by members themselves to serve as models for good writing” (Söderlind 1998: 473). The
intention of the Royal Society was fully within the current of thought in the EModE period and on
into the ModE era. Spelling was regulated fairly early on, but vocabulary and grammar were still felt to
be in need of regulation on into the 18th century.
ModE spelling
General
Non-standard spelling
ModE spelling (8.2.6) is only gradually different from that of the EModE period. Among the uniformly
accepted changes we find the move to use lower case letters for all but proper nouns, adjectives, and
verbs (e.g. <Britain, Welsh, Anglicize>). The “long” <ſ>, as in <ſpeech>, disappeared as did the <k>
at the ends of words like <physick>. These are some of the more immediately noticeable changes. A
thorough review of the regularities of ModE sound-to-spelling conventions cannot be made here, but
some general remarks are called for. The consonants of English, in most accents 24 in number, must
be represented by 21 graphs. Unfortunately, use of the letters is not optimal. For example, <c> may
represent both /k/ (cat, cot) and /s/ (ceder, cider) and <g> may stand for both // (gone, gun) and /d/
(gin, gene). This “wastes” the distinctive function of <k>, which is clearly reserved for /k/ and of /j/,
which is used for /d/. Furthermore, <q>, which occurs exclusively before in native words is completely
redundant for /k/. Indeed, the combination <qu> was an innovation taken from French after the Conquest,
when it eventually displaced OE <cw> as in cwic „”quick.” The use of digraphs (two graphs in a fixed
combination) is one way of expanding potential of the alphabet. The most commonly used graph in
English digraphs is <h>, as in <sh> for // (shin), <th> for // (initially in lexical words such as thin)
and // (initially in grammatical words like then), and <c> for /d/ (chin). The combination <ch> is
not quite so simple: In native words it represents /d/ as just illustrated (also: cherry, church, bench). In
words borrowed from Greek <ch> stands for /k/. Examples: character, trachea. More recent borrowing
from French with <ch> are pronounced as //. Examples: chandelier, Chicago. Other digraphs with
<h>: Some accents such as ScE regularly distinguish <wh> for /hw/ (where) as opposed to <w> for
/w/ (wear). <gh> is a relic of /x/ or /ç/ (once pronounced in right, but now lost except in a few
traditional dialects, esp. in Scotland); it is also used in borrowed words to differentiate hard // (Italian
ghetto) from soft /d/ (gentle). Greek borrowings contain <ph> for /f/ (photo) and <rh> /r/ (rhotic), but
neither is really necessary for any purpose other than signaling the Greek source of the words.
Sometimes <kh> is used in transliterations of Russian /x/ (Khrushchev, but pronounced as /k/ in
English), and of <zh> for Russian // (Zhukov). Other combinations with <h> include <bh> (/b/in
Hindi bhang) and <dh> (/d/in Hindi dhoti or Arabic dhow). Historically justified spelling such as <kn->
for /kn/. Example: ME knyght /kniçt/ retains the initial <kn-> in ModE, where it distinguishes now
homophonous (identical in sound) knight from night in spelling only.
The vowels of English are much more complex. Here a repertoire of 16 (GenAm) to 20 (RP) vowels have
to be represented by a mere six vowel-letters (<a, e, i, o, u, y>). The solutions which have evolved
include (1) using digraphs such as <ea, oi, ie, ue> and many others and (2) indicating length or
diphthongization with a following single consonant + a vowel letter as opposed to shortness by a
following single consonant and nothing or a double consonant. The first of these strategies has the
distinct disadvantage of involving a large number of exceptions. Examples:
the major pattern
<ea>
/i/
as in
breathe, lead (verb), appease, ease, release, etc.
the minor pattern
<ea>
/e/
as in
breath, bread, lead (noun), dead, death, etc.
incidental cases
<ea>
//
as in
earth, earn, learn, search
<ea>
/e/
as in
great, steak
Table: Spelling-to-sound variation: the digraph <ea>
The second of the two strategies is more systematic, but still involves numerous exceptions as the
following tables reveal. All the tables revolve around the pronunciation associated with the individual
occurrence of the simple graphemes <a, e, i/y, o, u>. Note that C stands for any consonant-letter; V
for any vowel-letter; and
for no following sound in the same word.
Spelling
Pronunciation
Examples
Some exceptions
<a> + C + V
//
rate, rating
have, garage
<e> + C + V
/i/
mete, scheming, extreme
allege, metal
<i/y> + C + V
/a/
ripe, rhyme, divine
machine, river,divinity1
joke, joking, verbose
come, lose, gone,verbosity1
cute, renewal
-
<o> + C + V
 + C + V
1
RP //; GenAm /o/
/(j)u/
Words which end in <-ity>, <-ic>, <-ion> (divinity, mimic, collision) have a short vowel realization of <a, e, i, o, u>
as a result of historical processes (cf. Venezky 1970: 108f).
Table a: The “long” vowels, spelling and pronunciation
Spelling
Pronunciation
Examples
1
Some exceptions
<a> + C + C/
//
rat, rattle
mamma
<e> + C + C/
/e/
set, settler,
-
<i/y>
/ /
rip, ripping, system
-
RP
//
comma
gross
GenAm
//
//
cut, cutter
butte
//2
bush, put, butcher
+ C + C/
<o> + C + C/
 + C + C/
1
In RP and RP-like BrE numerous words follow a special rule for <a>, which is frequently pronounced as / /
when followed by <f, s, th> (after, ask, bath) <m, n> plus C (sample, dance), or <lf> (calf, half).
2
“Short” continued to be pronounced as // if it occurred next to a “labial,” that is a consonant produce with
lip-rounding, viz. /b, p, , t/. All the same, there are a few exceptions such as putt /pt/ or bus /bs/. See FOOTSTRUT split.
Table b: The “short” vowels, spelling and pronunciation
Tables c-d give the rules for vowel + <r> in three different graphological contexts:
Spelling
RP
GenAm
Examples
Some exceptions
<ar> + V + (V/ )
/e(r)/
/er/
ware, wary, warier
are, aria, safari
<er> + V + (V/ )
/(r)/
/r/
here, cereal
very
<ir /yr> + V + (V/ )
/a(r)/
/ar/
fire, inquiry, tyre
-
<or> + V + (V/ )
/(r)/
/r/
lore, glorious
-
<ur> + V + (V/ )
/r/
/r/
bureau, spurious
bury, burial
Table c: Vowels before <r> + one letter-vowel and zero or two letter-vowels (cf. Venezky 1970: chap. 7)
Spelling
RP and GenAm
Examples
Some exceptions
<ar(r)> + VC
//
arid, marriage
catarrh, harem
<er(r)>
/e/
peril, errand
err
<ir(r) / yr(r)>
/ /
empiric, irrigate, lyric
GenAm squirrel
<or(r)>
RP //; GenAm //
foreign, oriole, borrow
worry, horrid
<ur(r)>
//
burr, purring
urine
//
RP hurry, turret
Table d: Vowels before <r> or <rr> + letter-vowel + consonant (cf. Venezky 1970: chap. 7)
Spelling
Examples
Some exceptions
//
par, part
scarce
<er>
//
her, herb
concerto, sergeant
<ir / yr>
//
for, bird, Byrd
-
<or>
//
for, fort
attorney
<ur>
//
cur, curd
-
<ar> +
RP and GenAm
/C
Table e:Vowels before <r> + zero or <r> + consonant (cf. Venezky 1970: chap. 7)
Venezky, R.L. (1970) The Structure of English Orthography. The Hague: Mouton.
Spelling reform has been called for over and over despite the widespread acceptance of an essentially
unified norm in orthography. Yet, we should not forget that standard English spelling – be it British or
American – continues to give general preference to etymological spellings, which help to increase interlinguistic intelligibility, and it retains “silent” letters such as the <r> in words like <car> or <card>
thus allowing a more universal acceptance of spelling, in this case between rhotic and non-rhotic
accents.
The usual basis for reform suggestions emphasizes a different principle, viz. to come as close as possible
to a one-to-one relationship between each phoneme of the language and the letter or combination of
letters employed to represent it. In other words, with the exception of a few shorthand systems of
writing such as Pitman shorthand, the alphabetic principle has been maintained. And in most cases the
Latin alphabet has been used, but again there have been exceptions such as Lodwick‟s universal
alphabet (Abercrombie 1972: 51; see also 8.2.6).
Attempts at reform include any one of numerous projects to bring spelling into a closer relation to
pronunciation. Some modest changes have been successful, but the abstractness of the present system
and distance from actual pronunciation allows it to more easily represent many accents. Standard
English spelling – be it British or American – continues to give general preference to etymological
spellings, which help to increase inter-linguistic intelligibility, and it retains “silent” letters such as the
<r> in words like <car> or <card> thus allowing a more universal acceptance of spelling, in this case
between rhotic and non-rhotic accents.
Spelling reforms are not merely haphazard and unsystematic. The reforms initiated by Noah Webster in
the United States are the one aspect of the standard language which he is especially closely associated
with. He ardently supported his changes, which he understood step by step in his spelling book (which
with sales of over 60,000,000 by the 1960s; Color plate no. 10.4 Webster’s American Spelling
Book). Slowly, he changed the spelling of words from one edition to the next so that they became
“Americanized.” He chose s over c in words like defense, he changed the -re to -er in words like center, he
dropped one of the <l>‟s in traveler, and at first he kept the u in words like colour or favour but dropped
it in later editions. He also changed "tongue" to "tung." Much, but not all, of what he proposed was
accepted and is now normal AmE usage. The effects of his major changes can be seen in connection
with the principles of simplification, regularization, derivational unity, reflection of
pronunciation, indication of stress, and pronunciation spellings. As we will see they are not
haphazard, nor are they restricted exclusively to AmE.
Further spelling reforms are not merely haphazard and unsystematic. Instead, we find the principles of
simplification, regularization, derivational uniformity, reflection of pronunciation, including
stress indication, and spelling pronunciations. There are in addition a number of individual,
unsystematic individual differences and nonce spellings, esp. in advertising. Much of the variation
lies in the greater willingness on the part of AmE users to accept the few modest reforms that have
been suggested.
Simplification is a principle common to both the British and the American traditions, but is sometimes
realized differently. It concerns doubling of letters, Latin spellings, and word endings such as in
<catalogue> vs. <catalog>.
Double letters are more radically simplified in AmE, which has program instead of programme, also
measurement words ending in <-gram(me)> such as kilogram(me) etc., where the form with the final <me> is the preferred, but not the exclusive BrE form. Other examples: BrE waggon and AmE wagon;
AmE counselor, woolen, fagot and AmE/BrE counsellor, woollen and faggot. On occasion BrE has the
simplified form as is the case with skilful and wilful for AmE skillful and willful. BrE fulfil, instil, appal may
be interpreted as simplification, but AmE double <-ll-> in fulfill, instill, appall may have to do with
where the stress lies (see indication of stress).
Latin spellings are simplified from <ae> and <oe> to <e> in words taken from Latin and Greek (heresy,
federal etc.) in all varieties of English, but this rule is carried out less completely in BrE, where we find
mediaeval next to medieval, foetus next to fetus and paediatrician next to pediatrician. In contrast, AmE has
simple <e> compared to the non-simplified forms of BrE in words like esophagus / oesophagus; esthetics /
aesthetics (also AmE); maneuver / manoeuvre; anapest / anapaest; estrogen / oestrogen; anemia / anaemia; egis /
aegis (also AmE); ameba / amoeba. Note that some words have only <ae> and <oe> in AmE, e.g. aerial
and Oedipus.
Word endings in AmE may drop of the -ue of -logue in words like catolog, dialog, monolog (but not in words
like Prague, vague, vogue, or rogue). Note also the simplification of words like (BrE) judgement vs. (AmE)
judgment; abridg(e)ment and acknowledg(e)ment.
Simplification vs. derivational uniformity: BrE simplifies <-ection> to <-exion> in connexion, inflexion,
retroflexion etc. AmE uses connection etc. thus following the principle of derivational unity: connect >
connection, connective; reflect > reflection, reflective.
Regularization is evident in AmE, which regularizes <-our> to <-or> and <-re> to <-er> as in honor,
neighbor or in center, theater. This seems justified since there are no systematic criteria for distinguishing
between the two sets in BrE: neighbour and saviour, but donor and professor; honour and valour, but metaphor,
anterior and posterior; savour and flavour, but languor and manor; etc. Within BrE there are special rules to
note: the endings <-ation> and <-ious> usually lead to a form with <-or-> as in coloration and laborious,
but the endings <-al> and <-ful>, as in behavioural and colourful, have no such effect. Even AmE may
keep <-our> in such words as glamour (next to glamor) and Saviour (next to Savior), perhaps because
there is something "better" about these spellings for many people. Words like contour, tour, four, or
amour, where the vowel of the <-our> carries stress, are never simplified.
BrE goitre, centre and metre become AmE goiter, center (but the adjective form is central). BrE has metre "39.37
inches,” but meter “instrument for measuring.” The <-er> rule applies everywhere is AmE except
where the letter preceding the ending is a <c> or a <g>. In these cases <-re> is retained as in acre,
mediocre and ogre in order to prevent misinterpretation as <c> as "soft" /s/ or <g> as /d/. AmE
spellings fire (but note: fiery), wire, tire etc. are used to insure interpretation of these sequences as
monosyllabic. The fairly widespread use of the form theatre in AmE runs parallel to glamour and Saviour,
as mentioned above: it is supposed to suggest superior quality or a more distinguished tradition for
many people.
Derivational uniformity can be from noun
adjective, as in BrE defence, offence, pretence, but AmE defense,
offense, pretense. AmE follows the principle of derivational uniformity: defense > defensive, offense > offensive,
pretense > pretension, practice > practical. (Cf. BrE connexion vs. AmE connection above). Note, however,
AmE analyze and paralyze despite analysis and paralysis.
Reflection of pronunciation. The forms analyze and paralyze, which end in <-ze>, may violate
derivational uniformity, but they do reflect the pronunciation of the final fricative, which is clearly a
lenis or voiced /z/. This principle has been widely adopted in spelling on both sides of the Atlantic for
verbs ending in <-ize> and the corresponding nouns ending in <-ization>. The older spellings with <ise> and <-isation> are also found in both AmE and BrE. AmE Advertise, for example, is far more
common than advertize (also advise, compromise, revise, televise). The decisive factor here seems to be
publishers' style sheets, with increasing preference for <z>. One special case is that of the alternation
between voiceless consonants in nouns (teeth /-/, half /-f/, use /-s/) vs. the corresponding verbs with
a voiced consonant (teethe /-/, halve /-v/, use /-z/). BrE spelling respects this distinction in the pair
practice (n.) vs. practice (v.) despite the lack of a voicing difference. AmE usually spells both with <c>,
which indicates voicelessness.
Indication of Stress determines the doubling or not of final consonants (esp. of <l>) in AmE when an
ending beginning with a vowel (<-ing>, <-ed> follows. If <-er>) is added to a multisyllabic word
ending in <l>, the <l> is doubled if the final syllable of the root carries the stress and is spelled with a
single letter-vowel (<e, o> as opposed to a digraph). If the stress does not lie on the final syllable, the
<l> is not doubled, cf.
re'bel
> re'belling
'revel
> 'reveling
re'pel
> re'pelled
'travel
> 'traveler
com'pel
> com'pelling
'marvel
> 'marveling
con'trol
> con'trolling
'trammel > 'trammeled
pa'trol
> pa'troller
'yodel
> 'yodeled
BrE uniformly follows the principle of regularization and doubles the <l> (revelling, traveler, etc.). AmE
spelling reflects pronunciation (cf. AmE fulfill, distill etc. or AmE installment, skillful and willful, where the
<ll> occurs in the stressed syllable).
Pronunciation spellings are best-known in the case of <-gh->. AmE tends to use a phonetic spelling so
that BrE plough appears as AmE plow and BrE draught ("flow of air, swallow or movement of liquid,
depth of a vessel in water"), as AmE draft. The spellings thru for through and tho' for though are not
uncommon in AmE, but are generally restricted to informal writing (but with official use in the
designation of some limited access expressways as thruways). Spellings such as lite for light, hi for high, or
nite for night are employed in very informal writing and in advertising language. But from there they can
enter more formal use, as is the case lite, which is the recognized spelling in the sense of low-sugar and
low-fat foods and drinks. In other words, an originally advertisement-driven spelling (<light>
<lite>) has gained independent status in its new spelling guise.
Hyphenation varies in the way it is used in the spelling of compounds – be it as two words, as a
hyphenated word, or as a single unhyphenated word varies. In general, AmE avoids hyphenation, cf.
BrE writes make-up ("cosmetics") and AmE make up and BrE neo-colonialism, but AmE neocolonialism. No
hard and fast rules exist, however; and usage varies considerably, even from dictionary to dictionary
within both AmE and BrE.
Individual words have different spellings without there being any further consequences. The following
list includes a few of the most common differences in spelling, always with the BrE form listed first:
aluminium / aluminum
(bank) cheque / check
gaol (also jail) / jail
jewellery / jewelry
(street) kerb / curb
pyjamas / pajamas
storey (of a building) / story
sulphur / sulfur
tyre / tire
whisky / whiskey
Finally, it should be noted that AmE usage is not completely consistent; for example, we find
<advertisement> with <s> and many people write <Saviour> (a reference to Jesus, with a capital)
with and <theatre> with <-re> as if the BrE spelling lent the word more standing. Much of the
variation in AmE lies in the greater willingness on the part of its users to accept the few modest
reforms that have been suggested. Canadians seem to be of two minds about this with the
consequence that we find far more variation – Canadians may, in fact, see the variation as Canadian.
The New Spelling of the Simplified Spelling Society of Great Britain uses the Latin alphabet, which has,
however, been modified to insure greater consistency. It is illustrated in the following rendering of the
beginning of Lincoln “Gettysburg Address” (Text 8.4):
But in a larjer sens, we kanot dedikaet – we kanot konsekraet – we kanot haloe – dhis ground. Dhe braev men, living
and ded, huu strugld heer, hav konsekraeted it far abuv our puur pouer to ad or detrakt.
(MacCarthy 1972: 71)
Conventional spelling:
But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground. The brave
men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it far above our poor power to add or detract.
Text: Lincoln‟s Gettysburg Address (excerpt) in the New Spelling
What has been undertaken in the example is the use of <k> only for /k/: kanot, konsekraet, detrakt. /d/ is
always <j> as in larjer. // remains <th> (not shown), but // is spelled as <dh>, as in dhis “this”;
final silent <e> is dropped as in sens. The <e> is sufficient to render /e/ and is consequently also used
in <ded> for standard <dead>. In konsekraet the use of <ae> for /e/ insures the proper vowel
quality, as do <ee> for /i/,<uu> for /u/, or <ou> for /a/. In other words the basic phonetic
principle of English orthography is extended.
Language planning and policy (7.2) Throughout the history of English both the geographic spread of
its speakers and the role of the government or other powerful institutions on the shaping and the
status of the language has become evident again and again. Before its extension beyond England and
the Scottish Lowlands, the use of the language as an everyday medium of communication depended
very much on the settlement patterns of the Saxons. With the introduction of literacy and learning,
centers of cultural power and prestige began to develop, and they tended to exert relatively great
influence on language attitudes among the more educated. In principle, the founding of monasteries
and the program of translation into and writing in English initiated by King Alfred is an early,
important example of language policy in regard to English, one which effectively established the West
Saxon variety and system of spelling as the OE written standard (cf. 3.4-5). In addition, this move
effectively distanced it from Old Norse, which was restricted almost exclusively in the spoken medium.
In the ME period the central question was Which language? Over a period of several hundred years
French and Latin proved to be insufficiently anchored to serve as the daily spoken language. As fewer
and fewer among the powerful nobility could use French with ease, the move to English was a sure
fact. The adoption of English as a written language was a more difficult process since English had little
or no association with the traditions of learning or state authority and administration. A number of
important legal decisions opened English to wider governmental use, for example, the Provisions of
Oxford (1258), which was the first proclamation after the Norman Conquest to be issued not only in
French and Latin but in English as well, and it was the only proclamation in English under Henry III
(see 4.1.2). The translation of the Bible into English was a second major indication of a change in the
status of the language (see 5.2.1.2). The adoption of English for use in the governmental chancery
together with the introduction of printing in England opened the gates, and English became a wellestablished and ever more standardized medium. The fact that there never was a language academy like
the Académie française in France or the Italian Accademici della Crusca was of little import: the weight of
public opinion and the direction of public usage of the language was already well established and the
authorities of language arbitration were clear.
Authorities (dictionaries, manuals of usage) need not be state institutions or language academies. In
effect the printers and publishers working in a largely competitive market – but regionally concentrated
in London – set the standards for the written language. In the end the educational systems of the
various English-speaking countries had little choice but to accept what has de facto become StE. The
instruments of dissemination were the masses of books, pamphlets, broadsides, and newpapers which
employed the new standard spelling (and vocabulary and grammar). For those who were uncertain, the
publishers produced spelling books, dictionaries, and manuals of usage .
Spellers were highly influential and several of them were economically extremely successful. Webster‟s
American Spelling Book, originally titled The First Part of the Grammatical Institute of the English Language. is
one of the best known of these. It went through 385 editions while Webster was still living, and the
income from it supported him well. Yet he constantly endeavored to make improvements in it. The
actual title was changed first to The American Spelling Book (1786) and then to The Elementary Spelling Book
(1829). Most popularly it was called the "Blue-Backed Speller" (see Color plate no. 10.4) because of
its appearance. The main task of Webster's speller was to clarify how words were to be sounded out
and spelled. The idea of reforming and Americanizing English spelling was very much a subsidiary
goal. The Speller was arranged to provide an orderly presentation of words and the rules of their
spelling and pronunciation.
Dictionaries are resources for retrieving information about vocabulary such as spelling, pronunciation,
etymology, style, and meaning. Printed dictionaries are most commonly organized alphabetically.
Because of the numerous exceptions in English spelling, English-users depend far more on dictionaries
than do users of languages with more consistent spelling systems. Especially notable is Samuel
Johnson‟s Dictionary of the English Language (1755; Color plate no. 8.1 Johnson’ Dictionary), which
stands at the beginning of a long tradition of lexicography that would include the incomparable twelvevolume historical Oxford English Dictionary (1928; plus supplements; now in an internet edition) as well
as hundreds and hundreds of further general and specialized dictionaries.
Manuals of usage are resources which set standards for formal written English. They include
information about vocabulary, spelling and punctuation, style, and meaning. Example: The King’s
English by H.W. and F.G. Fowler originally published in 1906.
Spelling pronunciations show the relative prestige and influence of spelling on speech habits. A spelling
like <often> for a word traditionally pronounced /fn/ (GenAm) or /fn/ (RP) is frequently heard
with a medial /t/, a pronunciation which originally went out of fashion in the 16th century. A second
example is <forehead>, which frequently takes on a pronunciation reflecting the two morphemes out
of which it is composed: {fore} + {head} thus ceasing to be /frId/ (RP) or /frId/ (GenAm) and
becoming /fhed/ (RP) or /frhed/ (GenAm). Of this tendency Potter writes: “Of all the influences
affecting present-day English that of spelling upon sounds is probably the hardest to resist” (1976: 77).
There are, in other words, tendencies for people to write the way they speak, but also to speak the way
they write. Nevertheless, the present system of English spelling has certain advantages:
Paradoxically, one of the advantages of our illogical spelling is that...it provides a fixed standard for spelling
throughout the English-speaking world and, once learnt, we encounter none of the difficulties in reading
which we encounter in understanding strange accents. (Stringer 1973: 27)
A further advantage (vis-à-vis the spelling reform propagated so often) is that etymologically related
words often resemble each despite the differences in their vowel quality changes. For example, sonar
and sonic are both spelled with <o> even though the first is pronounced with // or /o/ and the
latter with // or //. The same applies to <c>, which represents both /s/ in historicity and /k/ in
historic.
Potter, S. (1976) Our Language. rev. ed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Stringer, D. (1973) Language Variation and English. Bletchley: The Open University.
Scottish English (5.4.3; 5.5.2; 6.5; 8.2.6) long had its own literary and writing traditions. Among the
earliest Scots literature is John Barbour‟s Brus, which was introduced in 5.4.3, but also the heroic
narrative Wallace by Blin Hary (see 5.5.2). Together with the translation the text is readable (see
following) since the grammar is quite similar to that of GenE. The spelling and vocabulary may,
however, cause difficulties.
BUKE FYRST
First Book
OUR antecessowris, that we suld of reide,
Our ancestors, who we should speak of,
And hald in mynde thar nobille worthi deid,
And hold in mind their noble worthy death,
We lat ourslide, throw werray sleuthfulnes;
We let pass by, through veritable slothfulness;
And castis ws euir til vthir besynes.
And continually occupy ourselves with other business.
Till honour ennymys is our haile entent,
To honor our enemies is our whole intention,
It has beyne seyne in thir tymys bywent;
It has been seen in bygone times;
Our ald ennemys cummyn of Saxonys blud,
Our old enemies came of Saxon blood,
That neuyr yeit to Scotland wald do gud,
Who never yet to Scotland would do good,
Bot euir on fors, and contrar haile thair will,
But necessarily and against their will,
Quhow gret kyndnes thar has beyne kyth thaim till.
How great kindness there has been revealed to them.
It is weyle knawyne on mony diuerss syde,
It is well known on diverse sides,
How thai haff wrocht in to thair mychty pryde,
How they have tried in their mighty pride,
To hald Scotlande at wndyr euirmar.
To hold Scotland down evermore.
Bot God abuff has maid thar mycht to par:
But god above has lessened their might:
Text 5.10: Wallace Blin Hary, c.1478
A second selection is from the preface to King James‟ book on writing poetry, which appeared a century
later (1584). The text uses the Scottish spelling <quh> for Southern <wh>; initial /j/ appears as <z>
as in ze “ye.” {-ed} appears as <-it>, reflecting Scottish pronunciation. Many of the vowel realizations
are obviously Northern, quha, knawledge, ane (without initial /w/), sa, baith, sindry, and twa, where
Southern forms would have a back vowel. We find sould with <s-> not <sh->. The inflection <-is>
occurs where StE has <-(e)s>.
The cause why (docile Reader) I have not dedicat this short treatise to any particular personis, (as commounly
workis usis to be) is, that I esteme all thais quha hes already some beginning of knawledge, with ane earnest desyre
to atteyne to farther, alyke meit for the reading of this worke, or any uther, quhilk may help thame to the atteining
to thair foirsaid desyre. Bot as to this work, quhilk is intitulit, The Reulis and cautelis to be observit & eschewit in
Scottis Poesie, ze may marvell paraventure, quhairfore I sould have writtin in that mater, sen sa mony learnet men,
baith of auld and of late hes already written thairof in dyvers and sindry languages: I answer, That nochtwithstanding,
I have lykewayis writtin of it, for twa caussis: ...
(Rhodes et al. (eds.) 2003)
Text 6.9: King James VI. Reulis and Cautelis (1584)
The traditions and conventions of Scots spelling are largely those of StE spelling, but are extended to
a number of specifically Scottish conventions such as <ui> for fronted /jy/; <ae> for /e/. The
spelling is more or less connected to a word‟s phonemic realization but leaves leeway for varying
regional realizations as with <ui> in guid, which can be /gd/ (Angus), /gwid/ (Northeast), /ged/
(Fife), /gyd/(Glasgow), or /gid/ (Black Isle) (McClure 1980: 30).
The Scots Leid Associe (kent in Inglis as the Scots Language Society) is a bodie that warks for the furdal o the
Scots leid in "leiterature, drama, the media, education an ilka day uiss." It wis foundit in 1972, an haes about 350
memmers the nou.
The SLA sets furth a bi-annual journal, 'Lallans, that's nou a 144-page magazine wi prose, musardrie, reviews, news
etc. aw in Scots. It's furthset wi help by the Scottish Arts Council. Lallans is postit free tae memmers o the SLA, an it
is estimate that it haes a readership o about a thousan, syne copies is also postit tae libraries an siclike.
As weil as thon, the SLA hauds its "Annual Collogue" - a meetin wi writin competeitions for fowk o aw ages, talks,
muisic etc. This last aw day, for ordinar.
(http://sco.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scots_Leid_Associe)
Text 8.5: Suggested spelling for Scots
(General)
Non-standard spelling
Dialect spellings
Literary practices
Eye dialect
Non-standard spelling has been in retreat as a result of the normative pressure of schooling, especially
after the advent of universal education, chiefly from the 19th century on. Standard English spelling may
be associated with a wide variety of accents. Consequently, non-standard spelling shows up largely
where writers are less trained in the standard. Examples of non-standard spelling can be found in
advertising, in literature aiming to be comical, at dialect literature, and in informal writing such as
texting.
While much of this is concerned with more recent developments, we should not overlook the fact that
non-standard spelling has a long tradition. In earlier times the lack of a standard in informal writing has
allowed us to make conclusions about regional pronunciations. Excerpts from Henry Machin‟s diary of
the mid-16th century (Text 6.8) is one such example. Here we see both <Westmynster> and
<Vestmynster>, which suggests that the /w/ - /v/ contrast was not fully stable in London English at
this time. The spelling <harme> instead of <arm>, on the other hand, seems to be a case of
hypercorrection in spelling indicating, for one, an awareness that aitch-dropping was often considered
to be an error and, for another, that it must have been fairly widespread in the London of the times. A
second-grade (seven year old) American child who writes a postcard home from summer camp and
mentions buying a <boddel> of paint indicates by means of his or her non-standard spelling that the
<t> of bottle is flapped and voiced.
Nonce and advertising spellings (13.3.1.1; 13.3.1.3). While non-standard spelling on the part of the
poorly educated is unconscious, purposely irregular, non-standard, and nonce spellings are employed in
advertising and in dialect spelling. In the case of nonce (< (for) then anes “for the once”→ the nonce)
spellings the new “word” is intended only “for the moment.” Examples: <E-Z> (“easy,” which works
only for AmE, where the letter <z> is zee and not zed) or <Xtra>.
Quite obviously, advertising, which is very concerned about catching eyes, is highly likely to use such
“nonce” spellings. In this case the motivation for non-standard spelling lies in the attention which this
may potentially generate for the product advertised. It has, for example, reinforced the use of the letter
<k> as in the Kwik-E-Mart fictional chain of convenience stores on The Simpsons, where it is possible to
buy Krusty-Os cereal – all a take-off on some of the commercial uses of misspelling. This lies behind
such well known brand names as <Krispy Kreme> (a kind of doughnut or rather do-nut), <Kleenex>
(facial tissue), or <Weetabix> (a breakfast cereal).
Comical spelling is a further area in which alternatives to the standard orthographic system show up.
Like much else discussed here, the tradition of “misspelling” is not of recent origin. Its beginnings lie
close to the tradition of misspelling that was so popular in 19th century America (Text 13.5). The
following excerpt is an example of this and uses eye dialect to indicate the socially marginal or illeducated status of dialect speakers.
Almost every boddy that knows the forrest, understands parfectly well that Davy Crockett never loses powder
and ball, havin' ben brort up to blieve it a sin to throw away amminition, and that is the bennefit of a vartuous
eddikation. I war out in the forrest won arternoon, and had jist got to a plaice called the grate gap, when I seed a
rakkoon setting all alone upon a tree. I klapped the breech of Brown Betty to my sholder, and war jist a going to put
a piece of led between his sholders, when he lifted one paw, and sez he, "Is your name Crockett?"
Sez I, "You are rite for wonst, my name is Davy Crockett."
(Botkin 1944: 25)
Text: Davy Crockett
Eye dialect is spelling which suggests non-standard language because it violates spelling conventions thus
intimating that the speaker to whom the eye dialect is attributed is illiterate, socially low-standing, or
humorous. It is dialect for the eye not the ear, for when pronounced a word is no different than the
“same” word in standard spelling. Example: W’at for what (Text 10.5). The following text illustrates eye
dialect as well as spelling intended to indicate dialect pronunciation via non-standard spelling. It is
taken from one of the many dialect stories written by Joel Chandler Harris, a white Southern journalist,
in the late 19th century (Color plate no. 10.5 Harris’ Uncle Remus). This particular selection uses
two varieties of AAVE. The frame story is in StE. The characters Uncle Remus and „Tildy use
stereotypical, literary 19th Southern African American Vernacular English, and Daddy Jack uses a
creolized variety, perhaps reminiscent of the Gullah Creole spoken on the Sea Islands of South
Carolina and Georgia. Daddy Jack‟s pidgin-creole forms are in boldface.
“W'at I tell you, Brer Jack?” said Uncle Remus, as
“What did I tell you, Brother Jack?” …
‟Tildy came in. “Dat gal atter you, mon!”
“That girl is after you, man!”
“Fer de Lord sake, Unk‟ Remus, don‟t start dat ole
“For the Lord‟s sake, Uncle Remus, don‟t start that
nigger. I done promise Miss Sally dat I won't kill ‟im, en
old nigger [talking]. I have promised Miss Sally that I
I like ter be good ez my word; but ef he come foolin‟
won‟t kill him, and I like to be as good as my word; but if
longer me I‟m des nat‟ally gwine ter onj‟int ‟im. Now you
he comes fooling around me I‟m just naturally going to
year me say de word.”
unjoint him. Now you hear me say the word.”
… After a while the little boy grew restless, and presently he said: “Daddy Jack, you know you promised to tell me
a story to-night.”
“He wukkin‟ wid it now, honey,” said Uncle Remus,
“He‟ working on it now, honey. … Brother Jack,
soothingly. “Brer Jack,” he continued, “wa‟n‟t dey
wasn‟t there something or other about Old Man
sump‟n‟ n‟er ‟bout ole man Yalligater?”
Alligator?”
“Hi!” exclaimed Daddy Jack, arousing himself, “ ‟e
‟bout B‟er ‟Gater fer true. Oona no bin see da‟ B‟er
“Hi! … It‟s about Brother Alligator, for sure. Have you
all seen that Brother Alligator?”
‟Gater?” …
“Dem all sem,” continued Daddy Jack.
“They‟re all the same,”… .
“Big mout', pop-eye, walk on 'e belly; …
“[He has] a big mouth, pop-eyes, walks on his belly;
“One tam Dog is bin run B'er Rabbit, tel 'e do git tire;
…
da' Dog is bin run 'im tel him ent mos' hab no bre't' in 'e
“One time Dog was running Brother Rabbit till he was
body; 'e hide 'ese'f by de crik side.
getting tired; then Dog was running him till he almost
…
didn‟t have any breath in his body; he hid himself by the
“ „Eh-eh! B‟er ‟Gater, I hab bin come ‟pon trouble.
creek-side. …
Dog, ‟e do run un-a run me. … I proud fer yeddy Dog
bark, et ‟e is bin fetch-a me trouble lak dem.‟ ”
(Harris 1881: 141f)
“ „Oh-oh, Brother Alligator, I have met with trouble.
Dog‟s been running and running me. … I am happy to
hear Dog bark, he‟s been making me trouble like that.‟ ”
From Text 10.5: 19th Century African-American Vernacular English and Creole English
Among the more noticeable features of AAVE we find the following (not an exhaustive list):
19th century Southern AAVE (‘Tildy, Uncle Remus) 19th century AACreoleE (Daddy Jack)
Pronunciation via spelling:
elision of intervocalic // (Brer “brother”; n’er “nother”)
elision of /r/ and // (B’er)
/d/ for // (dat)
/d/ for // (dem)
/j/before initial vowels (year “hear”; yalligator)
/j/ before initial vowel + enclitic -y (yeddy “hear”)
non-rhoticity (wukkin’)
[a] for /a/ (tam “time”; lak “like”)
loss of final consonant (ole “old”)
loss of final consonant (tire “tired”)
loss of initial unstressed syllable („Tildy “Matilde”)
loss of initial unstressed syllable („bout, „Gater)
gwine, “going”; onj’int “un-joint”
/b/ or // for /v/ (hab)
unpalatalized nat’ally and des /des/ and /ntl/
-
The literary comedians (and misspellers) were a part of the comical spelling and eye dialect tradition,
a long line of folksy, humorous misspelled texts in American literature, cf. Artemus Ward (Charles
Browne), Petroleum Vesuvius Nasby (Ross Locke), Bill Arp (Charles Smith), Josh Billings (Henry
Shaw), Orpheus C. Kerr [Office-seeker] (Robert Newell), Bell Nye (Edgar Nye), Mr. Dooley (Finley
Dunne). Compare the spellings in Josh Billings, one of the literary comedians, with the Crockett text.
Amerikans love caustic things; they would prefer turpentine tew colone-water, if they had tew drink either. So
with their relish of humor; they must hav it on the half-shell with cayenne. An Englishman wants hiz fun
smothered deep in mint sauce, and he iz willin tew wait till next day before he tastes it. If you tickle or convince
an Amerikan yu hav got tew do it quick. An Amerikan luvs tew laff, but he don‟t luv tew make a bizzness ov it;
he works, eats, and haw-haws on a canter. I guess the English hav more wit, and the Amerikans more humor. We
havn‟t had time, yet, tew bile down our humor and git the wit out ov it. The English are better punsters, but I
konsider punning a sort of literary prostitushun in which future happynesz is swopped oph for the plezzure ov
the moment.
(Blair 1937, 1960: 427)
Text 13.5: Amerikans (1868)
A comparison of this with some of the spelling regarded as typical of texting shows an astonishing degree
of overlap: <hav, luv, hiz/iz>, and the ending <-in>. There are, nonetheless, spellings in 13.5 which
would not be appealing to texters, e.g. <tew> and <colone>; and <you> is not shortened to the
digital , but only to <yu>. The literary comedians clearly exaggerated far beyond what was
necessary to depict dialect pronunciation or even eye dialect, cf. <happynesz> “happiness” or <oph>
“off.”
Dialect spelling characterized much of the popular literature in the American West (esp. 19th century)
such as that collected by Botkin (1983) It also employed non-standard grammar, and attempeds to
represent a certain boastful, exaggerated, and somewhat anti-establishment tone. Indeed, it is this
language more than any other which has earned the title “The American Vulgate.” The following
excerpt, an anonymous example of American frontier tall talk illustrates some of these features.
“The Boast”
I was ridin along the Mississippi in my wagon, when I came acrost a feller floating down stream, settin in the
starn of his boat fast asleep. Well, I hadn't had a fight for ten days; felt as tho' I should have to kiver myself up
in a salt barrel, to keep so wolfy about the shoulders. So says I, hallo stranger, if you don't mind your boat will
run off and leave you. So he looked up at me slantindicular, and I looked down on him slantindicular. He
took out a chor of tobacco, and says he, I don't vallee you tantamount to that; and the varmant clapped his
wings and crowed. I ris up, shuch my mane, croocked my neck, and nickered like a horse. He run his boat
plump head foremost ashore. I stopped my wagon, and set my triggers. Mister, says he, I can whip my weight in
wild cats, and ride straight thro' a crab apple orchard on a flash of lightning - clear meat axe disposition - the best
man, if f I an't, I wish I may be tetotaciously exfluncated. So we come together; he was a pretty severe colt, but
no part of a priming for me. I put it to him mighty droll - in ten minutes he yelled enough, and swore I was a
ripstaver! Says I, an't I the yallow flower of the forest? And I'm all brimstone but the head, and that's
aquafortis! Says he, stranger, you're a beauty, and if I only know'd your name, I'd vote for you next election.
Says I, my name is Nimrod Wildfire - half horse, half alligator, and a touch of the airthquake - that's got the
prettiest sister, fattest horse, and ugliest dog in the district, and can out run, out jump, throw down, drag out and
whip any man in all Kentuck! (Blair 1960: 281)
American Vulgate: a term for that type of AmE which is characterized by non-standard grammar,
attempts to represent local-regional pronunciation and uncultivated usage in modified spelling, and its
boastful, exaggerated, and somewhat anti-establishment tone, cf. Text 10.4; see dialect spelling.
Literary practices (13.2.1) make use of misspelling chiefly to provide local color and a note of
genuineness. Throughout the 19th century dialect writing flourished in both the United States and
Britian. Dickens (see Text 8.3) and Twain (see Text 13.2) as well as numerous others supplied
numerous examples of dialect in which they emphasized regional differences in human types and in
language (see local color movement and dialect spelling). Examples: Dickens: <warn‟t> “wasn‟t”;
<wen> “when>; <werily> “verily”; <farden> “farthing.” Twain: <warn‟t> “wasn‟t”; <ketched>
“caught”; <forrard> “foreward.”
Texting literature (13.3.1.1; 13.3.2) may serve to give a small insight into the more creative ways of using
Informal spellings, which have become much more prominent with the great increase in written
messages due to e-mail, blogs, chats, tweets, and texting. Text messages, which are automatically
restricted to 160 characters, demand a certain amount of creativity. Crystal quotes one example from a
text-messaging poetry competition:
txtin iz messin
gran not plsed w/letters shes getn,
mi headn‟me englis,
swears I wrote better
try2rite essays,
b4 comin2uni.
they all come out txtis.
&she‟s african
(Crystal 2007: 14)
Text 13.4: Text-message poem
Clearly there are no restrictions on the spelling, which may be standard or not: note the complete lack of
capitalization, reduced use of apostrophes, occasionally missing spaces between words, the phonetic
spelling of is, and the colloquial use of <-(i)n> instead of standard <-ing>. As in dialect literature the
spelling reflects colloquial pronunciation (mi for my). Abbreviations are not obligatory and tend to
show up in the usual places (txt, rite, plsed, b4, 2). Little grammatical deviation shows up: here only the
missing verb is is in line 5.
Attitudes toward innovative spellings vary, as mentioned, from the clearly negative, e.g. “digital virus,
alien, outlandish, slanguage, dyslexia, mental laziness, illiterate,” to a more neutral evaluation as
“textese, hi-tech lingo, hybrid shorthand,” to a positive view that emphasizes it as inexpensive,
unobtrusive, personal, quick, and convenient (ibid.). Since certain types of text such as text messages
and twitters are very limited in space, there is a motivation to be as brief as is feasible1. Add to this the
inclination to indulge the ludic instinct, that is, the urge to play with language. Such playfulness has
been around for centuries and is even more or less standardized in some cases. The use of IOU “I owe
you,” for example, goes back to the end of the 18th century. Among the innovations of digital
communication is the use of emoticons (“smilies”), so much so that many computers automatically
change the combination <:> + <-> + <)> to <>. These devices are generally so well known that
much of the interest in them lies in the area of “one-upmanship,” playfully going one unexpected step
farther than your partner (see emoticons). Other elements of shortening include logograms like 2 “to,
too, or, of course “two” and b “be.” Conventional symbols include @ “at,” from the world of
business; x or xxx “kiss(es),” from letter writing; or zzz onomatopoeic of snoring “sleeping” from
comic books.
Furthermore, many people dispense with capitalization, as in the preceding examples, when this requires
pushing one more button on a cell phone. Add to this the use of abbreviations such as cu “see you,”
asap “as soon as possible,” aka “also known as,” or btw “by the way” or the omission of letters (usually
vowels), e.g. msg “message,” xlnt “excellent,” or mbrsd “embarrassed,” and you get stereotypical features
of e-mails, chats, blogs, twitters, and text messages.
Crystal, D. (2007) Txtng. The Gr8 Db8. Oxford: OUP.
(General)
(Non-standard spelling )
Word formation and spelling
Acronym
Borrowing
Clipping
Word formation and spelling may entail new spellings.
1
Crystal estimates that two-thirds of text messages are consist of just one sentence (Crystal 2007)
Acronym and spelling are, it seems, often important in word formation. In the case of acronyms the
initial letter or letters of a longer expression are used as an independent word. Example: South West
Township (of Johannesburg) goes under the acronym. Soweto. It is highly likely that some organizations
pick out names because of the possible acronyms which they will produce. Example: People United to
Save Humanity → <PUSH>.
Borrowings and spelling (11.4.3.4). When words are borrowed they usually accommodate to the
pronunciation and sometimes to the spelling of the host language. This accounts for the borrowing of
the German word for a species of fish found in the waters around Australia, the Schnapper (Chrysophys
auratus), which is now spelled written with <s> and not <Sch>. This is a case of assimilation to
English spelling patterns (German common nouns are capitalized) and English phonology (the sound
combination /n-/ of <schn-> is not native. Other examples: German <Sauerkraut> but English
<sourkraut>; Spanish <canon> but English <canyon>.
Clipping and spelling: a means of word formation in which a part of an original word is removed.
Example: mob is a 17th century clipping of Latin mobile vulgus “vacillating crowd.” With the clipping
came a change in vowel pronunciation, from / ~ o/ to / ~ /. Sometimes a clipping leads to a
change in consonant pronunciation as well. Example: Unchanged: <spectacles> → <specs> , where
<c> represents /k/ vs. Changed: <specifications> → <specs>, where <c> no longer represents /s/
but /k/.
Folk etymologies and spelling may be supported by appropriate English spelling. Example: French
<crevisse> has mutated via folk etymology to <crayfish>.