If the spelling of English was more logical and consistent, and based more directly on the sounds of the words, we would derive two major benefits:-
- Children would be able to learn to read and write very much more easily and quickly (approximately twice as quickly).
- Storage of words in our brains would be much more efficient. This would mean that reading (looking at printed words and extracting their meaning) would be much easier and quicker, and not leading to nearly as much mental fatigue. Also, there would be a much more direct correspondence between the sounds of words stored in our brain and the patterns of written (symbolic) words stored in our brain. So for example one word-sound like 'nite' could be associated with one written word 'nite' (rather than two forms 'night' and 'knight'). This direct correspondence between sounds and spellings of words would greatly assist the parallel processing of language via the two “pathways” - the "whole word" pathway and the "sound-of-the-letters" pathway.
Word-sounds in our brain appear to be stored in patterns - for example the sound 'nite' seems to be able to evoke similar sounds like 'site' and 'rite'. This may be one reason that rhyming poetry appeals to us. On the other hand, the way that English words are stored in our brains these days does not lead to the formation of many patterns that would assist in their retrieval. For example, the words 'night', 'knight'; 'site', 'sight', 'cite; 'rite', 'right', 'wright', etc. must require a lot of storage capacity, and the spelling of the words does not reflect the similarities of the sounds. These deficiencies becomes evident when we see how hard it is for children to learn all these different, illogical spellings. If these words were just spelt consistently as 'nite', 'site', and 'rite' then the storage requirement would be less; learning the words would be much easier and quicker; and use of the words in our reading would be easier, quicker and more accurate.
We have seen that both reading and writing involve two routes or “pathways” in the brain - the "whole word" route and the "sound-of-the-letters" route.
These two routes are complementary - the brain uses both routes in an effort to achieve a correct response. But with our conventional spelling the two routes can give conflicting or inaccurate outcomes. For example when we read the word 'read' we must decide if the sound of the word should be 'red' or 'reed'. And when writing we need to know both the sound and the meaning in order to be able to produce the correct spelling.
A consistent spelling system would take away all these potential inaccuracies and conflicts. There would be only one written word 'red' (with two possible meanings) corresponding to the sound 'red', and one word 'reed' (with two possible meanings). So when we come to read the word we will know exactly how it will sound - using either of the two routes or pathways. And when we are writing we will know exactly how it will be spelt - again using either of the two pathways.
e-speec would thus greatly reduce the numbers of dyslexic and dysgraphic
people, since either the "whole word" or "sound-of-the-letters" routes would be
adequate for a person to accurately read or write. (Recent studies in the
U.S.A. have suggested that as many as 20% of children are affected by dyslexia).
(See "Dyslexia" by Sally E. Shaywitz in "Scientific American", November 1996)
Return to Home Page
|
Return to Chapter Contents