60-day returns • free shipping on USA orders $129+
What a strange language
- This topic has 13 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 9 months ago by
.
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
- Posts
Like any language isn’t strange. I was chatting with my daughter one night and my mind began to wonder. Suddenly after typing the word post I wondered why the ‘o’ in post is a long vowel. I haven’t spent much time looking it up but in guessing I suspect post is a sub text of the word postal yet the a has two consonants between the o and the a.
Anyone know the story behind these kinds of words?
If “post” is short for “postal”, then it would make sense for it to be long, since the “o” in “postal” is the last vowel in the syllable (it seems to not come from a Latin root); this coming from The ABC’s and All Their Tricks.
But then where would that leave the words “most” and “both” and “jolt” and….can’t think of any others right now!
They are written under “exceptions” in The ABC’s… in the short “o” section, since they’re the exception to the short vowel rule.
most, (found post there, too), ghost, host, both, gross
The key is that I and O may say “I” and “O” before consonants. ie. most, mind, pint, post
The key word is may. Mint, milk, pond, pill show that the “may” is the key word. However, knowing this “rule or key” will help with spelling.
Guys, it’s time to come to terms with the fact that English is only partially phonetic. I could write a few pages on the history of English vowel sounds and the history of English spelling, but it would really not be that useful. When you get to the point that there are more “exceptions” than “rules” then it’s time to face the fact that we’ve made up the “rules” in a desperate attempt to make English make sense. It is a vain attempt. Don’t stress it, just enjoy it. Here’s a favorite poem of mine–just be glad you aren’t trying to make sense of this as a second language. 🙂
My previous post should have read, I and O may say “I” and “O” before two consonants. No, it isn’t hard and fast, but it’s proved itself helpful to my family as have the other spelling rules. (I was typing on my phone, sorry.)
Bookworm, I love the poem, but I see the phonetic beauty in it because I know the sounds and the rules.
I disagree with it being a vain attempt. It works for many people. Different strokes for different folks is becoming a favorite saying of mine. LOL.I’m a natural speller who rarely mispells anything, but I see words in phonetic chunks or phonograms. I’ve no idea how I was taught as a kid, but my kids are learning spelling rules and phonograms to boot. They are doing well and aren’t confused by exceptions. I know many natural spellers for whom phonics and spelling rules may be unnecessary, but I know many natural and learned spellers for whom they’ve been a godsend. If your kids do fine without learning them, great, but if not then I highly recommend using an Orton-Gillingham approach to spelling. There are many – Writing Road to Reading, Phonics Road, Spell to Write and Read, LEM Phonics, and my personal favorite All About Spelling. AAS is very simple to use, open and go. Learning all of the ~ 72 phonograms with all of their sounds and the ~ 28 spelling rules that are much more accurate that most people realize is a fairly simple task when compared to learning thousands of whole words and simply remembering them, at least for my family.
By way of example…
a – “a”, “A”, “ah”
ea – “E”, “e”, “A”
oi – “oy” that we may not use at the end of English words
ou – “ow”, “O”, “u”, “ah” – We call this phonogram the pg of pain.
Learning all of the sounds a phonogram (big word for a letter or combination of letters that together make a sound) can make in the order of frequency makes perfect sense to me and our family. Learning that English words don’t end in i, j, u, or v makes sense, too. Yes, I know we have exceptions, but knowing the rule helps us to spot the exceptions and we call that word a rule breaker.
This post is longer than I intended, but I wanted to give a shout out for the phonics/spelling rules camp. It works for us.
Blessings,
Christie
I have to add that although I don’t necessarily teach “rules” I agree with Christy’s breakdown on the sounds our alphabet represents. I use Reading Reflex which says it is a Phono-Graphix Method for Teaching Your Child to Read. I am using that and Delightful Reading, which is delightful. My son is loving it. I know this thread isn’t about reading, but as we’re learning to read, we’re learning to spell, right?
I guess my objection, Christie, is that calling them “rules” sort of implies to others that there is a logical group of guys somewhere who made up a set of rules, then made up words that fit the rules, then presented this nice neat language to us, and if we just spent eleven hours a day memorizing rules we’d be able to read just fine . . . but knowing the history of English and its pronunciation and spelling, I know that these “rules” are almost totally arbitrary and largely made up after-the-fact to explain what people were already DOING—which is making up a really messy, wildly adaptive language “on the ground” in real time and not paying attention to very many rules as they went. THEN later they noticed things that were already happening–the divergences between pronunciation and spelling that had already occurred– and THEN backtracked and made up “rules” and then more “rules” to explain the “exceptions”–It’s kind of like the Latin grammarians who invaded English and made up all kinds of “grammar rules” that we should follow in English, except we DON’T, and it does violence to the language I think to press this stuff ON it after the fact and then pretend we have a nice logical system of rules. We don’t. We can make UP rules to explain every wacky pronunciation divergence we run into because we’re really creative and highly verbal, but this just doesn’t seem a good use of time to me. I think we should teach enough phonics to get everyone well started in reading, then work on visual memory (coupled with varying mnemonic devices when necessary) even in non-visual-learners, and we’d ALL read and spell better and with more pleasure. My very, VERY biased 2 cents.
To butt in this phonics vs visual memory debate, I would like to say that with my mildly dyslexic son, I have been through rough times trying to figure this out. I bought all the fancy programs out there ( Orton Gillingham program called Barton, Spell to Read and Write, etc)
Many years of tears for me of very little improvement in my son. It was hard!
After my daughter learned to read with ease at the age of 4, I knew it was because her brain processed language quite differently than my son. It made me realize that it wasn’t my fault after all that my son was struggling! So after much prayer and time to research more options to help my son, I finally decided to trust the ideas of Charlotte Mason. My son knows basic phonics and remembers some of the rules, but mainly it has been dictation that has made spelling words stick in his mind. Just yesterday we were doing a longer passage in Spelling Wisdom and he grumbled that he felt unsure. I reminded him to use his memory and concentrate on each word until he can see it with his mind’s eye. He did it perfectly. This makes him proud and feeling more confident of being a better speller and reader. He has a long road ahead, but at least I’m seeing improvement instead of tears now. Yay!!
One more thing with phonetic rules…they can be very frustrating for a struggling reader/ speller. They have to think through all the rules and pick one that makes the most sense. My son started getting worse even after memorizing many of these rules. I personally like rules but it can sometimes be a lot of work ending in little payoff for some kids.
Great comments! I read a number of years ago now that we are all dyslexic to some degree. Maybe that is why our language is so messed up.
To get back to my original question. I use to live on public radio daily. There use to be a short segment on in the mornings about the history of whatever the word of they day was on that segment. I thought that words like ‘post, most’ and such probably have some deep history as to how they came about. More on the history then the ‘rule’, whatever that means.
I think, (as Herman Cain once said) I don’t have any proof of this but… the American English more so than European English, that our language is made up of the worlds languages. In that case rules are to natually be broken.
Excuse me if that didn’t come out the way I intended. My dyslexia kicked in just then.
p.s. I’m not making fun of dyslexia. I am just a little disapointed not much was known about it 48 years ago when I started school.
I disagree with it being a vain attempt. It works for many people. Different strokes for different folks is becoming a favorite saying of mine. LOL.
Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
- The topic ‘What a strange language’ is closed to new replies.