Reforming English Spelling

Anatoly Liberman argues that English spelling reform remains worthwhile despite more than a century of failure to gain traction. English is now essential to communication worldwide, so its inconsistent spelling burdens learners and readers; computers and spellcheckers may conceal the problem but do not eliminate it. At a recent English Spelling Society conference, members debated whether reform could succeed, and Liberman supports keeping the Society active while broadening its work to literacy. He attributes resistance partly to the reluctance of proficient readers to discard spellings they worked hard to learn, as well as disagreement among reformers about the scale and direction of change.

His proposed strategy is gradual and deliberately modest: first remove redundant letters unlikely to be missed, such as the second consonants in “sufficient” and “communal,” or the silent b in “dumb” and “thumb.” More controversial words and major irregularities should wait; he would also regularize g to j in some words, as in “gibberish.” The aim is not perfect consistency, but achievable improvements that avoid alienating readers. Since governments are unlikely to lead, he urges reformers to seek support from teachers, English-language instructors, media, and popular figures, using publicity and humor rather than relying on funding. Reforms in other countries and Noah Webster’s American spellings show that change is possible, he says, but English reformers should proceed slowly and settle for what they can accomplish.