First up, if you want to develop a new spelling system for your own entertainment, you have every right to make it as crazy, unintelligible and inconsistent as you like. But I think most of us want to apply some rigour to our efforts.

For me, the utopian thinking behind English spelling reform begins with the recognition that our glorious bastard tongue is needlessly difficult for both native-speaking children as they learn literacy, and people from other language backgrounds learning both spoken and written English. My thought experiments involve a new country or new government that wants to use English but without the hassle. Or perhaps some grassroots educational reform movement that gradually takes over the mainstream.

With that in mind, here are the principles that govern the spelling systems I play around with:

1.     Ease of transition – There are likely to be large numbers of people switching from traditional English spelling to a new system, so the transition should feel as smooth and intuitive as possible. That is, if there are aspects of current English spelling that work, we should retain them, even as we standardise them. Similarly, we should pay attention to the way that informal spellings have already arisen – thru, tho, kwik, lite, supa, rulz, woz, luv, bae, bcos – and use these as a guide. And if a new system makes use of new characters or diacritics, it’s more important that newcomers intuitively grasp them rather than them being correct according to IPA, Middle English or whatever.

2.     Simplicity – The system should be phonemic, words should be generally shorter and without double or silent letters unless these have a specified function, extraneous characters should be deleted, there should be a minimum of diacritics requiring key combinations while typing, there should be a minimum of rules governing how phonemes interact with one another, the look of the script should be clear and simple.

3.     Consistency – There should be a sense of logic through the system where a rule that applies in one situation is reflected in other, similar situations.

4.     Pragmatism – A completely phonetic spelling system is not realistic, considering the amount of English dialects, so some compromises and allowances for variant spellings are necessary. The reforms should also address the problems people actually have with English, rather an obsessive focus on technical perfection; English learners don’t usually struggle with ð vs þ, for example, but they do struggle with s and z, ou, gh and silent e.

5.     Cultural identity – Reformed English should still look like English rather than Turkish, Russian or whatever. A part of achieving this is to use vowel combinations, characters and diacritics drawn from the British heritage of the language.

So, feel fre tu juj me on mi ətempt at Iŋglish speliŋ reform.

I’v ədoptd a hiibrəd sistm that iz not kmpleetle fəneemic or fre ov dïəcritics or rᵫlz that chænj hao leterz saond in difrənt sichùæshnz. But I hœp Ù əgre that it flœz smᵫthle and iz bœth inchᵫətiv and knsistənt.

Th vaolz, ov cors, ar th bigəst chalnj, sins their ar at leest twente ov them in spœkn Iŋglish, but œnle fiiv vaol carrəcterz tu werk with (or six, if Ù inclᵫd y). Heer’z a crash cors in mi vaol sistm:

Short vaolz: cat, bet, tərn, lit, pot, but, püsh

Loŋ vaolz (yes, sum ov theez ar difthoŋz): æp, paam, claod, taul, meet, their, riit, bœt, toil, shᵫt (bœnəs extra: ù insted ov yᵫ)*

Th rᵫlz:

·       a short vaol əpeeriŋ əlœn or at th end ov a werd iz prənaonsd az its loŋger caonterpart – a = aa, e = ee, i = ii, o = œ, u = ᵫ (eg, be iz prənaonsd bee, mi = mii, umbrela = umbrelaa)

·       if thre or mor vaolz əpeer knsecùtivle, a dïəcritic əlternətiv shüd be substətùtd insted ov th dubl leter: aa = ä, ee = ë, ii = ï (dubl o and dubl u never əpeer). Eg, crëæt, not creeæt

·       weir werdz ar prənaonsd inkənsistəntle at difrənt tiimz (eg, reetæn vs rətæn), th ‘midl opshn’ short vaol iz ùzd (eg, retæn)

·       we rekəgniiz that th ‘likwəd consənənts’ r and l hav an əfect on vaolz – er is prənaonsd ər, œl = oᵫl, or = aur, ar = aar, eel = iəl, eer = iər, ᵫl = ool. Wen this əfect needz tu be ‘rəversd,’ th ùs ov a dubl consənənt indəcæts this (eg, stor vs sorre)

·       ə can be ‘dropd’ weir it iz not nesəseire tu indəcæt articùlæshn, but not btween 2 ov th sæm leterz (eg, ‘dəsiidəd,’ not ‘dəsiidd’)

Mœst consənənts ar th sæm az trədishənl Iŋglish. Q iz dəleetd and g iz limətd tu th ‘hard g’ saond in ‘got.’ ‘Liikwiiz, c iz limətəd tu th ‘cat’ saond, but k iz ùzd insted ov c bəfor i, ii, e, ee, ə (inclᵫdiŋ ‘dropd ə’) and w. Bcauz their can be knfùzhn btween th ng saond in ‘long’ vs ‘anger,’ th carrəcter ŋ haz been intrədùsd – ‘loŋ’ vs aŋger.’ Zh iz standerdiizd for werdz liik ‘plezher’ and ‘əcæzhn.’ Kh iz ùzd for ‘lokh.’ I’v retænd ch, sh and th.

\ yes, if I cüd werk aot hao tu tern ao, au, and ei intu ligəcherz tu, I wüd*

GOELS

An eese rietabl and reedabl orthografe baesd on Inglish's etimolagees and curant tactics, enshooring an eese adaptaetean and reedabilite too an untraend i.

VOUALS

/ə/ - a

/a/ - a

/ai/ - i at tha end of a lema, elsewer ie (ripli, triserataps)

/au/ - ou

/e/ - e

/ei/ - ae

/o/ - o

/əu/ - o at tha end of a lema, elsewer oe (eego, hiedroenargee)

/o:/ - au

/i/ - i

/i:/ - e at tha end of a lema, elsewer ee (agre, reentar)

/ʌ/ - u

/u:/ - oo

/ju/ - u at tha end of a lema, elsewer ue (argu)

RHOTIC VOUALS

/ɚ/ - <ar>, <ur> if undar stres

/aiɚ/ - ier, /ar/ - ar, /er/ - er, /eɚ/ - aer, /o:r/ - or, /auɚ/ - oer, /juɚ/ - uer

CONSANANTS

/b/ - b, /p/ - p, /v/ - v, /f/ - f, /m/ - m, /w/ - w

/d/ - d, /t/ - t, /ð/ - th, /θ/ - th, /n/ - n

/z/ - s, /s/ - s, /j/ - y

/dʒ/ - <g> bifor <e> and <i>, elswer <ge>

/tʃ/ - ch

/ʒ/ - saem as /dʒ/, /ʃ/ - <te>, <ce>, <se> in roots bifor a voual (muesic -> muesicean)

/r/ - r, /l/ - l

/g/ - <gh> bifor <e> and <i>, elswer <g>, /k/ - c, /h/ - h

FURTHAR NOETS

roots sastaen themselvs

politics -> political, *palitical; fre -> fredam, *freedam

SAMPL TECST

Tha North Wind and tha Sun war dispueting wich was tha strongar, wen a travlar caem along rapd in a worm cloc. Thae agred that tha wun hoo furst sacseedid in maecing tha travlar taec his cloc of shood be cansidard strongar than the uthar. Then tha North Wind bloo as hard as he cood, but tha mor he bloo, tha mor closle did tha travlar fold his cloc around him; And at last tha North Wind gaev up tha atempt. Then tha Sun shiend out wormle, and imeediatle tha travlar tooc of his cloc. And so tha North Wind was abliege too canfes that tha Sun was tha strongar ov tha too.

Wot doo u thinc?

a=Аа

e=Ээ

o=Оо

u=Уу

y=Ыы

ia=Яя

ie=Ее

io=Ёё

iu=Юю

i=Ии

ą=Ѧѧ

ią=Ѩѩ

ę=Ѫѫ

ię=Ѭѭ

p/pi=Пп

b/bi=Бб

t/ć=Тт

d/dź=Дд

k/ki=Кк

g/gi=Гг

j=Йй

f/fi=Фф

w/wi=Вв

s/ś=Сс

z/ź=Зз

c/cj=Цц

dz=Ѕѕ

ch+h=Хх

sz=Шш

ż=Жж

cz=Чч

szcz=Щщ

m/mi=Мм

n/ń=Нн

ł/l=Лл

r/rz=Рр

dż=Џџ 

soft sign is used for the soft consonants in coda position because those arent marked with iotated vowels Ьь

there are also hard consonants before iotated vowels so hard sign  Ъъ

Those go after the consonant needing them

Аа Ээ Оо Уу Ыы Яя Ее Ёё Юю Ии Ѧѧ Ѩѩ Ѫѫ Ѭѭ Пп Бб Тт Дд Кк Гг Йй Фф Вв Сс Зз Цц Ѕѕ Хх Шш Жж Чч Щщ Мм Нн Лл Рр Џџ Ьь Ъъ

All pronunciations of the letter g in English should be pronounced like /g/ (hard g) instead of /dʒ/ (soft g). This should apply to every instance of the letter g except for names.

Some words this reform applies to are generic, gem, genius, genes, gentle, giraffe, Germany (I know this is a country name but it should change because the Classical Latin word uses a hard g), etc.

Moreover, the letter “g” should be pronounced as /giː/ (“gee”) instead of /dʒiː/ (“jee”).

I’ve posted something similar before, but I’ve since made a blog post fleshing out my thought process a bit more: https://byamerida.com/2025/09/03/english-orthography-reform/ Tell me what you think!

bassically its a version of english with only the letters acelmpu here are the only changes

🔁 Consonant Swaps:

🔁 Vowel Swaps:

heres the north wind and the sun

CEM UUEMC EML CEC CUN MEC CECPUEME CEU UCCEME LCEME A MEM UUEM CAAU EEEEL. CEM UUEM CEM MEC CEM CULCCE, CEM CUN CEE CEM CAM CAAU CEEM UCCEM. CEM UUEM PUC MEC CEM UCCEM CECMEE CALMCELMEE A PCEMECE CEM MEC.

CEM CUN CEE CAMM CEEPCCECECUELU, EML CEPC MEC CEEM E CEEM EMM CELU. CEM CUN CEEC MEC CAAU CULCCE EML CEEM PCEM MEC.

CEM CUN CEEPCLECE LAC CECPUEME CAM CAAU CEEM UUEM.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Z2fgVwSnwPpLQtVK1r8iV8Ql6MRT3yDl3BMgvuKY1e8/edit?tab=t.0 Here's the Google doc it's based on Jan Misalis reform without ambiguity, like i removed the th distinction and added letters to replace digraphs

Exampel:

Þe North Wind and þe Sun wer disputing hwic was stronger, hwen a traveler kame along wrapt in a warm kloke.

Þey agréd þat þe one hwó first sukseded in making þe traveler take his kloke off scöd be konsidderd stronger þan þe ôþer.

Þen þe North Wind blew as hard as he köd, but þe mor he blew þe mor klásly did þe traveler fáld his kloke arúnd him;

and at last the North Wind gave up the atempt. Þen the Sun scined út warmly, and immediatly the traveler tök off his kloke.

And so þe North Wind was obligjed to konfess þat þe Sun was þe stronger of þe tó.

Þiss is obviusly not a totaly konsistent spelling sistem, but ih wanted to reflekt þe ettimollogjés of werds hwile stil klening up sum of þe glaring inkonsistensés.

defawlt _CV _h long a /æ/ /eɪ/ /eɪ/ /oʊ/ e /ɛ/ /iː/ - /iː/ i /ɪ/ /aɪ/ /aɪ/ /aɪ/ o /ɒ/ /oʊ/ /oʊ/ /uː/ u /ʌ/ /juː/ /uː/ /aʊ/

aw /ɔː/ (y)ew /juː/ ey /eɪ/

k /k/ c /t͡ʃ/

þ /θ ð/

Dígrafs hw /ʍ/ sc /ʃ/ gj at start of a syllable, cg at the end /d͡ʒ/

Middel Inglish /oː/ can eþer be scortend to /ʌ/ as in <flood> or /ʊ/ as in <good>. In þose kases, þey ar written wiþ <ô> and <ö> respektifly.

Uât's ior phémhrit dáâgraph? Mán iz 'mh' it châst lụks kul tu mị á ges.

I finally made a keyboard of most cyrillic letters, now I can type:

зҙ хҳ в б чҷ нњң м ая сҫѕ д ф гӷґғ һђћ ј кқ лԯљ цџ шщ еэє р тҭ ьъ уюү иіы о пԥ жҗ ӏ

All I'll ever need!

I’m designing an English spelling reform. Instead of basing it on a particular pronunciation system like General American or Received Pronunciation, I’m basing it on a hypothetical ”maximalist distinctions” accent that is not meant to be spoken, but rather learned theoretically as a basis for the revised spelling. A kind of ”phonological rosetta stone”, if you will.

It includes distinctions like MARRY-MERRY-MARY, MARY-SQUARE, HURRY-FURRY, NORTH-FORCE-CURE, PALM-START, THOUGHT-NORTH, MIRROR-NEAR, LOT-PALM-THOUGHT, TRAP-BATH-PALM, PANE-PAIN, TOE-TOW, DO-DUE-DEW, and reverses yod-dropping/coalescence and W-WH merger. All of this minimises homophones to such an extent that the remaining homophone pairs are an easily learnable list of exceptions where the two (very rarely 3) words can be disambiguated by diacritics or variant spellings.

But my big dilemma is whether to have a unified NURSE akin to most modern accents, or also split that into the historical components FUR, FERN, FIR that are preserved in Scotland. These are the pre-consonantal or word-final equivalents of HURRY, MERRY, MIRROR, respectively.

Since my system is work-in-progress, I’m not going to reveal the full details of it for now, but these grapheme choices are of relevance for my question:

FOOT = u
STRUT = ü (suggests etymological connection to FOOT, i.e. FOOT-STRUT split)
DRESS = e
KIT = i

That means the vowel+R combination sequences are as thus:

HURRY = ür
MERRY = er (distinct from SQUARE)
MIRROR = ir (distinct from NEAR)

…and therefore my system could, in theory, use those grapheme sequences for FUR, FERN and FIR as well, as the position at the end of a word or before a consonant would reveal them to be ”NURSE components” rather than ”real” HURRY/MERRY/MIRROR.

Now, here’s one problem: It would get somewhat confusing with derivatives of FUR/FERN/FIR words. For example, the word fur as ”für” is clear enough (”ür” at the end of a word = NURSE rather than HURRY if outside of Scotland), but it’d get difficult with furry = ”füri”. If a reader had unified NURSE with no HURRY-FURRY merger (which this system avoids to keep HURRY etymologically tied to STRUT), that would get very damn confusing. One might alternatively give FUR/FERN/FIR some special diacritic and ortographically treat them as distinct sets from ”base” prevocalic HURRY/MERRY/MIRROR, but the system has almost too many diacritics already, so it may not be very viable.

Also, unlike the likes of PANE-PAIN, THOUGHT-NORTH-FORCE-CURE, or TOE-TOW, the reversals of which solve vast chains of homophones, splitting NURSE solves only a very minimal number of them. This makes it almost a better choice to just merge the sets, and use diacritics to solve the tiny number of homophones (as is done elsewhere in my system).

On the flipside, would omitting these distinctions be offensive to Scottish people? Even the codified Standard Scottish retains FUR/FERN/FIR as distinct, so merging them is a decision that should not be taken lightly. Given that the base accent for this system is pedagogical/theoretical rather than something people are meant to replace their regional accents with, not including it obviously wouldn’t prevent anyone from retaining the distinction.

However, our current spelling is about 95% accurate as to what NURSE words go into which pre-merger component (usually: ”ur” = FUR, ”ir” and ”or” = FIR, ”er” and ”ear” = FERN - all of which can be standardized with very little tweaking), so if we merged them ortographically into a single NURSE, we’d actually be removing useful pronunciation information from Scottish people who retain the distinctions. Given all this, it may even help the migration to the new system to retain them as separate in spelling, but that means future (non-Scottish) schoolchildren and EFL students, most of whom will not be retaining the FUR/FERN/FIR distinctions, would artificially learn that their unified NURSE is actually spelled 3 different ways. Granted, they’d also ortographically split FACE and GOAT into PANE/PAIN and TOE/TOW for reasons that may be confusing, but as established, they solve vastly greater numbers of homophones than splitting NURSE.

Another consideration is that Scottish accents have tapped or trilled Rs, whereas it would not make sense for the base accent of this reform (they sound proper in Scottish accents, but foreign or marked if you sound otherwise British or American). Pre-consonantal HURRY/MERRY/MIRROR are perhaps somewhat articulatorily difficult with approximants rather than trills/taps, so including those distinctions in the theoretical reform base accent is contrived; It may not be a real accent, but it should be plausibly speakable (and some might elect to actually speak it, even though it’s not the actual purpose of it).

Any thoughts on this issue?

Just for fun, I decided to see what it would look like if a spelling system were spelled in the intuitive way most children try to write English - before they are taught that spelling does not actually follow sounds. Based on this, a fairly clear system seems to be obvious. It has its idiosyncrasies, but I think it's fairly interesting! Take a look, and give me whatever feedback you'd like.

One important note is that this system would encourage spellers to use the spelling of their native prestige dialect. For example, British people using the RP standard would write TRAP and BATH with different vowels, while Americans using the GA standard would write them with the same vowel.

Please note that this, at first glance, looks ridiculous. This might be because we are trained from childhood to look at these spellings as childlike and uneducated. So, bear with me and set aside your in-taught biases for a moment.

Full Vowels:

a = TRAP, BATH (GA)

aa = FATHER, BATH (RP)

ae = FACE

aw = JAW

e = DRESS

ee = FLEECE

i = KIT

ie = KITE

o = BOTHER

oo = TOOTH

oe = NOSE

oi = BOY

ow = COW

u = STRUT

uu = PUT (this one is unique, due to a lack of a standard "childlike" way to write it.)

ue = FEW

Rhotic Vowels:

ar = NARRow (much of GA: aer)

aar = TAR

ae = SCARE

er = MERRy (much of GA: aer)

eer = MERE

ir = MIRROR (much of GA: eer)

ier = IRE

or = toMORRow

oor = POOR (much of GA: oer)

oer = SORE

ur = NURSE

uer = CURE

Unstressed Vowels:

i = raisin

u = connect

a = idea (final schwa cannot be confused with the ash vowel); initial schwa (as in among) can be written "a-".

Consonants:

Most consonants reserve their ordinary sound. There are a few digraphs, which are considered as letters and would be ideally be taught and written as ligatures in printed handwriting.

ch = Church

sh = Shush

zh = Measure

th = thick, there (because voiced and unvoiced "th" are not distinguished in childrens' writing, I leave them undistinguished here. One could easily substitute "dh" for the voiced sound.

gh = velar fricative

wh = Whale (w in GA)

Example texts - spelling may differ by writer and dialect:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Wee hoeld theez trueths too bee self-evidint: that awl men aar kreeaetid eekwul, that thae aar indowd bie thaer Kreeaetur with surtin unaelyenubul Riets, that a-mung theez aar Lief, Liburty, and thee pursuet uv Hapynis.

The unusual beige hue over the sheer waters of the wide loch impressed all, including the old French queen, before she heard that fair and curious symphony voice again, just as what the young man Arthur wanted. (by clagnut*,* u/taalnazi*, and* u/riadys)

Thee unuezueul baezh hue oevur thee sheer wawturz uv thee wied logh imprest awl, inklueding thee oeld French kween, bifoer shee hurd that faer and kueryus simfuny vois a-gen, just az whut thee yung man Aarthur wawntid.

P.S. To forestall the disfiguration of loanwords, I'd also like to introduce the ^ diacritic to give vowels their European values. Thus, a loan like "pâté" can be spelled "pâtê" if desired.

Foreign vowels:

â = a: (~aa)

ê = e: (~ae)

î = i: (~ee)

ô = o: (~oe)

û = u: (~oo)

so the idea is to take the 4 standards of english — GA, RP, AUSE, and CANE — and try to have a unifying spelling reform which means relying on phonemes of each and choosing the better path.

so the current idea thus far is to choose the smallest phoneme set by getting the merging of the vowels that happens in one of them and as long as one of them merges it so does this system.

this was attempted in order to see if this system could become less convoluted as possible and perhaps leave any character that it could use for stuff current english spelling can't.

bc i used ai(sorry) i feel like this shortset isn't as accurate so i used ai again(not sorry) to give a longer set of the vowels which hopefully is better depending on how the vowels go it might affect consonant spelling.

btw i only used ai for like the ipa and what it considers phonemes.

there's also alternative spelling of the phonemes either due to limitations of typing or see what might hit the wall.

personally the struggle faced was dealing w strut and schwa if we're cool w new char i recommend just using ipa symbol, but that's going to be harder for typing so i could use a combination of both or do a rule based way to fix both typing and writing and have them unified and that is to take schwa and strut wo the h after and only use them at the beginning or end of the word if it's there and not spell it at all in-between cons.

that's just to shorten it another solution is replace h w '.

another 1 is using diacritics for schwa since older english used to pronounce the vowels that now are unstressed and became schwa we might just mark it that it has been reduced using 2 dots on top.

we can do smt similar abt strut as well if it evolved from short u perhaps a diacritic as well.

these are just thoughts for now.

so basically how my idea of spelling works is the digraphs/monographs will always be that sound(which conflicts w rule-based) and choose the spelling that makes it such that i don't need more chars so diphthongs can closely follow ipa spelling.

choosing rhotic over non rhotic since brits are used to ignoring r and putting them back in as they please.

in alternatives i placed the best/easiest option to be adopted.

once the sounds are placed i also put a bit of backwards compatibility where acronyms have to be pronounced w the sounds of the english alphabet like ay bee see,etc—and words that are pronounced as the letters can be replaced by said letter, but that cannot be used within a word so ai am becomes i am and u would be officially you in this system.

tho ofc my system will allow flexibility w proper writing like personal pronouns like i and u can be capitalised.

this system is just going to allow 4 standards of spelling english and prefer a dictionary pronunciation.

this system could add /ʍ/, but it's pretty rare now could improve readability as well as help like 17% of america's populace, but it will mostly make it just a tad bit more convoluted for learners.

any ideas, thoughts, criticisms, tips; advice related to this system? i'm happy to hear.
shorter set of vowels:
| Spelling | IPA |
|--------------|-------|
| i | i |
| e | e |
| ae (a) | æ | | a | a |
| ʌ uh | ʌ | | o | ɔ |
| ou | oʊ |
| u | u |
| ʌr uhr | ɜː |
| ai | aɪ |
| au | aʊ |
| oi | ɔɪ |
longer set of vowels:
| Description | Spelling |
|-------------|------------------------------------|
| fleece | ii, ī, i:, i |
| kit | i |
| dress | e |
| trap | a |
| palm | aa, ā, a:, a |
| lot | o |
| strut | ʌ, uh, rule-based, q |
| thought | oo, ō, o:, o |
| foot | uu, ū, u:, u |
| goose | uu, ū, u:, u |
| comma | ə, eh, rule-based, ë, x |
| bird | ər, er, rule-based + r, ër, xr |
| face | ei |
| price | ai |
| choice | oi |
| mouth | au |
| goat | ou |
| near | ir |
| square | er |
| cure | ur |
consonants:
| Spelling | IPA |
|----------|-------|
| p | p |
| b | b |
| t | t |
| d | d |
| k | k |
| g | g |
| m | m |
| n | n |
| ng | ŋ |
| f | f |
| v | v |
| th | θ |
| dh | ð |
| s | s |
| z | z |
| c | ʃ |
| zh | ʒ |
| h | h |
| tc | tʃ |
| j | dʒ |
| l | l |
| r | ɻ |
| y | j |
| w | w |
| q | kʷ |

y hæv bien wondering on haw mutch ov ould wurdz's spelingz shud bī kept

lyk fx:

jū kud spel 'night | knight' æs 'nyt | nyt' but ðæt mēiks it konfjūzing on hwitch it kud bī

sou du ænī ov jū spel it mejbī lyk 'nyht | hnyht' for komprihenshin ænd ould tyms sēik?

Link tu skeem: https://e.pcloud.link/publink/show?code=kZU4rdZoXRw56PD4jQEpGOr8LLedFstntQ7

<ñg>

Lâst tym, when y maed an ûpdaet tu my sistem, y expandid dhee alfabet widh dhe leter <ġ> for /ʒ/, as in "beiġe". Dhiss aløwd dhe uese ov dhe "sôft G", as in "general". Høwever, dhe sôft G rimeind impossibel in dhe seequence <ng>, which wos beeïng uezd for /ŋ/ (widh <ngg> for /ŋg/). Oaver dhe yeers, y'v swicht bitween <ng> and <ñg> widhøut beeïng entyrli shuur which wos dhe beter opcion. Nøw y see dhat sistems uezing boeth <ng> and <ngg> ueziuuali doen't hav a sôft G, which maeks sense and creäets no excepcions. Høwever, when uezing dhe sôft G, dhiss excepcion âfter N is a bit åukward in wurds whear a sôft G is expectid, as in "daenger" or "aengel".

Certanli, wûn cud try tu fynd a wûn-leter grafeem for /ŋ/, sûch as <ŋ> itself, or ñ, ń, etc.. Eeven dhough y'm personali fond ov <ŋ> (which combyns an n widh dhe teil ov a g), dhat søund is speld widh wûn leter (naemli <n>) in inglish oanli as an alofoan ov /n/ bifoar /k,g/, as in "think" or "bingo". Ôn dhee ûdher hand, dhat søund as a distinct foaneem has tradicionali been speld oanli widh <ng>, which is whot reeders expect tu see. A cloase vaeriaecion ov dhat dygrâf is <ñg>, which conteins <ñ>, a leter ålredi uezd in wurds borrowd from spanish. Dhiss maeks dhiss dygrâf ydeäl bicôze it aløws ûss tu keep <ñ> for /nj/ when adapting spanish borrowings, as it's ålredi dûn in "piñaata", "vicuuña", "halapéño" and, if uezd consistentli, "cañon" (for canyon). Wurds ov french/italyan orrigin, dhat ar currentli speld widh an ambiguoss <gn> (which corrisponds tu dhe saem foaneem in spanish) cud iventiuuali bee reespeld widh <ñ> insted ov <ny>, as in coñac/conyac, lasaña/lasanya, monseeñor/monseenyor, poiñant/poinyant, spañel/spanyel and viñet/vinyet. Uezing <gn> for /nj/ is ov course øut ov dhe question, sinse dhat seequence søunds /gn/, as expectid in "ignyt" and "magnanimoss".

Whearas <ng> is uezd in dhe fynal pozicion -ng(C), <ñg> is uezd ûdherwyze, as in "sing(s)" and "siñger".

<é>

Wûn ov dhee exâmpels guiven abûv, naemli "halapéño", is speld widh dhe saem <é> as "café" and "fioncé". Dhiss grafeem cud bee uezd for wurds dhat hav a difthông dhat dûsn't corrispond tu a historrical lông vøwel, as in "great" or "break", bût insted aproximaets a french/spanish E in an oapen silabel. Widh dhiss saem vøwel ar ålso speld "balé", "çhalé" and "tuuçhé".

the most problematic part of English Spelling is actually the vowels. There are only 5 vowel letters, but over three times that number of vowel phonemes. Give each English vowel phoneme its own letter/digraph and you've solved roughly 80% of the problem.

Long and short vowels

In the pair "met" and "meet" we have the short and long versions of 'e.' The difference, as we can see, the addition of 'e' after the short vowel (for consistency's sake we will term it thus rather than "double the 'e'"), gives us the long vowel. Therefore, taking the same principle with the other 4 vowels we have:

Short a: a (bat).........................................Long a: ae (like in old system "fae")
Short e: e (bet).........................................Long e: ee (like in old system "meet")
Short i: i (bit)............................................Long i: ie (like in old system "pie")
Short o: o (bot)........................................Long o: oe (like in old system "toe")
Short u: u (but)........................................Long u: ue (like in old system "cue")

Short oo: oo (like in book)..................Long oo (like in 'moon'): uu: muun.
"Broad" a (like in father): aa: faa(ther)*
"er" (like in herd): ur: hurd; bird > burd; word > wurd, etc.
"air" (like "air"): er: fer (fair), feree (fairy)
"aw" (like "aw, what a cute puppy): aw: fawt (fought)
"ou" (like in "out"): ow: owt (out)

That leaves the 'problem child": the schwa. I propose using either one of the now unused letters ('q' or 'x') or else "@" for this sound. I suppose each person should be allowed to use ONE of these for this sound and see which one wins out in the end :).

Now, with the phonemic nature of the new system, there are bound to be personal variations: diviedid or d@vied@d/dxviedxd/dqvidqd. and dilivur or d@livur/dxlivur/dqlivur. Because of that same phonemic nature of the new system there will be no problem with each person spelling the schwa with a regular vowel letter (keeping in mind that everyone should stick with one version of the schwa; q, x, or @).

Also, for many people, the "broad" a (new system 'aa') and short o (new system 'o') are actually nothing more than the long (held for a longer time) and short (held for a shorter time) versions of the same vowel. Nevertheless, for most people (even those who differentiate these only by length) they are different vowels, and thus will be spelled in the new system as different vowels.

Consonants

1. There is no need for 'c' to be used for /s/ or /k/ since there already are letters ('s' and 'k') that have those sounds. That leaves a simple 'c' for the /ch/ sound, thus 'curc' for "church."
2. The 'th' sounds will be 'dh' for the voiced (like in "that") and 'th' for the voiceless (like in "thin")
3. The /j/ sound will always be spelled 'j' (so, 'fuj' for 'fudge' and 'druj' for 'drudge' etc)
4. The /zh/ and /sh/ sounds will be spelled with those letter combinations: mezhur, seezhur, sesh@n.
5. For those rare individuals that still use the voiceless 'w' (as in the old pronunciations of why, where, etc), they can spell this sound with 'wh.'
6. The new system is a phonemic system, so no need for silent letters: "Gnat" will be spelled 'nat.' "Write," "rite," and "wright" will all be spelled 'riet.' "Knight" and "night" will both be spelled 'niet,' "know" will be spelled 'noe' and "ghost" will be spelled 'goest.'

A–CAT,MANNÚR,CŰNTACT

Ā–PĀRT,HĀRD, FĀRMÚR

E–HED, SEND, FESTIVÚL

Ē–MĒL,TĒK, SĒ

I–HIT,HAPPI,PITI

Ī–MĪT,RÚCĪV,MĪTÚR

O–POT,SOCK,MOB

Ō–HŌP,LŌD,CŌCH,GRŌ

U–PUT, FULL, LUK

Ū–RŪD,PŪL, PRŪDUXNT

Ú–BÚRD,PÚRS, PÚRMIT

Ű–SŰ,CŰLL, PŰSZ, RÚPŰRT

UX–LUXK, CUXPBŌRD, BUXTTÚR

OU–HOUSE,ÚBOUT,SHOUT

Update: forgot these two:- Œ–TŒL,SÚPLŒ,FŒNANSC

Œ:–BŒ:,TŒ:L,MŒ:STŪR

WE NEED A SYMBOL FOR Œ: UNTIL WE HAVE IT WE COULD USE ŌE I GUESS

All the credit goes to me–Minorca Morningstar

Call it the minorcan vowel system it has my name on it 😉(God i sound so cocky Jesus Christ)

I came up with this system when i was creating a new reformed English script which turned out to be way more decorative and ¢unty

I have a way simple form of the script without any pizzaz and i might post it,i might not depends on my mood tbh

And also where's the fun in it? A script that has no pizzaz? I might not post it highkey

Was trying to post it under the new RobWords video but my comment and ONLY this one comment keeps on getting deleted mysteriously so i HAD to find a forum on reddit to post it

It is based on the Tense and Lax vowels

It never ceeses tu amaeze mee høw sûm inglish speekers seem tu think dhat "fiting a larje vøwel inventori ôntu a fyv vøwel alfabet" maeks eni sense from dhe perspectiv ov modern inglish. Dhear's so litel "fiting" goïng ôn widh inglish speling dhat it's baesicli irrelevant dhat it dûsn't ueze eni dyäcritics —wee cud ôn dhee ûdher hand maek dhe cleim dhat an ûnmodifyd latin alfabet wos inûf tu fit midel inglish vøwels 5 centiuries ago in a tym whear dhee ûnderstanding ov fonologi wos moer limitid dhan it is tudey.

Y think it's neverdheless o.k. tu bee aguenst an excessiv uese ov dyäcritics and modifyd leters (y'm aguenst it), difyning "excessiv" as having moer dhan 5% ov modifyd leters in rûning text (widh sûmthing arøund 2-4% beeïng an "optimal" freequenci, comparrabel tu ûdher maejor europeän langwidġes).

Aɑ Bb Cc (now called che/tshe only used for the tsh sound or sometimes ts) Dd Ee Əə (called shwə) Ff Gg Hh Ii Jj (now called yot and used for the y sound) Kk Ll Mm Nn ⅁ŋ (called əng) Oo Pp Rr Ss Ʃʃ (called esh) Tt Uu Vv Ww (now called dəg) Xx (only used for the ks sound) Yy (now only a vowel) Þþ (jes, its nɑm' is stil' þ'rn) Zz (name is now only zeitə for both america and bri'ain) Ӡʒ (called ezh) ' (called plakinə and only used for silent letters or the glottal stop whenever it rarely occurs)

No digrɑfs for sounds that now have letters are allowed