Register  Login  Active Topics  Maps  

Will the French ortograph be reformed?

  Tags: Spelling | French
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages Post Reply
55 messages over 7 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  Next >>
simonov
Senior Member
Portugal
Joined 5590 days ago
222 posts - 438 votes 
Speaks: English

 
 Message 33 of 55
17 November 2010 at 10:54pm | IP Logged 
Fine, as -ent is so unnecessarily complicated it had better be abolished. And all French endings for that matter, so that people won't have to think but just write beautiful content.
I wish you luck with your French studies.
3 persons have voted this message useful



Mikael84
Bilingual Pentaglot
Groupie
Peru
Joined 5301 days ago
76 posts - 116 votes 
Speaks: French*, Finnish*, English, Spanish, Portuguese
Studies: Arabic (classical), German, Russian

 
 Message 34 of 55
18 November 2010 at 5:57am | IP Logged 
I'm French and just had fun reading the whole thread. Gotta take sides and say 3rd person plural in "et" just looks very wrong.

I'd be OK with a spelling reform, but only in minor matters unrelated to grammar, such as the "hiboux, cailloux" examples already discussed.

Anything else I feel would take something away from the language. Why must we always look for the most logical, simple path? I know this forum is about language learning and so people are biased towards ease of learning... but personally I think languages would be a lot more boring without the little twists and turns that seem like a nightmare at first but that you eventually end up mastering (hopefully).

So what, people, even French people, end up making spelling mistakes because rules are not always 100% logical. I don't see the problem with it.

If anything, a lot of the time I think language learners on this site are too obsessed with details and perfection, so maybe that's why they get frustrated with complicated or illogical rules. It's OK if you're making spelling mistakes... relax. Realize that natives also make them!

Even in a professional setting I can't tell you how many times I see French people messing up with the participes passés and writing stuff such as "je les ai rendu" instead of "rendus". In a non-professional setting it's worse. It doesn't matter. People understand the meaning anyway, and unless you are in a very formal situation, you won't lose points because of it (even more so if you are not French).

Makes it all the more amazing to read (and write!) a long text totally void of mistakes...
10 persons have voted this message useful



s_allard
Triglot
Senior Member
Canada
Joined 5431 days ago
2704 posts - 5425 votes 
Speaks: French*, English, Spanish
Studies: Polish

 
 Message 35 of 55
18 November 2010 at 6:12am | IP Logged 
Cainntear wrote:
simonov wrote:
Who has told you that? Proof of the difficulty of the -ent verb ending? It is in fact one of the least common realspelling mistakes. One that people sometimes make, not because they don't know, but because they're not paying attention.
And that is precisely my point. You should not have to think about the form of what you're writing, just as you don't consciously think about the pronunciation. It's a complication because it forces you to think about form, which distracts you from

Quote:
But at the outset you were referring to the difficulty arising when reading -ent, so why are you now changing to "writing".

I'm talking about orthography as a whole. The process is symmetrical. Literacy involves the brain associating written forms with sounds. The harder something is to associate with a sound, the harder it is to read and write. The sound represented by -ENT can only be worked out using extra data from elsewhere in the sentence. This makes more work from the brain.   The more work it is to read or write the form, the less attention can be paid to the actual content of the message.
Quote:
My conclusion still stands: no need to change the -ent verb ending, because the remedy would be worse than the disease: too many other changes would have to be made, in writing and in speech..
Nonsense -- no changes would have to be made in speech. You could rewrite the -ent ending as -zrg if you wanted and no changes would have to be made in speech. (However, it would make reading and writing harder.)


My approach to this curious debate is as follows. This so-called problem of the co-existence of two different sounds of the -ent ending in French seems to be limited to Cainntear. None of the guides to difficulties of the French language that I consulted hinted that this was a problem for native speakers. There are so many other areas of real difficulty, including things like the past participles, relative pronouns and the many quirks of French grammar that I don't see the point of even discussing this issue

Edited by s_allard on 18 November 2010 at 10:56pm
2 persons have voted this message useful



Haldor
Triglot
Senior Member
France
Joined 5616 days ago
103 posts - 122 votes 
Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Swedish
Studies: French, Spanish

 
 Message 36 of 55
18 November 2010 at 7:46pm | IP Logged 
My approach to this curious debate is as follows. This so-called problem of the co-existence of two different sounds of the -ent ending in French seems to be limited to Cainntear. None of the guides to difficulties of the French language that I consulted hinted that this was a problem for native speakers. There are so many other areas of real difficulty, including things the the past participles, relative pronouns and the many quirks of French grammar that I don't see the point of even discussing this issue

Must say I agree with s_allard on this one, even though I the ent only serves to confuse, like the accent circonflex. What is more important is the numerous ways to denoute the frtanch wowels, for example the sound ɛ correspond to è, ê, ai, aî, ait, ei, et, êt, e, ey, ais, aix, aid, aie, and on and on..

Anyway, I'm happy to see so many people taking a real interest in this debate.
However you may wanna look at it, there is hardly any language where so many of its parleurs want to change the spelling..
1 person has voted this message useful



Kisfroccs
Bilingual Pentaglot
Senior Member
Switzerland
Joined 5410 days ago
388 posts - 549 votes 
Speaks: French*, German*, EnglishC1, Swiss-German, Hungarian
Studies: Italian, Serbo-Croatian

 
 Message 37 of 55
06 February 2011 at 9:13am | IP Logged 
Mikael84 wrote:
I'm French and just had fun reading the whole thread. Gotta take sides and say 3rd person plural in "et" just looks very wrong.

I'd be OK with a spelling reform, but only in minor matters unrelated to grammar, such as the "hiboux, cailloux" examples already discussed.

Anything else I feel would take something away from the language. Why must we always look for the most logical, simple path? I know this forum is about language learning and so people are biased towards ease of learning... but personally I think languages would be a lot more boring without the little twists and turns that seem like a nightmare at first but that you eventually end up mastering (hopefully).

So what, people, even French people, end up making spelling mistakes because rules are not always 100% logical. I don't see the problem with it.

If anything, a lot of the time I think language learners on this site are too obsessed with details and perfection, so maybe that's why they get frustrated with complicated or illogical rules. It's OK if you're making spelling mistakes... relax. Realize that natives also make them!

Even in a professional setting I can't tell you how many times I see French people messing up with the participes passés and writing stuff such as "je les ai rendu" instead of "rendus". In a non-professional setting it's worse. It doesn't matter. People understand the meaning anyway, and unless you are in a very formal situation, you won't lose points because of it (even more so if you are not French).

Makes it all the more amazing to read (and write!) a long text totally void of mistakes...


I'm also a french native speaker and feel like Mickael84. I do not apply the reform from 1990. I write boîte, maîtresse, maître etc and like any other child in school I learned all these rules. (by heart). I also learned that fenêtre was for fenestre, maître for maistre and I'm very well aware of the "ethymological" sens behind French. French is the only language I can read without hesitation in old French. I understand almost every word (not these whose senses have shifted in time) because all the rules today are derivated from old French and Latin. I cannot say the same for German (and I'm native speaker !). I didn't have the opportunity to learn these rules in German when I was a kid... and now I'm lost :)

But if you have to learn something in French it's: "l'exception fait la règle". And sadly, this phrases apply to most of the rules in French. :)

Kisfröccs
4 persons have voted this message useful



Préposition
Diglot
Senior Member
France
aspectualpairs.wordp
Joined 5115 days ago
186 posts - 283 votes 
Speaks: French*, EnglishC1
Studies: Russian, Arabic (Written), Swedish, Arabic (Levantine)

 
 Message 38 of 55
09 February 2011 at 4:41pm | IP Logged 
Kisfroccs wrote:
I'm also a french native speaker and feel like Mickael84. I do not apply the reform from 1990. I write boîte, maîtresse, maître etc and like any other child in school I learned all these rules. (by heart). I also learned that fenêtre was for fenestre, maître for maistre and I'm very well aware of the "ethymological" sens behind French. French is the only language I can read without hesitation in old French. I understand almost every word (not these whose senses have shifted in time) because all the rules today are derivated from old French and Latin. I cannot say the same for German (and I'm native speaker !). I didn't have the opportunity to learn these rules in German when I was a kid... and now I'm lost :)

But if you have to learn something in French it's: "l'exception fait la règle". And sadly, this phrases apply to most of the rules in French. :)

Kisfröccs


Wait, there's a 1990 reform that says "boite, maitresse, etc" is correct? I was born in 1990, and I was never taught to write anything but "maîtresse, boîte" and others!

Now I have to say, foreigners are often pretty quick at jumping on the problem of French spelling, and equally quick to diss it and say it's too complicated and annoying. But you've learnt English, and for all I know, you don't have troubles adding useless letters everywhere in this language, so why should it be a problem when it comes to French? (I'm sure there's been complaining, but it's never more of a problem than it is in French, for strange reasons).

You never quite know (oh, wait, did I just add a K I don't pronounce before "now"?) how to say stuff (one F does an equally good job) if you've never heard (why is heard not the same as hear when you add a letter to it) it before, why is "Heath" different from "Heather", looking at "rough", "cough", "bough", "dough", you're never really sure what you should say, and so on. There's an area called "Hulme" near where I study, and people are constantly debating about how to pronounce it, same for "Salford". Why is the W not pronounced in Warwick and Greenwich, but it is in Ipswich? Why do you say "pear" but "near", why is there an H in "why" or "what" or "when" or "where"? (I'm aware some people do pronounce the H, but I don't think it's how it's taught) Why "naughty" or "haughty" but "draught beer"?

Spelling is part of the difficulty of learning a language, and I don't think it should be changed in any way, be it French or English, that's what comes with a language, it shows a language's history. Even natives still make loads of mistakes, but admittedly, it takes me far longer to write or read SMS language than actual French - even if it's got some mistakes, or English, for that matters. I've seen dyslexic friends using funny spellings, like "astronaught" and you can see that maybe the "gh" in "aught" isn't that useful at indicating a specific sound that could be spelt "aut".

Edited by Préposition on 09 February 2011 at 4:44pm
4 persons have voted this message useful



Haldor
Triglot
Senior Member
France
Joined 5616 days ago
103 posts - 122 votes 
Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Swedish
Studies: French, Spanish

 
 Message 39 of 55
19 February 2011 at 7:57pm | IP Logged 
Préposition wrote:
Kisfroccs wrote:
I'm also a french native speaker and feel like Mickael84. I do not apply the reform from 1990. I write boîte, maîtresse, maître etc and like any other child in school I learned all these rules. (by heart). I also learned that fenêtre was for fenestre, maître for maistre and I'm very well aware of the "ethymological" sens behind French. French is the only language I can read without hesitation in old French. I understand almost every word (not these whose senses have shifted in time) because all the rules today are derivated from old French and Latin. I cannot say the same for German (and I'm native speaker !). I didn't have the opportunity to learn these rules in German when I was a kid... and now I'm lost :)

But if you have to learn something in French it's: "l'exception fait la règle". And sadly, this phrases apply to most of the rules in French. :)

Kisfröccs


Wait, there's a 1990 reform that says "boite, maitresse, etc" is correct? I was born in 1990, and I was never taught to write anything but "maîtresse, boîte" and others!

Now I have to say, foreigners are often pretty quick at jumping on the problem of French spelling, and equally quick to diss it and say it's too complicated and annoying. But you've learnt English, and for all I know, you don't have troubles adding useless letters everywhere in this language, so why should it be a problem when it comes to French? (I'm sure there's been complaining, but it's never more of a problem than it is in French, for strange reasons).

You never quite know (oh, wait, did I just add a K I don't pronounce before "now"?) how to say stuff (one F does an equally good job) if you've never heard (why is heard not the same as hear when you add a letter to it) it before, why is "Heath" different from "Heather", looking at "rough", "cough", "bough", "dough", you're never really sure what you should say, and so on. There's an area called "Hulme" near where I study, and people are constantly debating about how to pronounce it, same for "Salford". Why is the W not pronounced in Warwick and Greenwich, but it is in Ipswich? Why do you say "pear" but "near", why is there an H in "why" or "what" or "when" or "where"? (I'm aware some people do pronounce the H, but I don't think it's how it's taught) Why "naughty" or "haughty" but "draught beer"?

Spelling is part of the difficulty of learning a language, and I don't think it should be changed in any way, be it French or English, that's what comes with a language, it shows a language's history. Even natives still make loads of mistakes, but admittedly, it takes me far longer to write or read SMS language than actual French - even if it's got some mistakes, or English, for that matters. I've seen dyslexic friends using funny spellings, like "astronaught" and you can see that maybe the "gh" in "aught" isn't that useful at indicating a specific sound that could be spelt "aut".



Yes, I've learned English. I must say though, you're being unfair. First of all, look at the language description of French on this forum. Even Micheloud dares to admit French spelling is indeed harder than English. English spelling usually uses all letters and the mutes aren't as scattered as in the French labyrinth of an orthography.. Frankly, I've never had any troubles in English, and it's not my mother tongue..

I must ask you: who told you those w' s aren't pronounced? And yes, why, when and so on, English spelling is out of date too..

But that was English, whose orthography is unnecessarily complex as well. Take Spanish, Italian, German, Scandinavian languages, indeed any other Latin or Germanic language, and try to find an orthography that is equally complex.. You won't!

I really can't see any reason not to change the current monstrum you use to write. Even my French professor admits to making mistakes..

And no, spelling is not necessarily that hardest part of mastering a language.. If you don't believe me, try learning the exquisite Spanish language..

1 person has voted this message useful



tractor
Tetraglot
Senior Member
Norway
Joined 5454 days ago
1349 posts - 2292 votes 
Speaks: Norwegian*, English, Spanish, Catalan
Studies: French, German, Latin

 
 Message 40 of 55
19 February 2011 at 8:46pm | IP Logged 
Haldor wrote:

Yes, I've learned English. I must say though, you're being unfair. First of all, look at the language description of
French on this forum. Even Micheloud dares to admit French spelling is indeed harder than English. English spelling
usually uses all letters and the mutes aren't as scattered as in the French labyrinth of an orthography.. Frankly, I've
never had any troubles in English, and it's not my mother tongue..

He's not being unfair. English spelling is a monster, even compared to French. French spelling is not as
straightforward as Spanish, but at least it is possible to spot a system behind it. There's a reason why a phonetic
transcription is given for every single word in every single English dictionary out there.


4 persons have voted this message useful



This discussion contains 55 messages over 7 pages: << Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7  Next >>


Post ReplyPost New Topic Printable version Printable version

You cannot post new topics in this forum - You cannot reply to topics in this forum - You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum - You cannot create polls in this forum - You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page was generated in 0.3906 seconds.


DHTML Menu By Milonic JavaScript
Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved
No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization.