How logical should language be?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

I suppose I should thank them, for presenting me with two perfectly formed living, breathing stereotypes; with the icing on the cake being their crying and whining over being 'stereotyped' and the delicious irony that accompanies it.

[Philosophy Explorer]

I suppose I should thank them, for presenting me with two perfectly formed living, breathing stereotypes; with the icing on the cake being their crying and whining over being 'stereotyped' and the delicious irony that accompanies it.

You're in the lead with your crying and whining about Americans. Yet another argument you've lost.

So when will you post in accordance with the OP?

PhilX

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Some people enjoy learning new things. Those who don't are doomed to remain idiots.

[Philosophy Explorer]

Some people enjoy learning new things. Those who don't are doomed to remain idiots.

Which category are you?

Btw you must have a guilty conscience to be concerned about SF and I 'pm'ing about you as if we didn't have better things to do.

PhilX

[Philosophy Explorer]

Here's a list of long English words:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longest_word_in_English

PhilX

[Science Fan]

It's hilarious that even after it is pointed out to VT how she will comment, she comments exactly as I described.

And as far as her claim that people like to learn new things is concerned, then perhaps she should stop typing on here that America is responsible for all the problems in the world, for the ten millionth time?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

It's hilarious that someone comments exactly as he claims others do and thinks no one notices. It's also hilarious that someone seems to think I actually care what anyone on here thinks of me.

[-1-]

It's said you need rules (grammar) for language to function and be effective. Yet for language to grow, it needs to adapt.

In comparing American with British, there are a couple of examples that come to mind. For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US. Under that spelling, it would be pronounced theatra, but it was pronounced theater under both American and British. So instead of changing the American pronunciation, it was far more convenient and logical to change the spelling to theater for that and similar words.

Another example is honour. The u is silent, keeping it can lead to confusion (because it would be pronounced like hour). So it was decided it would be logical to drop the silent u.

But, in spite of rules, languages need to adapt for a variety of reasons.

PhilX

Americans also should spell "because" as "becaz", because the U is silent, and so is the e at the end. They should also spell "Worchestershire Sauce" as Wooster sauce, but they don't. Or should spell "a penny ain't worth a farting". Or say "Alfred Hitchcock was a tuppence suspense." When cinema admission was a dime a head. Oh, and they should drop the e in head, the a in meaningless, and the o in country.

Once you drop the U from honour, however, honour has you no more.

[-1-]

... For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US.
PhilX

U r gong ti kil me, Philx, but... theatre was more than once spelled that way in the USA. In fact, it was spelled that way very many times, for quite a long peroid of time.

[Philosophy Explorer]

It's said you need rules (grammar) for language to function and be effective. Yet for language to grow, it needs to adapt.

In comparing American with British, there are a couple of examples that come to mind. For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US. Under that spelling, it would be pronounced theatra, but it was pronounced theater under both American and British. So instead of changing the American pronunciation, it was far more convenient and logical to change the spelling to theater for that and similar words.

Another example is honour. The u is silent, keeping it can lead to confusion (because it would be pronounced like hour). So it was decided it would be logical to drop the silent u.

But, in spite of rules, languages need to adapt for a variety of reasons.

PhilX

Americans also should spell "because" as "becaz", because the U is silent, and so is the e at the end. They should also spell "Worchestershire Sauce" as Wooster sauce, but they don't. Or should spell "a penny ain't worth a farting". Or say "Alfred Hitchcock was a tuppence suspense." When cinema admission was a dime a head. Oh, and they should drop the e in head, the a in meaningless, and the o in country.

Once you drop the U from honour, however, honour has you no more.

The a in meaningless? That would change the pronunciation.

PhilX

[-1-]

The a in meaningless? That would change the pronunciation.

PhilX

What? Change the pronunciation? Not the pronunciation!!!???!!!
Sh'ma, O Yisroel!

[Walker]

It's said you need rules (grammar) for language to function and be effective. Yet for language to grow, it needs to adapt.

In comparing American with British, there are a couple of examples that come to mind. For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US. Under that spelling, it would be pronounced theatra, but it was pronounced theater under both American and British. So instead of changing the American pronunciation, it was far more convenient and logical to change the spelling to theater for that and similar words.

Another example is honour. The u is silent, keeping it can lead to confusion (because it would be pronounced like hour). So it was decided it would be logical to drop the silent u.

But, in spite of rules, languages need to adapt for a variety of reasons.

PhilX

Americans also should spell "because" as "becaz", because the U is silent, and so is the e at the end. They should also spell "Worchestershire Sauce" as Wooster sauce, but they don't. Or should spell "a penny ain't worth a farting". Or say "Alfred Hitchcock was a tuppence suspense." When cinema admission was a dime a head. Oh, and they should drop the e in head, the a in meaningless, and the o in country.

Once you drop the U from honour, however, honour has you no more.

In the appropriate situation, it is pronounced Whatsthisheresauce.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

It's said you need rules (grammar) for language to function and be effective. Yet for language to grow, it needs to adapt.

In comparing American with British, there are a couple of examples that come to mind. For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US. Under that spelling, it would be pronounced theatra, but it was pronounced theater under both American and British. So instead of changing the American pronunciation, it was far more convenient and logical to change the spelling to theater for that and similar words.

Another example is honour. The u is silent, keeping it can lead to confusion (because it would be pronounced like hour). So it was decided it would be logical to drop the silent u.

But, in spite of rules, languages need to adapt for a variety of reasons.

PhilX

Americans also should spell "because" as "becaz", because the U is silent, and so is the e at the end. They should also spell "Worchestershire Sauce" as Wooster sauce, but they don't. Or should spell "a penny ain't worth a farting". Or say "Alfred Hitchcock was a tuppence suspense." When cinema admission was a dime a head. Oh, and they should drop the e in head, the a in meaningless, and the o in country.

Once you drop the U from honour, however, honour has you no more.

The a in meaningless? That would change the pronunciation.

PhilX

Why would it change the pronunciation? hmm?

[attofishpi]

It's said you need rules (grammar) for language to function and be effective. Yet for language to grow, it needs to adapt.

In comparing American with British, there are a couple of examples that come to mind. For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US. Under that spelling, it would be pronounced theatra, but it was pronounced theater under both American and British. So instead of changing the American pronunciation, it was far more convenient and logical to change the spelling to theater for that and similar words.

Another example is honour. The u is silent, keeping it can lead to confusion (because it would be pronounced like hour). So it was decided it would be logical to drop the silent u.

But, in spite of rules, languages need to adapt for a variety of reasons.

PhilX

Americans also should spell "because" as "becaz", because the U is silent, and so is the e at the end. They should also spell "Worchestershire Sauce" as Wooster sauce, but they don't. Or should spell "a penny ain't worth a farting". Or say "Alfred Hitchcock was a tuppence suspense." When cinema admission was a dime a head. Oh, and they should drop the e in head, the a in meaningless, and the o in country.

Once you drop the U from honour, however, honour has you no more.

Hooray and well said! Someone other than myself and VT attempting to explain to phil the irrationality in his 'argument' that anything in his content is 'more logical'.

[attofishpi]

It's said you need rules (grammar) for language to function and be effective. Yet for language to grow, it needs to adapt.

In comparing American with British, there are a couple of examples that come to mind. For example theater was once spelled theatre in the US. Under that spelling, it would be pronounced theatra, but it was pronounced theater under both American and British. So instead of changing the American pronunciation, it was far more convenient and logical to change the spelling to theater for that and similar words.

Another example is honour. The u is silent, keeping it can lead to confusion (because it would be pronounced like hour). So it was decided it would be logical to drop the silent u.

But, in spite of rules, languages need to adapt for a variety of reasons.

PhilX

Americans also should spell "because" as "becaz", because the U is silent, and so is the e at the end. They should also spell "Worchestershire Sauce" as Wooster sauce, but they don't. Or should spell "a penny ain't worth a farting". Or say "Alfred Hitchcock was a tuppence suspense." When cinema admission was a dime a head. Oh, and they should drop the e in head, the a in meaningless, and the o in country.

Once you drop the U from honour, however, honour has you no more.

Hooray and well said! Someone other than myself and VT attempting to explain to phil the irrationality in his 'argument' that anything in his content is 'more logical'. Honour should, by phils rationale, be spelled 'ona'