614 MCGRAW-HILL’S SAT
8 8 888 8
the pronounced althoas a third syllable.
Doubtless the asthmatic islanders who con-
cocted our English language actually pro-
nounced it so.
I propose to have some millionaire endow
my plan, and Serena and I will then form a so-
ciety for the reforming of English pronuncia-
tion. I will not punch out the iof any chief,
nor shall any one drag mefrom any pro-
gramme, however dull. I will pronounce
programmeas it should be pronounced—
programmy—and, as for chief,he shall be
pronounced chy-ef.
The advantage of this plan is manifest. It is
so manifest that I am afraid it will never be
adopted.
Serena’s plan is, perhaps, less intellectual,
but more American. Serena’s plan is to ignore
all words that contain superfluous letters. She
would simply boycott them. Serena would
have people get along with such words as are
already phonetically spelled. Why should peo-
ple write although,when they can write
notwithstanding that,and not have a silent let-
ter in it? I have myself often written a phrase
twelve words long to stand instead of a single
word I did not know how to spell. In fact, I
abandoned my Platonic friendship for Serena,
and replaced it with ardent love, because I did
know how to spell sweetheart,but could not
remember whether she was my friendor
freind.PASSAGE 2
For centuries, thinkers as notable as Ben-
jamin Franklin have registered the same com-
plaint about English spelling: it is needlessly
complicated and inconsistent in pronuncia-
tion. Silent letters abound, and oughis pro-
nounced six different ways in the words
tough, bough, through, bought, although,and
cough.Franklin wanted to change the alpha-
bet and institute new spelling rules to make
English more sensible, more usable, and eas-
ier to learn. Such good ideas have been
around a long time, and we should put them
to rest for three good reasons.
First, English, like most languages, has
dialects. In Boston, Koreaand careerare
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE
60
65
70
75
80
85
homophones. In San Francisco, they are not.
To spell them the same way would be to im-
pose a “preferred” dialect on all Americans,
forcing us all to talk like South Enders and vi-
olating our precious value of democracy over
elitism. Failure to do so would result in chaos.
Would a novelist from Alabama who was edu-
cated at Brown write in her native drawl, her
adopted New England dialect, or the homoge-
nized English of the educated elite? In a de-
mocratic society, isn’t one of the great benefits
of a language-wide spelling system that it ob-
scures those spoken dialects that are so often
used to stratify and separate us?
Second, languages evolve, adopting words
from other languages, coining new ones, and
changing pronunciations over time. The silent
letters in the word eight,a bane of the “ratio-
nal” speller, are the echoes of the German
acht,the Latin octo,the Greek oktoand even
(faintly) the Sanskrit asta.The spelling may be
vexing to some, but it is a historical treasure
trove to others. Furthermore, this example
shows the folly of trying to standardize
spelling by linking it with pronunciation. The
words won’t stand still.
Third, languages are not influenced very
much by plan or reason; they develop by
evolving conventions of usage. They are cul-
tural artifacts, not legislated standards.
Spelling is like football: there may be lots of
silly and illogical things in it, but that doesn’t
mean you have a snowball’s chance in hell of
replacing the rules.
90