Print

Print


The various national news organizations seem to find an "offical"
pronounciation. I don't hear much of a difference from nationwide broadcasts
out of New York verses local broadcasts out of Southern California. Before
that, publishers started "standardizing" spelling which has spread across
the country. If an orthography was made with spelling un-standardized and
communication was desired, there are enough nationwide communication
organizations that would influence pronounciation and spelling so that each
country would at least have a semi-defacto standard spelling and
pronounciation. Locals could use non-standard spelling for their own uses.

Most likely the "official" pronounciation would serve as a mark of
education, just like "official" spelling does today. There are jobs which
don't require you to be able to spell one word correctly, but an interviewer
will assume "uneducated" and be less likely to give you a job for which you
show complete competence for.
Those that can switch to the official pronounciation, and use the phonomic
spelling associated with it, would get the job. Of course sometimes showing
that you are a local gets you the job instead. If English spelling is
regularized, maybe those that could misspell it right would get those jobs.


> i was kind of wondering, since everyone pronounces their words
> difrently when they standardise the  spellings whos pronounciation
> would we go with?