Author Topic: a', e', i', u', o'; s', z', g'/dz', c'/ts'; signs: '(stress), j (soft), : (long)  (Read 5913 times)

Offline waive15

  • Linguist
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
English words' orthography

/words are numbered in order of importance and usage/




Signs in/of English

. , ; ? ! - ' ... 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...



Words in/of English

#1-52       (monographs)
a, A, b, B, ...

---

#53-67(?) (digraphs)
ae, ..., ph, ...

---

#68-76(?) (trigraphs)
sch, ...

---

... (?)

---

#77-84(?)
be/am, is, are/was, were/being/been
   /isn't, aren't/wasn't, weren't
  /beings

#85-??
have/has/had/...
      /...

#??-???
do/does/did/...
   /...

#???-???
will/would
    /...

#???-???
shall/should
      /...

#???-???
can/could
    /...

#???-???
may/might
     /...

#???-???
must/ -
       /...

#???-???
ought/ -
        /...

#???-???
need/ -
      /...

#???-???
dare/ -
      /...

#???-???
 - / used
  /... (?)

---

#???-??? (Prepositions, ~20)
...

---

#???-??? (Pronouns)
...

---

#???-??? (Articles)
a, an, the

---

#???-??? (Nouns, ~20 /all forms/)
...

---

#???-??? (Adjectives, ~20 /all forms/)
...

---
#???-??? (Adverbs, ~20 /all forms/)
...

---

...

---

#???-???
do

   level down      level up      origin

        -do-           +do+        _ --> _

        ado              ...               
         ...

a-   
        -"-               -"-             -"-

---

#???-???
go

        -go-         +go+         _ --> _
       ago             go on   
                    /two-word
                     verb (word)/ 
         ...              ...   

a-
        -"-              -"-              -"-

---

...

---

#???-???
all

         -all-         +all+            _ --> _
           ...             ...             all --> al-

al-
          -"-             -"-                 -"-
---

...

---

#???-???
full

        -full-        +full+            _ --> _
          ...              ...            full --> -ful

-ful
          -"-             -"-                 -"-

---

...

---

#???-???
access

      -cess-         +cess+         _ --> _
         ...                             ced --> cess

ac-
          -"-             -"-           ad- --> ac- /d --> c before c/
---

#???-???
...




===

do, go, a-, all, al- ... above are given as an illustration

===

This list is made up of words defined as such in

http://linguistforum.com/outside-of-the-box/spelling-(and-morphology-(and-syntax-(and-punctuation)))/msg44144/#msg44144

Letter is Word, #-graph is Word, Morpheme is Word, Word is Word, #-phrase is Word, (...) Sentence is Word.

===

There are other lists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolch_word_list

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_common_words_in_English

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:1000_basic_English_words

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Service_List

https://www.talkenglish.com/vocabulary/top-2000-vocabulary.aspx

https://www.scribd.com/document/179640086/5000-Most-Common-Words-pdf

https://gist.github.com/deekayen/4148741

https://www.worldclasslearning.com/english/4000-most-common-english-words.html

...

One can get the picture.

« Last Edit: August 25, 2021, 04:46:12 AM by waive15 »

Offline waive15

  • Linguist
  • ***
  • Posts: 148

algorithm:


 for the first 100 ~ 200 words one has to trust (spelling);

                https://www.dictionary.com/browse/trust

 for the rest one has to check

                https://www.dictionary.com/browse/check

                    ...

                   (4)  to investigate or verify as to correctness
             
                   (5)  to make an inquiry into, search through, etc.

                    ...


     https://www.etymonline.com/

     https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Main_Page

     https://www.affixes.org/index.html


 then (again) one might (~???) check some of the first 100 ~ 200 words




===



x, y, z, j, w

---

x            - "native" in Latin

y, z         - Greek   in Latin (y (Greek-i) and z were used only(?) in Greek words)

j, w         - new     in Latin alphabet

---

x, y, j, w - native   in English

---

z             - odd       in English /bizarre, muzzle, nuzzle, snooze, booze, .../



-ize

(?) the only affix with z in English is -ize (?)

https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=-ize

word-forming element used to make verbs, Middle English -isen, from Old French -iser/-izer, from Late Latin -izare, from Greek -izein, a verb-forming element denoting the doing of the noun or adjective to which it is attached.

The variation of -ize and -ise began in Old French and Middle English, perhaps aided by a few words (such as surprise, see below) where the ending is French or Latin, not Greek. With the classical revival, English partially reverted to the correct Greek -z- spelling from late 16c. But the 1694 edition of the authoritative French Academy dictionary standardized the spellings as -s-, which influenced English.

In Britain, despite the opposition to it (at least formerly) of OED, Encyclopaedia Britannica, the Times of London, and Fowler, -ise remains dominant. Fowler thinks this is to avoid the difficulty of remembering the short list of common words not from Greek which must be spelled with an -s- (such as advertise, devise, surprise). American English has always favored -ize. The spelling variation involves about 200 English verbs.


https://www.affixes.org/alpha/i/-ize.html





For simplicity, as a foreigner, one would choose -ise.




Here is a text for example.

https://www.computerweekly.com/opinion/Does-artificial-intelligence-have-a-language-problem

anthropomorphise /4th paragraph, 4th word/

recognise /7th paragraph, 4th line/

categorised /7th paragraph, last line/ (etymonline com and dictionary com do not mention the word)

organisations /11th paragraph, 13th word; 16th paragraph, 2nd word/


also

    kinaesthetic /5th paragraph, 7th word from the end/

    https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=kinaesthetic

    kinesthetic

   /ae - e   one is free to choose/

==


« Last Edit: August 27, 2021, 05:44:19 AM by waive15 »

Offline waive15

  • Linguist
  • ***
  • Posts: 148

-ize

The other affixes with z given by

https://www.affixes.org/index.html

are:

az(o)- / azot(o)‑

benz(o)-
             /
              benzoin
              https://www.etymonline.com/word/benzoin

               benzene
               https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=benzene
              /

piezo-

rhizo-

schiz(o)-

zetta-

             /
              zetta-
              https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/zetta-
             /

-zoic

zoo-

-zoon / ‑zoa, ‑zoan, ‑zoic

zygo-

zym(o)-


All are foreign in English. All are Greek, or come from Greek (zetta-), except benz(o)-.

The difference between them and -ize/-ise is that -ize/-ise is productive in English (= -ize is naturalised).
                                                                               
/nature --> natural --> naturalise --> naturalised/




===



An average (~ 50 000 words) Dictionary of English would probably have about 30 z-words.


zany; zap;

zeal; zealot;

zebra; zebu;

zed (UK name of the letter Z);
zee (US name of the letter Z);

Zen; zenith; zephyr; zero; zest;

zig-zag; zinc; zing; zinnia; Zion; zip; zip code (US postcode); zirconium; zither;

zodiac; zombie; zone; zonked;

zoo; zoology; zoophyte;

zoom;

zucchini;

Zulu


apart from Zimbabwe, Zanzibar, ...



===



-i- 
https://www.affixes.org/alpha/i/-i-.html

a connecting/linking vowel from Latin

In Latin this is a regular part of word formation. As a result, it occurs in many words borrowed into English either directly from Latin or through French, for example omnivorous, uniform, and pacific. On the model of these and others, it has come to be used in words created in English. These can be formed from words which are ultimately of Latin origin, such as calciferous (containing or producing calcium salts, from Latin calx, calc‑, lime), ultimately from Greek, such as amoebiform (like an amoeba, from Greek amoibē, change, alternation), or even from those not of classical origin, such as tickicide (a substance that kills ticks, see ‑cide). It occurs particularly before an ending of Latin origin such as ‑ana, ‑ferous, ‑fic, ‑form, ‑fy, ‑gerous, or ‑vorous (see ‑vore).



‑o‑
https://www.affixes.org/alpha/o/-o-.html

a connecting/linking vowel from Greek

This appears as the final vowel of many prefixes, such as chloro‑, Indo‑1, pneumo‑, schizo‑, and techno‑. It comes ultimately from its use as a linking vowel in classical Greek combinations, which were borrowed into Latin and thereafter arrived in English via French. It is often used in English as a connecting vowel irrespective of the source of the word elements it links. However, it is often left off if the following element begins with a vowel (as, for example, with phlebo‑, a vein, where the ‑o‑ is lost in forming phlebitis, inflammation of the walls of a vein). In English the vowel also often acts as a link between a stem and an ending, as in cottonocracy or speedometer. In this book it is the Greek source stem that is decisive in placing an ending in its alphabetical sequence, so that entries (to take two common examples) are listed as ‑cracy rather than ‑ocracy and ‑logy rather than ‑ology; however, ‑onym appears in that form because it derives from Greek onoma, name. Entries are cross-referenced where confusion might arise.


---

i - u

e - o



-ous
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ous#English

-ious  = -i- +‎ -ous
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ious#English

-uous = -u- + -ous (?)
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-uous#English

-eous = -e- + -ous (?)
    https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-eous#English





-???-
vowel                   connecting/linking vowel

i - u                         -i- / -u-
                  -->
e - o                        -e- / -o-

If there is a connecting/linking vowel, is it really necessary to use a connecting/linking "-" !?
-???-




===



Basic English

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_English

---

Simplified English

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_English

---

Special English

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_English

---

...



===


« Last Edit: August 30, 2021, 03:12:04 AM by waive15 »

Offline waive15

  • Linguist
  • ***
  • Posts: 148


"... Although the Chinese characters are difficult to learn, once they are learned and mastered, they make a most rapid reading possible, because they convey the meaning directly to the eyes without resorting to the "sound".
..."
p. 169, Japanese in Thirty Hours, Eiichi Kiyooka


---


Chinese characters                 = 2d pictures (in squares) + some rules (including numbering and embedding)

English words (some of them) = 1d pictures (in lines)      + some rules


---

/English/
Pictures "make a most rapid reading possible, because they convey the meaning directly to the eyes without resorting to the "sound"".
/and they can also bring on the "right" sound/dialect/

Reading on the other hand is more demanding (some Latin, some French, some Greek , some ...).
/English/


===


Chinese characters (as 2d pictures)

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Written_Chinese/Calligraphy


---

most english spelling reforms are bad

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEsqY4MH40s


/probably because reforms deprive people of pictures and force them not to pronounce words in their accustomed manner (dialect)/



« Last Edit: September 02, 2021, 03:53:27 AM by waive15 »

Offline Rock100

  • Linguist
  • ***
  • Posts: 85
> "... Although the Chinese characters are difficult to learn, once they are learned
> and mastered, they make a most rapid reading possible, because they convey the
> meaning directly to the eyes without resorting to the "sound".
> ..."
> p. 169, Japanese in Thirty Hours, Eiichi Kiyooka
Hm… One can easily teach himself treating, say, English words as separate hieroglyphs so there will be no difference in the way of reading and comprehension at all. And I bet that all more or less advanced readers of a language do such a trick. And an alphabetical reading/writing looks even more fault-tolerant than a hieroglyphic one. You can check it yourself. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Offline Forbes

  • Jr. Linguist
  • **
  • Posts: 48
> "... Although the Chinese characters are difficult to learn, once they are learned
> and mastered, they make a most rapid reading possible, because they convey the
> meaning directly to the eyes without resorting to the "sound".
> ..."
> p. 169, Japanese in Thirty Hours, Eiichi Kiyooka
Hm… One can easily teach himself treating, say, English words as separate hieroglyphs so there will be no difference in the way of reading and comprehension at all. And I bet that all more or less advanced readers of a language do such a trick. And an alphabetical reading/writing looks even more fault-tolerant than a hieroglyphic one. You can check it yourself. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

I agree. Both a hieroglyph and a written word are two things. They are both a sign for the sounds of the spoken word (which itself is a sign) and so a sign of a sign, but also a direct sign for what the spoken word is a sign for. Accordingly, whether you are reading Chinese or English, the brain is taking up meaning directly just as it does when you hear speech.