Habitual imitation.

Habitual imitation has played a major role in giving a new shape to the language. We can not deny our habit of harking back to words (minimal pair), whenever we have to spell a new word trying to find existence in the language. We closely descry similar structured words varying only in one phoneme.
In other words, if you are asked to spell a word you are not familiar with, you do not know the meaning, its application, its origin, you would probably try to match it with the sounds of the words you know. For example: If you are asked to spell ‘bæt’, and you did not know anything about the word, you would try to wrack your brain to memorize similar words sounds) varying in one phoneme only. You would try to refresh your memory to recall ‘cæt’, ‘hæt’, ‘fæt’, ‘mæt’, ‘ræt’, etc.
Linguafranca is all about refreshing your memory, telling you things you do not know, or things you know but can not recall in time, and get you in the habit of recognizing sounds and structural arrangements, help you relate to all of the generalities. As in above example, when vowel ‘a’ is sandwiched between two consonant sounds and the syllable is stressed it would give ‘æ’ sound.
There are numerous words of foreign origin, the first time they were spelled, were not spelled right, and may be because of the perceptual differences or lack of understanding. Or may be they were spelled by some George from English speaking region, who could not capture the sound, or just simply spelled in a possible idle moment to kill time, or may be because people were not able to give the actual sound. Or the then-popular George might have given them options, but because of the communication gap they picked the wrong option by themselves according to their ease. And habitual imitation kindled it, and acted as an electrode in a nuclear reactor of language.
Habitual imitation is like Uranium-238 rod in the nuclear reactor of the language. The idea is, if we can put some neuron rods( periodic codifications) in place to tame the power of the fuel and somehow put a check on the plausible explosion that damage sounds, words, and finally speech; instead of just sitting back and vacillating over the confounding, and let it complicate it further.
It’s a fuel; more fuel we put more powerful combustion we expect in the cylinder. We’ve got to control the irregular and un-warranted infusion to make it rather beneficial to the language. Use it effectively and efficiently to tap the full potential of the growth of the language. For the universal comprehension among the speakers. As is practically impossible to reverse the damage, once the language is abused at a larger scale. And what scale is larger than a relatively bigger civilization ( Asian countries) more than happy to adopt, experiment, and apparently abuse a new language.
THANKS TO ANGLICIZATION AND SOUND DISTORTION.
And now every body is saying words the way the spelling suggests, or what they understand from the way those words are spelled; but not the way it should be said worldwide. The beauty of the original words is lost. It acts as a threat to both, the foreign language from which the words have come from, and also to English as a Universal language. Why English? Because there is every possibility that by the course of time a new sub-script style would emerge. Which is a Universal fact, but we hitherto failed to recognize. And at a later stage we start to realize the follies fanned out by habitual imitation, which in-turn makes it quite difficult to communicate. Which would have been avoided if had considered the importance of sound and application of letters in the formation of English replica of a foreign word( with the use English alphabet), and we start to correct at a much later stage when it is bound to confound every body.
This doesn’t mean that we never thought of written English logically. At one time we might think that something is perfectly fine, as is solving the purpose but later we realize a need for change. This is the base of development. Till the time we are not ready for any change we won’t develop anything. If we had thought of bulb as the end of electronics, we would have probably stuck with not more than a bulb in our hand.
In order to improve comprehension among English speakers across the globe, it is essential to decrease the disparity ( perceptual differences).
We’ll discuss how effectively we can correct those follies fanned out by possible habitual imitation.
I remember one instance, some time in 2006 people protested a shoe making company for printing `Allah` on the shoes they made. Company didn’t know that the people will get offended. Not every body who believe in God will take such disrespect.
’Allah’ is also a spelling for Muslim God. People know Allah as a spelling for the name of the God ‘۸la:’, the ’۸’ sound in ‘۸la:’, is a solid ‘u’ sound, as in but, cut, hut, rut, etc. Every body who know ‘۸la:’ would say ‘ ۸la: ‘ , but for the rest of the world it’s `Allah` , phonetically, `Æla: ` , with solid `a` sound as in fat, cat , rat , mat , etc.
What if today, after seeing that protest for the name sake, God himself say, “I respect your feeling for what ever you did to get it corrected , and I also know that you all love me very much” , “But there is one thing I would like to ask , I know that u can say my name right, but why did the you spelled it `Allah`? The rest of the world who do not worship me read my name as ’Æla:’ ,where ‘a’ is solid . Don’t worship a lesser GOD (the printed word).
“Please educate every body on this and please change the spelling if possible.”
The fact is that nobody is as forgiving as GOD is.
Giving space for alternate pronunciations & alternate spellings.
This difference in understanding is giving rise to alternate spelling for “Sheikh” and “Grey” as: “Shaikh” & “Gray”, and such like words and also alternate pronunciations. People are confused between “∫eikh”, “∫i:kh”, “shaikh”, and “sheikh”. And between allophones: “K” or “ख़”. If we use ‘ei’ in ‘Sheikh’, it could be misconstrued for soft ‘e’ sound (soft ‘e’ sound as an alternate pronunciation already exist in dictionaries worldwide, the original sound is ‘∫eikh’ with soft ‘a’ sound.
Whosoever know of shaikhs would agree on the sound but what about the rest of the world who does not know of ‘∫eikhs’, and understands the vowel combination “ei” as “i:” sound. They could be in a soup someday if they aren’t lucky enough, as deadly shakes could kill.
Shouldn’t we weigh a foreign language entry before we assimilate it in English language as a part, in terms of structural compatibility and possible sound change with the course of time, to save the original sound, and to avoid possible structural confounding?
Not everybody but Shaikhs would agree.
Delhi : The capital of India. Phonetically if we hyphenate the word, it is ‘Del-hi’, where ‘del’ is a solid syllable with solid ‘e’ sound in well, jell, set, get, etc. When it was named first ,it was named as ‘िदॣली’. ‘द’ as’ ‘ð’ .We can get ‘ð’ sound with ‘th’ combination in English. The only reason why ‘th’ was not used could be, that it would be misconstrued as Ø sound as in thanks, thunder, thatch, etc.
The origin sound is ‘ðil-li:’, where ‘ðil’ is solid with solid ‘i’sound.
How did ‘ðil-li:’ sound changed to ‘Del-hi’( D sound –solid ‘e’ sound – l sound-short ‘i’)?
Ignorance and perceptual difference made ‘ðil-li’ ‘Del-hi’ .
Till the time I was in my teens, everybody said ‘ðil-li:’ ðil-li:’ . And now, though everybody in India know that its ‘ðil-i:’, but they say it ‘Del-i:’. It’s not that people find it difficult to say ‘ðil-i:’ , everybody can say it . It an India word, every sound in the word is there in the National language of the country. If a Kid, whose History teacher did not tell him its ‘ðil-li:’, says it as ‘del-i’ because his English teacher told him that way, it is acceptable. But what made educated & English speaking populace, who took their History lessons well say it ‘Del-hi:’? May be the pretext of wrong spelling, or may be any other personal reason.
I think the name change, yes, I would call it a name change, happened because initially when it was spelled with English alphabetic script, we were not able to capture the sound correctly and we spelled it ‘Delhi , which is wrong.
By the course of time people interacted with the rest of the world for Business purposes, and communicated the wrong spelling. The wrong spelling was peppered through out the world, as ‘ðil-i’ had been a business center, and on all of the written communications ‘ðil-i:’ was spelled as ‘Delhi’. Also the name was broadcasted as ‘Delhi’, because broad-caster said it the way it was spelled. And the rest of the know it as ‘del-i’, with a solid ‘e’ sound.
I m not going to give you a list of such like words to make you believe the present state ( how many such like words are there, how does it effect your speech). Do your homework by yourself. Only if you think its quite true, if you think that this all make some sense, then only follow the blog, otherwise just shun like the way we always do.
Start with this, and I will show you how you can perfect your speech. Start to learn to respect original sounds and see sound do wonders for you.
Don’t worry I’ll share it later.

English advantage.

One of the biggest reasons why India is considered as a preferred destination for out-sourcing is the English speaking population of India. English tops the list as a second language of India. Nevertheless, it's also very much evident that India might lose on this advantage if she does not learn to cash on it, for that matter, like any other country in the race to woe big businesses to outsource. This advantage will not be an advantage any long.
The cost advantage is diminishing according to the recent survey conducted by A T Kearney; is not just enough to retain the competitive edge over China, Philippines, et.al. The market for services other than voice support is comparatively small; and will remain small in volumes in comparison to voice support services. There is yet a lot to be explored in relatively larger segment, which still has many un-addressed issues.
Irrespective of the new alleyways of domain expertise such as, finance, law, human resource, telecommunications, copyrights, healthcare, and such like services; the regular fresh English speaking work force to cater to human voice support functions will remain in volumes. The industry can change the resolution to new alleys for a while, but should never lose its focus from the backbone of the industry. At least not at the cost of the essence.
To expand the scope of business process outsourcing, to snare volumes, we need to zero-in on building clients faith by redefining the parameters of quality deliverance.
Big businesses know of the limitations and understand the nuances of human contact needs to strengthen the bond of trust with their consumers; and that's the only reason why they silly-sally to outsource, or somehow compromise with the available resource, and somehow let the resource deliver of its own volition.
They look askance at the speech habits of the available resource, but because of the cost benefits, they give it a pass. Many a times businesses silly-sally over the idea of moving their Consumer care/human voice support base, and the location switch reappraisals are centered on the cost benefits only.
Now the choice is among the destinations offering cheaper alternatives, Chapter-13, Chapter-7, or any other option available.
The fact is, it’s not an option, is compromise.
The time is not far to see businesses volt-face in favor of a destination who can understand the need, and act before any other competitor does. If they can do away with Chapters altogether and still maintain their creditability.
We really don't have to sit back basking in the comfort zone, chipping away at the mainstay to embark on new alleyways of BPO, as it'll have impinge on the market share; because whenever a client outsource she also compromise on certain things. The client will be more than happy if she does not have to compromise on something that can affect her business. Whosoever does it first and with precision; will take the lead. Not someone, who is just passing the monkey over.
The very core of the business is actually not how much good you are but how well you deliver. How fast you take cognizance of future needs.
Indians are considered well endowed with grey cells; are diligent, and have the fire to excel.
But the industry as a whole seems to over look the importance of quality deliverance of human support functions, as is blinkered by the new avenues and sometimes fail to realize the importance of speech in its true sense, to understand the concept of speech impacts on their business. Industry has been escaping from the challenge altogether and always turned deaf ear to the evolving industry needs.
If a destination has to improve its attractiveness for the offshore business, has to take cognizance of the potential growth prospects by the redefining the cognitive base, and by pruning the stance with knowledge acquisition in the domain of voice training.
I would love to share one of the unsatisfactory cop-outs of the industry, which I noticed when I got the chance to visit a so -called captive unit recently.
Few verses from what they worship as Bible.
"Dearest creature in creation, study English pronunciation. I will teach you in my verse Sounds like corpse, corps, horse, and worse. I'll keep you, Suzy, busy. Make your head with heat grow dizzy. Tear in eye, your dress will tear. So shall I! Oh hear my prayer."
"Just compare heart, beard and heard. Dies and diet, Lord and word, Sword and sward, retain and Britain. But be careful how you speak: Say break and streak, but bleak and streak; cloven, oven, how and low, script and receipt."
"Finally which rhymes with enough-Though, through, plough, or dough, or cough? Hiccough has the sound of cup. My advice is to give it up!!!"
Moreover, the heading was: "English is tough stuff"
Who would not be convinced with such a work (700 words) of art, if client can, but me?
It is nothing but an easy escape to blame it entirely on English, instead of understanding the need for segmental/phonetic conditioning, the coherence and generalities of morphological alterations needed to twig the concept better.
Businesses are bending over backwards to find something that could click, but their own frames of reference and their vacuity on the subject is making it quite a job. Anything other than Jones is in complete denial altogether.
Only knowledge driven approach would help maintain the lead among preferred destinations. Only if we can cut loose from ostensible old philosophies, which have no functional significance; to reinforce the stance over something, which is affecting the business.
The language seems to be fraught with confounding and the training department seems rather flummoxed by them.
But this is not at all incorrigible.
All this is a result of habitual imitation of the follies of the yesteryears. We can correct this if we can just sit back and try to see the core of the so-called problem.
Rajeev, a good friend of mine; is quite successful in his career with the BPO industry. Four visits to USA in the last 2 years, all financed by the company, all of them were to bring new processes. Is working as a Group manager, is diligent so is successful.
He knows grammar, vocabulary, and the thought process is also good. However, most of the times I find him vacillating between alternate pronunciations; between his understanding of the sound predictability and the possible probabilities of sound sequences. He forces his way to identify the structural cues to identify the sounds sequences.
The only thing I like about him is that he does not give up it up for the distorted and sound damaging Indian way of utterance, as most of the libertarians in India have.
Either they match the rhythm they are comfortable with or they kill speech. Either ways they kill word sounds. This very much apparent as are left with guessing only, whenever they are encountered with a completely new word. They mispronounce or cling on to their "chulta hah" philosophy.
The capability to customize utterance and the phoneme prediction is not well developed. Every time they fall through to tap the sound patterns.
The strengthening of the knowledge base will only keep the business from moving to a new destination altogether, or back to the lands where it came from.
So save the advantage falling in to decline.

Sound probabilities.

Language learning snags and speech imperfections due to unawareness of sound probabilities and rhythm match counts for a major percentage of the total unease and apprehensions to speak in a language other than your native language. Social and habitual factors most of the times impede the language learning abilities and attainable prowess. Moreover, socio-habitual factors clubbed with sub-scripting styles, and habitual imitation in different regions is a disaster for a language. So is the propensity of reducing your world to the people who speak likewise.
You can easily attain a degree of fluency by modifying your speech habits, and by making it in line with the rhythm of your native language, but your morpho-phonological sense would be jeopardized if you pay no heed to the most important component of a universally understandable speech. Right sounds. So is the case with most of the South-Asians.
Your speech is affected by the knowledge of the word sounds; which in-turn is affected by perceptual factors, whatever you have learned from the people you interact with.
Auditory cues are needed to identify the structure of a word and to help you spell it; and also the structural cues to identify the sound or the sequence of sounds with prevalent scripting styles.
Speech sound and frequency predictability is very helpful to identify spoken words. Moreover, until the time you are not aware of the close sound variables and the differences, how would you remember and differentiate it from what has been ingrained in your speech?
The same is true with structural understanding of words for the right utterance of a word.
If I were to give you auditory cues to spell a new word, of which you've never seen the script form before. All those factors will come in to play to help to recognize the structure of the word; and that form may or may not be acceptable to the rest of the world.
As opposed to the native speakers, it is easy to remember words as spellings than as sounds for someone beginning to learn a new language. A native speaker speaks more words than she writes, which is inversely so with someone from region who speaks comparatively less of English and also understands quite well the sub-scripting style to write their native language words with English alphabetic script.
Speech theories, which defined you as Tongue-tight/ nerve-tight were formulated in ignorance on the speech organ movement or articulatory saga alone. To some extent, seems quite true when illustrated with so many nicely elaborated examples. Though I m surrounded with sorts who dotes on these renowned philosophies, but I always doubted the effectiveness of the so-called articulatory phonetics.
I recently had a chance to share the popular sub-scripting style prevailing in India with Trainers; who by birth are from regions other than the native English-speaking region and learn of there Mexican and German styles. Why do I call it sub-scripting style?
Because it is not suggestive of the actual sound. It’s not that difficult to twig and memorize words from different languages if we don't let the sub-scripting styles intervene the whole process. They struggled real hard to say foreign words when I showed the script form and shared the actual sounds simultaneously. Nevertheless, there was a higher degree of coherence when I shared the sounds only. They would simply decipher word sounds in script they can easily relate to, sub-scripting style they followed..
It has been observed that we always tend to confused ourselves with the sub-scripting styles. We can learn any language if we have a good nerve coordination and well developed nerve centers, which can serve as a reliable repository to recall information. Both had difficulties to remember new language words; which is obvious and still acceptable till the time they are peculiar of the sounds.
I'll make it little easy for you to relate to it: Just pick any favorite song from your native language, and try to decipher all of the words in that song in English alphabetic script. You may not be able to write an understandable peace of work for a native speaker suggesting closest possible alternate sounds, just because of the effect of popular sub-scripting style in your area on your life; you know of the sounds but are doubtful of the morph-phonological aspect. If possible, share it with different speakers around the world. You'll realize how good the sub-scripting style you follow is; if is suggestive of the actual sound of the word; and the morpho-phonological compatibility of the script.
Such a script is everywhere around you, and is really getting over you to make your speech imperfect. The fact is that you are not even aware of the impact on your speech habits. This habitual resort to the sub-scripting style and the morpho-phonological understanding always intervene and addles you to learn the language to the core.
There is a higher degree of transparency in usage and popularization of foreign language words in academic disciplines, and is inversely so in non-academic profession.
It’s all written on your speech notes. Your speech reflects your morpho-phonological understanding .The sub-script is a creation of non-professional populace, and its popularity to creep into your daily speech is kindled by the media.
The moment you hear a new word, you'll take time to analyze the sound patterns; and try to differentiate new sounds from close variable you already know.
The moment you are not sure of the actual pronunciation; you’ll; Yes! You’ll take time to decide from the different variables you know of.
The transposition of the popular scripting style to form English replica of different language words gained grounds with the popularity of English itself; which is sometimes unfairly expected to be understood and accepted by everybody. Nevertheless, the ignorance of the structural compatibility to form new English versions, which are suggestive of the actual sounds world-over created the big gap. As they had to find English replica of their native sound so badly as had always been in vogue, but did not know of the structural sequences suggesting the phono-perfect spellings. Phono-morpho did not cohere well, as were backed by the perceptual factors only; which is what they somehow managed to support it with.
All this can be altered to attain a degree of coherence and systematic phonemics to captured sounds with the help of generalizations about the morphological factors. And that is in fact possible by something which has offered a substantial support to the expansion of so called sub-scripting style: Mobile telephony, as is one of the biggest channels to fan out the much dreaded scripting style.

Moreover, if you choose to be carefree of the correctness of the utterance you might attain fluency, but that would always be at the cost of the sounds.
The idea is that many words of foreign origin have lost their identity; both in sound and appearance that we sometimes find different regions jostle brains hard to consciously recognize the actual sound, the actual pronunciation.
What do we expect?
Do we expect every body, from someone who does not speak that much (beginning to learn to speak English), to someone who does more than just speak, to know the origin of every other word, and their contrasting applications of English alphabetic script?
The idea is, that it would be far fetching; way too much. Then why should we let egregious follies to act as an impediment in communication. Ain’t is possible to educate every body to save them from being ignoramus enough to damage words from so many different languages.
The real need for a base accent emerged with the increasing interaction of different communities having different phonetic perceptions. Not everybody understands it the way it should be understood. The idea is to minimize the regional perceptual differences in phonetic applications and habits.
The contribution of countries like India & China, had been little less hitherto, but there is every possibility that they'll turn out to be one of the major contributors as they are making their presence felt worldwide; and also if we consider the increasing population of English speakers in these countries. Odds on, we’ll all witness the unprecedented spate of entries from these regions. But we can not let their free-floating habit of spelling their native language words with English alphabetic script to jeopardize languages just like that.
There is a real need for a base paradigm to clear up the maze they are floating in.

Read-write-spil. Sorry! Spell.

The way we read and spell suggests our understanding of the structural behavior of English letters.

How would somebody whose first language is not English would learn speak English?
You learn to memorize the visual files and then attach corresponding sound files with selective attention. There would be myriad of visual folders, and sound files would be there just as the attached files. The sound files, which have been selectively stored, would not necessarily be the right sound files (which you created yourself under the influence of regional understanding and tutorials you followed, and the education system). As everybody from that region grew with a peculiar understanding, almost everybody pronounce words likewise. Most probably mutilated sounds been stored with the visual files. Wrongly attached sound file + the experimental soul (the Little Einstein) + habitual imitation is what the base had been, on which she made her internal speech.
To give you an example:
With the increasing popularity of English, a convent in a region where the first language is not English would have all the subjects taught in English but the regional language. A kid would know how to speak the regional language to soothe her communication needs as she learned enough from her parents. She would see more of English than the regional language in school, as she would have only one subject in that language but would probably choose to speak in her regional language, as everybody around her speaks the regional language more than English; at home, with friends, et.al. Therefore, she would be pretty fluent by the time she would be in her third grade.
To recollect she is in her third grade, speaks the regional language more but sees less of it, and speaks less of English and sees more (books).
The normal course is, every subject teacher would ask the pupils to read from text, and the teacher would explain text. As she practice reading she would unconsciously
memorize the visuals (make visual files and attach sounds). Initially her reading skill would not be that good, but as she would keep on seeing more and more of text, she would not take much time to recollect the sound files and read swiftly.
And if we contrast her regional language reading skills which would probably be not quite promising because she has not been seeing the regional text much and she herself did not pay heed to improve it, as that was the only subject in that language. The result would be more spelling mistakes and more reading difficulties in that subject (regional language). To recollect more of sound files (regional language) less of visual files; God saves her!
As she grows, would learn new words (from the regional language) corresponding visual files not necessarily be there at all. Would start to apply in her daily speech and would strongly insist on the right pronunciation if she happens to listen somebody pronounce them wrong (there is every possibility that she might not be able to spell those word right). She would play more with the sound files of regional language and would probably make it the language of her internal speech (the language of internal speech is the language in which you speak with your inner self).We will discuss it latter.

There are higher possibilities that she would mistakenly pull the close variant sound files.
She would have loads of visual files (English alphabetic script) and corresponding sound files, mutilated though, but she would swiftly pick the sound file when she would read text and there is every possibility that she would insist more on spelling right than saying it right. In addition, she would have problem with new words, she is seeing for the very first time as she would not be sure of the right pronunciation and the spelling would suggest her very different sound than the actual pronunciation.
It is observed that she would read smoothly and fast if she chooses to, if the text has words she recognize well (has seen and read before). Nevertheless, words she is seeing for the first time will give her a tough time. To read those words she would have to apply her knowledge of structural behavior of letters (understanding of the physical representation of sounds and arrangement of letters a particular region has) and that varies drastically from region to region, and there are different regions following same alphabetic script to spell their regional language words.

With time, her vocabulary would grow and probably start applying the vocabulary to design speech; she may also choose to make English the language of her internal speech. However, she would not be aware of the actual sounds and keep on mispronouncing words and one day she would have her moment of truth.

She would realize that the sound file she attached with a visual file is a wrong sound file; and she would have more and more decisive moments, as she will interact with the outer world.
There are two ways she can take it from there, either add the new sound, which is contrary to the sound file corresponding a visual sound or simply ignore it. In addition, if she chooses to add new sound files with the already sound file corresponding visual file, she would have an option to pick sound file by choice. Her speech would be a mish-mash.
How would she get to know the sound file she adding is right or not? Moreover, there is every possibility that she would add another wrong file with an already existing wrong sound file. Then, there would be two or even more wrong files, one of them could be right but how would she know which one is right. She will be confused.
Wrong or right pick would all be her call, which in-turn would be based on influences rather than the exact knowledge of picking the right one. If she happens to listen to the sound files of some popular personality, will precarious try to match (corresponding visual file) with hers, and there is every possibility that thenceforth she would choose to pick that sound file sound, without actually taking the trouble of finding out the right one.
She may choose to look at the respelling help. She would probably choose to keep on picking and dropping sound files and mispronouncing words often or may call it quits one day, saying, “I am better the way I was before”.
To recollect, now she insists on speaking her region language the right way, but has found good enough reasons to mispronounce English words. This is not the only thing she does; she is in a habit of spelling her regional language words with English alphabetic script, which could be Hindi, French, German, Spanish, Latin, ET, al. to the rest of the world. And her this habit does not only damage her regional words which she always insisted to be pronounced right, but also act as a paradigm to further on the damage, which is a disaster.

There is one better option to help her save from that much effort, to save here from reading or writing French, German, Spanish, or Latin, from a pure entrenched English text, to help her save her own language, is to help her follow a paradigm.
What paradigm? **********************************
We need a paradigm that is easy to understand and applicable.
It should be capable of explaining the present spelling system.
Should suggest minimum changes in the spelling system we already in place.
Capable of covering every possible sound, and should have room for every foreign sound & should be receptive to foreign sounds as well, without indicating a total makeover.
A turning point in spelling and sound relationship, so that they can relate better.
The present spelling habit and future needs to help people steer in clear water.
It should be able to demystify the spelling pronunciation confounding with precision; should be able to assimilate sounds (words) from foreign languages without any damage to the original sound.
Easily understandable, so that we can educate every other region using English alphabetic script to spell their own language words (countries like India, china, et. al.).
That can cover every possible sound (word).

Namesake.

Have we made ourselves rigid enough to speak in a way that is not understandable to the rest of the world?
Yes! It’s true.
Who would appreciate if someone read their name wrong? A few would take offence; a few would start giving sound lessons, or even start justifying the spelling; but almost all of us would assume that either they belong to a different world or never heard of your name before; and that’s reason why they say it the way they say it.
Learn the phonemic symbols and start writing your name with phonemic symbols, is what I suggest.
Either learn the widely acceptable way or wear a tag having your name transcribed in phonemic symbols, every time you go out and meet new people. Wear a tag and simply point at the tag or write it; as there is every possibility of you being addressed by a different name altogether.Or you can choose to confuse them and let them make fun of either your name or of themselves. If you are not loyal to your name then how could you expect other to be?
Either say it and help them remember the sound or let them have the liberty to guess.But mind you: never say and show them the way you’ve been writing your name simultaneously.How faithful to your name are you?
It’s a matter of concern not restricted to the world you interact with, but all across the planet called earth. We don’t have to elaborate much because I think that you have seen Grammy, Cannes, or you may have experienced it by yourself at some point in your lives. How people flounder when they see script form of a new name, they haven’t seen before?
It could be a perfect topic to start a conversion in an informal set-up. It will consume 3 to 4 minutes, and you’ll have a fair chance of smoothly drifting to other interesting topics theretofore. It may not affect an informal conversation, but when it comes to business, initial 3-4 minutes matters a lot, especially over the phone.It makes your job lot easier if you can get it right the first time. If you’ve dialed for Collections, sales (outbound) you would know what I m talking about. A noticeable number of hours are spent helping new recruits of BPO industry familiarize with foreign name sounds. But it has been proved to be a total waste of time and efforts spent. And proved us as poor comprehenders /decoders when it comes to foreign names.
What you think would be the reason why people pronounce names wrongly?
Business needs higher language capabilities; would never want you to get in to something, which is astray, or not even the business; or is bad for business. For business economies matter. How can we increase the productivity and reduce turn-round time? Business does not want us to confuse or get confuse.
Either you happen to be a native speaker or not it doesn’t actually matter. Every region has its unique scripting style. Most of the times it seems that you can’t do much about it. You can’t really help it as it’s stuck in our brains for a lot many reasons. It’s all over our speech like a spell.
What would you think be the reason why everybody is given an alias in BPO industry?
What goes comes around. Just think about it.
I would love to share an instance with you. BHEL is the abbreviation for Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited. BHEL has their plant in Garwaal District (India). A lot many locals work with BHEL. You ask them the name of the organization they work for, they would say B-H-E-L; not like the we say VAT (value added tax) and such like abbreviations as a separate word having its own separate identity as a word. They are very peculiar about the way they say it. They would say every letter separately because their interpretation of this written form is a taboo word, which means ‘ass’. And if they had to read it as one word, they’ll read it as ‘*’. I was with my friends. One of them was from Garwaal who obviously knew the meaning of ‘*’. A she friend with wandering eyes saw street side cart selling ‘Bhail pu:ri:’. She asked the ‘ pury’ guy if his ‘*’ is fresh. To my amusement he said, may be this is your first time, but it’s as fresh as it’s always been. Suddenly the friend from Garwaal went to his favorite resort. He was upset. Nobody but I knew the reason. He was upset of the idea of mixing food with something he thought can’t be delicious. He was so upset with the “bhel pury” that he decided not to have it. I knew what was running in his mind, which to some extent was running in my mind too; but the take was different. I could not hold on to my disposition any longer and shared with everybody his mind, and what exactly made him decide not to eat. It was fun.
The idea is that it’s not BHEL, not Bhel-pury, and not even a**, but us. Neither BHEL nor your Bhel would tell what exactly it is. You have to see which one of it you want to eat, or if you really have an appetite for it; in which context it’s used in the sentence. It’s actually something heavier and tasteless than any Bhel can ever be; and that is something which is burned on your brain to keep you from seeing and relish few nicest things in life.
BHEL as word is an inkling to yet another aspect of sub-scripting styles. There are a few letter sounds, which are close to English letter sounds but not quite those sounds. “BH” combination is used to get “*” sound in South-East Asia. We will discuss such like combinations; chances and possibilities of getting worldwide recognition later.

CASE AGAINST SPELLING REFORM.

1. Public apathy and prejudice.
People are reluctant to switch to another system of writing considering the difficulties faced while learning the current spelling system.The learned populace still faces difficulties with script though. People write which a lot many people dont understand or different people understand differently, something the writer didn’t mean.See beyond words give you a new perspective towards script. It clearly doesn’t suggest in anyway that you have to take the same sort of trouble again, as learning new scripting style could be equally gruesome as learning the present orthography.It helps you relate to the present orthography better. Doesn’t suggest to forget what we’ve learned hither to; suggests you to accept the remedial script which is already a part of the present orthography. All we have to do is to regularize specific approaches to gage a specific sound forms. It’s system of writing where we pick the best of different scripting styles. A system where we dont have to remember the appearance of every words and sound separately; a system with which it’s easy to get to the sound form if we see the visual form and the otherwise.
2. There is a fear of adaptability to a new strange writing style.
See beyond words brings out which already exists in our present writing style, is not strange at all. It gives you the best possible permutation and helps you recognize it. Present suggestions to channelize the English writing style and brings out the benefits of a universally followed writing style. It attempts distinguish sub-scripting styles with that of English.Does not recommend a total make over.
3. Spelling reform is an attempt to lower down the education system.
Sir William Darling: “I am of the opinion that it [spelling reform] is an attempt to step down our education standard, because reading English is a little difficult in as much as it requires concentration and thought, and well-intentioned persons should not make it easier.”
Low education standard—–Do we need to learn every other scripting style if we just want to learn English? What standard to we talk about? English scripting style is not at all standard. We have Indian script, Spanish, German, French, etc.This is nothing less than being dual standard. First we allow different scripts to percolate and be a part of English and then we distort original word forms.I dont understand why we do to other language entries which we would never encouraged otherwise.We accept mutilated word forms as per the Standard English pronunciation and writing style, and latter we somehow change the very identity of the word.By doing this we not only damaging individual word forms, we are also corrupting English script.We can maintain standards if we do a structural compatibility check with all new foreign entries as per a well defined English scripting style.And concentration of thoughts is much require with some more intensive studies with human welfare perspective, like healthcare, medicine, engineering, etc., not with language for God sake.Language is for free flow of ideas.
4. Implementation.
This is the only argument which seems quite genuine to me. Simplified spelling society has an implementation plan to take reform forward.But before that we have to decide on the reform itself.The best approach would be to decide on a reform first—–create a need—–educate people of the benefits——create a commendable work first.Implementation is secondary. If there has to be a body for the implementation, it definitely need not be SSC. It had never been the objective of the organization. And if they come forward to implement it too, nothing would be better than that.
5. Printers won’t welcome reform.
The argument, that it would create confusion for typesetters and slow down their work is nothing but under-mining the capabilities of the typesetters.This argument is not a valid argument in Digital era; with computer aided phototypesetting and high resolution imaging printers dont have to rely on the spelling skills of type-setters. And even if some printers use Linotype machines, a reformed text would test the operators on the very nature of their job, not on their spelling skills.
6. With reformed spelling we would’ve to reprint all of the books.
No at all! This could invariably be one of the criteria to select suitable reform. The perfect reform would be the one which suggests smooth switch from old to new orthography. Even if we have to reprint some books, that would solely be on demand basis and boost economy. To ensure smooth sailing we can easily add suggestions as to help people read and learn the new writing style in every book printed with new orthography for nascent years.
7. Foreign words won’t be easily recognized by foreigners.
At least they are recognizing the fact that native speakers of different languages dont understand the English versions in sound form.That means that we also recognize the fact that original word sound changes when a word is assimilated to English language.Why should the sound change?The very purpose of script is to reflect the sound form. If the script form doesn’t reflect the core word sound, there got to be something wrong.The argument that foreigners may not be understand words when they hear it, but at least will have no difficulty in recognizing them when they are written down. This argument clearly defies the very concept of language, the purpose of a language. Are they suggesting that we you can’t understand what they say or either ways, we should exchange slips.I dont understand why they cry for only spellings, when they can’t retain the original sounds. May be original word sounds are very hard to trace and the only easily assessable thing is what we cry about. If we have to be so particular about something, then why only spellings, why not sounds this time?First of all we have to differentiate foreign languages on the basis of respective alphabetic scripts. The argument that French won’t recognize the reformed spelling of French words in English doesn’t have any solid grounds. There is also a population which didn’t use English alphabetic script to write words like Urdu, Hindi, Chinese, etc., but have started using it with the popularity of English. And those French origin words or any other language word would be as alien as the words from those many different languages with a total different sound to letter relationship. Words from a region like India, China, Pakistan would definitely French for even French.
8. Reform would complicate grammar rules.
English grammar rules like making plural forms by adding ’s’ or ‘es’; verb forms by adding ’s’ and ‘es’; past tense with the addition of ‘ed’.There is discontent over the change of grammar rules based on pronunciation. Is this just because a few proposals which suggested to make it more phonetic.See beyond words identifies it as an advantage to English and does not suggest nouziz for noses, cabz for cabs, boiz for boys, or walkd for walked, etc.,.Rather provides sound ascertaining techniques.
9. Phonetic spelling would be disservice to scientists.
An argument that scientific terms are written forms and they dont have pronunciation.May be that’s the reason why I couldn’t ever figure out a doctor’s prescription. They are always confused over “how to spell”, and what they write is far from what we understand as a written word.May be the spelling of drugs are quite difficult to remember, so they write a few recognizable letter and for the rest of it you have to guess.But I had this habit of asking every time of the pronunciation, so as to remember which medicine to take at what time.
What I understand is that today we have different brand names for a specific medicine or a specific combination. It’s quite easy to remember those few names, easily understandable and written. But they’re still confused.A phonetic spelling is not a disservice to anybody; the only disservice if any is when we distort names be it of scientific, historic or religious importance or anything for that matter. Forget about scientific terms for a while; I presume that a scientist wouldn’t like if somebody recognize him or their invention as just a spelling and that too distorted many a times. We are humans for Good sake! Scientists are not Tomatoes or Potatoes. We don’t have the liberty to treat them alike, so as to say “po-Tat-o or po-taa-to, or to-Mat-o or to-Maat-o.
10. No reform is good enough for
11. Argument that the language ain’t static, it changes with time.The argument that the spoken language changed a lot from King Alfred, to Chaucer’s, to Shakespeare’s, to what we speak today has not evidence at all. We did not have human voice recording technology before Edison’s “Mary had a little lamb”, 1877(ref: Steve Schoenherr). The only evidence we have is of orthography change. English writing style changed a lot.How does a language change?a. Language changes when two language mix.b. Changes with the introduction of new language words.This is actually good for a language. Language bank increases; people get to know new things, new processes, new ways of doing things. This is good for everybody. People come together share thing, learn things.The only change that’s not good for any language is, when people start damaging the integrity of individual words. They start playing with the language; interpret word sound wrongly or differently; mis-spell, mis-pronounce. See beyond words suggests not just a new writing system but also a learning system for everybody. Want it to be follow universally. Want to free English from the influence of different sub-scripting style to affect different languages and speakers.
11. Argument that English is not uniformly pronounced across the world.The very purpose of “See beyond script” is to provide a tool to read, write, speak and communicate easily. The number of English speakers outside nations with English as first language is much more as compared to the latter. There are as many different way of speaking as different languages in the world. Everybody speaks English differently.The argument that a reform won’t be of no help to a Yorkshire boy, for whom ‘wheat’ and ‘red’ have same vowel sound is nothing but petty fogging, as the majority of English speakers is in India, Pakistan, china, etc., specifically in India than any other country in the whole world. The count is way too high. And I personally feel that no country can beat it, considering the population growth rate and the economic predictions. So do we want to help a few Yorkshire boys or a big population which has a unique way of pronouncing words, a totally different ways of ascertaining the phonemic value attached to a word, and a unique style of arranging letters to represent a sound form? Why English words borrowed from Hindi language do not indicate the actual pronunciation to the rest of the world? We should take a hint from this. Do we want to streamline things or, give good enough reasons for a huge ignorant population to coin new word forms which don’t suggest anything close to the actual pronunciation? Or utter sound that’s not close to actual pronunciation?And these disparities would further increase if we don’t act now.
12. The argument that all homophones would be spelled same if a reform is introduced.That all of the homophones would come under same spelling and all homographs would have different spelling.a. Homophones.A reform would necessarily suggest same spelling form homophones. The existence of homophones could be trace to two basic root causes:1. Different ways of arrangement of letters to give a specific sound value.2. Different perceptions over the sound value attached to particular set of letters.www.bifroest.demon.co.uk has a list of 441 homophones.A question could arise that why do we need different ways to represent a specific sound?There is no harm if we more than one way of arranging letters to give a specific sound, unless it’s contradictory.For Example: ‘ai’ digraph is used to represent soft ‘a’ sound; also a soft open syllable like ‘pane’.The argument that we still have two or three ways to decipher a sound, then what’s the use of a reform, and would that be called standardization?We already have lot many heteronyms (same spelling same sound, but different meanings) in English; also the meaning and application of words changes with time. This is the beauty of English. This will not add to the difficulties faced while learning English.The meaning changes with the context.Homograph is a perfect example of ‘take a guess’, while it’s not the case with homophone. But you are sure of the application and the sound value attached with homophones. You can learn different applications of words with time.Perfect example of a homograph: The digraph ‘ei’. ‘EI’ exhibit different sound value in different words. It could be soft ‘a’ sound, soft ‘e’ sound, soft pure ‘i’ sound (refer to page no.____), solid ‘e’ sound. A source of confusion.
See beyond words attempt to codify words; recognize a specific sound value from a letter if arranged in a particular fashion. All we have to do is to remember them. Nothing less, nothing more.Considering this we definitely need a uniform orthography.

Masha Bell.

I recently had a chance to see a debate through a series of emails between Masha Bell and Vivian Cook, on the merits of spelling reform.Masha pitched for and Vivian against.People have been discussing this for quite some while.Reformers have been struggling to persuade the rest of the world ever since the incorporation of the society, but it hasn’t taken any shape yet.Being a spelling reform protagonist, I strongly believe that we need some regularization of English.And she put forth her mind quite well.I was pretty impressed with the conversation, until I saw addendum simplified glossary link. And I did a little search to check what the world think of it.
Almost everybody commented on this. Everybody is so opinionated, except a few like Percy Balemans (pbtranslations.com). As we always oppose change, so nothing new to it.Some said if Poor is Por, Your is Yor, Worse is Wors; then what about horse or hors. ( louise dade).Only the BBC web-page seem healthy to me. The good thing is that it created a stir. But it was too less to opine; too short to form opinionated interpretations, good or bad.Every healthy debate on reforms should be encouraged. I commend BBC.Why did they only notice the ‘wors’?What about the rest of it?Some called her a ‘foreigner’ and ‘ an idiot’; and the society ‘The moron’s society of people who can’t spell’.Who is more idiot than someone who himself is foreign to the difficulties their kids face in the real world?This all came from someone who just ain’t an idiot, but also inconsiderate. At least the society recognizes it.It was just an attempt to bring to notice that something is hindering the language acquisition, and we can do something to make it little easy for all those who feel distraught when they see word, worm, world, and even worse.And what about norm, storm, horn, etc., and warm, warn, and barn, farm, etc.They is a discontent on the level we want our spelling to be phonetic, to want extend we want to push our brains to remember words?The problem could be at the project front. Even if the society proposes spellings to be phonetic, we have got to remember specific patterns for similar sounds.It was just a suggestion.They clearly dont want to lower down the education standards; just want to add a little sense to it. (gwil.com)This might be coming from someone who himself is a reform protagonist, but I blindly dont agree to whatever they propose.I see it as a tender for a more reliable set of data, a more intelligent approach to the whole concept.Just free expressions of thought processes in the form of few nicely written articles won’t do any good. A lifestyle wherein we think about something so intensely for two or three days, and sleep on it the third day; you see an opportunity in something in new the fourth day, and you forget the previous ones the same day.Does anybody except the society think of it anymore? Not quite a many.Did any of those refined writers notice anything more than just wors?I dont think so.I happen to see the whole glossary. Real good suggestions except a few:Cupl.Difrence.Singl.Simpl.Therefor.Debateable: Peeple; Wors; Phonnic; Onely; Adicted; Bennefit, Tu,Exceptionally good: Memmory, Munny, Moast, Yung, Yor, Wer, Verry, Wun.