This is an experimental tool to convert current English into a "2.0" English that is more orthogonal and phonetically pure. Full specs & top 2000 words for English 2.0 are in README.md file. Help is wanted in verifying that top 2000 words were converted in accordance to the spec.
It seems to me Mark Twain was trying to show that (if taken to an extreme) a 'new' English would be unrecognisable and unreadable - essentially a foreign language.
This is not the goal of English 2.0, which aims to be fully readable for current English speakers, but also phonetically pure at the same time.
As an example, the following is perfectly readable by anyone who knows English 1.0, but it has better phonetic purity than current English, in that 'ae' is always Long A (and hence distinguished from Short A, which is simply 'a'), and 'owne' is a distinct tetragraph (having the diphthong OW sound), to distinguish it from the 'ow' digraph (which is always the Long O sound):
In particular, the terminal E has lost it's role as Magic E.
1. 'nowe': English 2.0 distinguishes 'ow' (digraph, same Long O sound as in 'know') from 'owe' (trigaph, same the OW diphthong sound as in 'now'). The 4 letter combination 'owne' is also the 'OW' dipthong sound, but is used at end of words like towne, downe, browne, etc.
Technically, the 'E' in '-owe-' and '-owne' is not a guard or silent E, as it is part of the trigraph/tetragraph and serves to give a different phonetic sound to the '-ow-' digraph. (eg. In the same way that the 'sh' digraph is a different sound to the letter 's' not in such a digraph).
This is what the Specification says about the owe/owne trigraph/tetragraph:
2. 'proove': English 2.0 retains the 'guard' e after -ce/je/se/ve, -iyze & u-glide words - this is mainly to retain overall word shape, so that someone who knows nothing about English 2.0 can still read most words immediately & without effort.
In this case, E does not have any softening role, as all c's not associated with a 'k' are already soft, and likewise all s (when not the pluralisation or possessive 's') is always hissed & not buzzed like 'z'.
Also, all g's are always hard (any soft g's are converted to j). English 2.0 has phonetic plurity in that g's always sound like 'go', whereas English 1.0 allows two different sounds for the same letter.
xphung|5 days ago
rzzzwilson|5 days ago
https://faculty.georgetown.edu/jod/texts/twain.html
xphung|5 days ago
This is not the goal of English 2.0, which aims to be fully readable for current English speakers, but also phonetically pure at the same time.
As an example, the following is perfectly readable by anyone who knows English 1.0, but it has better phonetic purity than current English, in that 'ae' is always Long A (and hence distinguished from Short A, which is simply 'a'), and 'owne' is a distinct tetragraph (having the diphthong OW sound), to distinguish it from the 'ow' digraph (which is always the Long O sound):
beardyw|5 days ago
And "proove", what does the 'e' add?
xphung|5 days ago
In particular, the terminal E has lost it's role as Magic E.
1. 'nowe': English 2.0 distinguishes 'ow' (digraph, same Long O sound as in 'know') from 'owe' (trigaph, same the OW diphthong sound as in 'now'). The 4 letter combination 'owne' is also the 'OW' dipthong sound, but is used at end of words like towne, downe, browne, etc.
Technically, the 'E' in '-owe-' and '-owne' is not a guard or silent E, as it is part of the trigraph/tetragraph and serves to give a different phonetic sound to the '-ow-' digraph. (eg. In the same way that the 'sh' digraph is a different sound to the letter 's' not in such a digraph).
This is what the Specification says about the owe/owne trigraph/tetragraph:
2. 'proove': English 2.0 retains the 'guard' e after -ce/je/se/ve, -iyze & u-glide words - this is mainly to retain overall word shape, so that someone who knows nothing about English 2.0 can still read most words immediately & without effort.In this case, E does not have any softening role, as all c's not associated with a 'k' are already soft, and likewise all s (when not the pluralisation or possessive 's') is always hissed & not buzzed like 'z'.
Also, all g's are always hard (any soft g's are converted to j). English 2.0 has phonetic plurity in that g's always sound like 'go', whereas English 1.0 allows two different sounds for the same letter.