Archive for Tag: spelling

Monday, July 11, 2016

English Spelling: Making Sense of the Chaos (Part 4)

TamaraJonesBy Tamara Jones
ESL Instructor, Howard Community College
Columbia, Maryland

In previous blog posts, I shared my own personal struggles with spelling, I described the class I have been teaching for a year, I shared some hard-learned lessons about teaching spelling to international students, and I listed some of the key elements to an intermediate level spelling curriculum.

This is all well and good, you may be thinking, but isn’t teaching a spelling class about the most boring thing you could ever do? Not at all! Because spelling is a tough, personal, and challenging mental activity, it’s really important that my classes be as active and interactive as possible. I want my students to be moving, laughing, talking and learning. So, now I want to describe some of the activities I used in my spelling class to help liven things up and give students multiple exposures to spelling “rules” to ensure greater retention.

Activity #: What Color do you Hear?

As I mentioned in Part 2 of this blog series, students have a really hard time hearing the difference between certain vowel sounds. If they can’t distinguish between /ɪ/ and /iy/, how in the world can they begin to spell words containing either of those sounds? To provide students with extra practice with this, we play “What Color do you Hear?”

Read more »

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

English Spelling: Making Sense of the Chaos (Part 3)

TamaraJonesBy Tamara Jones
ESL Instructor, Howard Community College
Columbia, Maryland

The “rules” of English spelling can appear to be so random and unreliable, they drive students (and at least one teacher) to distraction. Since I’ve started teaching an intermediate-level spelling class, I’ve had to re-learn some of these “rules” in order to help my students make sense of the chaos that is English orthography. I don’t call them “rules” in my class, though. When I did, my students were very quick to complain that with so many exceptions, they were hardly “rules.” Instead, we refer to them as “tips.” That just seemed to make everyone a lot happier.

So, in a previous blog post, I shared some ‘lessons learned” about teaching spelling. Here, I want to share some of the things I think ESL/EFL students need to know to be strong spellers.

Tip #1 – Some Consonant Sounds have Wacky Spellings
Sometimes consonant sounds are easy to spell. For instance, /m/ is usually spelled with an “m” or sometimes an “mm.” But, some consonant sounds are trickier. Students need to learn that /f/ can be spelled “f,” “ff,” “ph” and

Read more »

Monday, June 13, 2016

English Spelling: Making Sense of the Chaos (Part 2)

TamaraJonesBy Tamara Jones
ESL Instructor, Howard Community College
Columbia, Maryland

Teaching English spelling can be almost as daunting as learning it. Since I’ve started teaching an intermediate-level spelling class, I’ve learned a lot about how to teach spelling to international students.

Lesson #1 – Students Need to Know Why
Students whose L1 has a more regular sound-spelling correspondence are baffled about why English spelling is such a nightmare of random letter combinations and exceptions to the rules. They often seem to want the teacher to make sense of it all, for us to provide them with a tidy reason that will help them sort it all out. So, the short answer to the question “Why?” is: History. There is a great video on YouTube called “Why is English Spelling so Weird?”  It’s a pretty fast-paced lecture, but my intermediate students seemed to really enjoy learning that there is a logic behind English spelling peculiarities, even if it is buried deep in British history. In short, English spelling is a product of foreign invasions and changing English pronunciation. In my experience, once students learned this, they could stop asking “Why?” and could focus on the task at hand, learning to spell.

Lesson #2 – Students Need to Hear the Sounds
Duh, right? But, I hadn’t realized just how much of a challenge this would be for my students until I was trying to cover all the spelling patterns for the /iy/ sound and the students couldn’t even differentiate between /ɛ/ and /iy/.

Read more »

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

English Spelling: Making Sense of the Chaos (Part 1)

TamaraJonesBy Tamara Jones
ESL Instructor, Howard Community College
Columbia, Maryland

The experts tell us that that English has a loose sounds-spelling correspondence “as a consequence of 16 centuries of unmanaged spelling” (Brown, 2016, p. 167). That’s just the academic way of saying that spelling in English is nothing short of a nightmare. As a child, I struggled with spelling. I sweated over lists of seemingly random letter combinations every weekend in preparation for Monday morning spelling quizzes. I puzzled about silent letters, schizophrenic vowels, and “rules” that had more exceptions than conformities. I misspelled “maybe” until I was well into high school. Nothing associated with spelling came easily to me.

Perhaps this is why I am so sympathetic when my students express frustration about English spelling. It is far less regular than spelling in many other languages and my ESL students are often perturbed when they realize English words aren’t usually spelled the way the sound, like words are in their L1s. This lack of regularity is the very reason native English speakers spend a disproportionately large amount of school time memorizing words and learning spelling rules (Seymour, Aro and Erskine, 2003).

From Struggling Speller to Teacher

Despite an ongoing personal dread of all things spelling related, I agreed to teach a spelling class last Fall when the adjunct instructor who had been assigned the class got a full-time job elsewhere. I reasoned that, if nothing

Read more »

Friday, August 22, 2008

Sometimes Reform Can Spell Disaster!

By Richard Firsten
Retired ESOL Teacher, Teacher-Trainer, Columnist, Author

Can you spell /pyu-sә-læ-nә-mәs/ the way it’s normally written? I can’t ― unless I look it up in a dictionary. I mean, why should I know how to spell it? I never use the word. Well, okay, it’s spelled pusillanimous, and it means “afraid to take even a small risk” or “cowardly.” Talk about a low-frequency word!

But what about /ne-bәr/ or /saI-ka-lә-ji/? Can you spell those the way they’re normally written? Oh, you feel better now, don’t you. You know I’m talking about neighbor and psychology, right? Did you have trouble spelling those two? I have a hunch you didn’t. They’re high-frequency words, so you’ve seen them and used them many, many times. That’s why you had no trouble spelling them.

So how would you feel if I told you that from now on they should be nebr and sykaluji? How would that grab you? (I think I can see you grimacing.) That first one looks like it could be a kind of phonetic transcription of an ancient Egyptian word, and the other looks like it belongs to some Turco-Mongolian language. They certainly don’t look like English anymore!

And that’s my point. For years and years there have been many people calling for a drastic reform of English spelling. They claim that the majority of even US high school students can’t spell well, and that too much time is spent trying to teach English speakers how to spell their language. I can’t argue with them about that; I’m sure it’s true. I’m also sure that we’re stuck with the spelling system ― if it is a system ― that we’ve got, but I don’t know if that’s such a bad thing.

True, if you look over the history of English spelling, you can’t help but laugh out loud at times when you find out what people did to make the system illogical, awkward, and somewhat inconsistent. Part of the problem comes from the fact that monastic scribes, and later on, printers, had a great deal of influence on how we spell words.

Do you know why so many words contain the combination ck? Some scribes decided that spelling could show it’s necessary to maintain a short vowel sound if that vowel is separated from another vowel by doubling a consonant. That’s why we know how to pronounce pinning vs. pining, or robbed vs. robed. But those scribes didn’t like the look of kk ― it just wasn’t esthetically pleasing to them, I guess ― so they arbitrarily decided to write ck instead. They thought that looked prettier. That’s why we now write picked instead of pikked and won’t confuse its pronunciation with piked. Hah!

And do you know why we spell the word lamb with that silent b? Well, those scribes kept the b in comb and tomb and climb as a reminder of their older forms in which the b was pronounced (camban, tumba, and climban). So when they wrote that word that means a baby sheep, they automatically added that b even though in its original form the word never had a b. We should still be writing it lam, not lamb! And the list of oddities like these goes on and on.

But let’s get serious for a moment. It’s all right ― or alright ― to scream for spelling reform, for a more phonetic way of writing English. But has anybody come up with a system that will work? Not the way I look at it. One big question I have to ask is, with so many variations in the pronunciation of English words, whose pronunciation will we choose to use as the standard for sound/symbol correspondence? If you want to make the system more or less phonetic like we find in Spanish or Russian or German, whose pronunciation will each vowel or consonant represent? Will it be that of the Australians, or New Englanders, or Cockneys, or the British who use “received pronunciation,” RP? Take the word path. If I’m American, I say [pæθ]. If I’m British using RP, I say [pa:θ]. And if I’m a Cockney, I say [pa:f]. So how can we be true to a phonetic way of writing when one word can be pronounced so differently by people who are all native speakers of English? I think you see my point. It just won’t work!

At any rate, we don’t learn to read and write one letter at a time, not after the very beginning. We learn sight recognition, looking at a whole word all at once and recognizing what it is. We don’t sound out each letter of a familiar word when we read it, not if we’re normal readers. To me that’s akin to how Chinese characters are read. They, too, are in a system that relies on reading by sight recognition. So this is one more reason I can’t take those spelling reformers seriously.

And one other thing ― a very important thing ― that they overlook is the personality and unique identification that our spelling system gives to the written language. Take a look again at how I suggested we spell neighbor and psychology. For me there’s something special, almost mysterious, about why those words are spelled as they are. And if I choose to, I can find out the reasons by learning more about the history of the language, which wouldn’t be such a bad thing. Neighbor comes from two Anglo-Saxon words, neah and gebor, which mean “near farmer.” I like seeing the remnants of those ancient words in the spelling. And psychology is really interesting, too. The p was pronounced in the original Greek word psychos, which means something like “soul.” The Romans incorporated that word into their own language, but they had a problem. Greek had a sound similar to the Scottish or German ch that didn’t exist in Latin, so the Romans chose to represent that sound as ch even though they pronounced it more like a k. Our one word is really from two Greek words, psychos and logos, which mean something like “the study of the soul.” I find there’s a romance in such spellings that I don’t want to lose. Is it impractical? Perhaps, but it adds a character, a personality, a charm to English that I think well worth keeping.

Of course, the most compelling argument for not reforming the English spelling system is this: What will happen to spelling bees? Would you want to take away the fun that so many children have competing in those contests? Would you want to be that spoil-sport? Not I!