<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>

<channel>
	<title>UK News &#187; english</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/tag/english/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews</link>
	<description>Our UK correspondents' insights</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 12:28:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Does spelling matter?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2008/08/07/does-spelling-matter/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2008/08/07/does-spelling-matter/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 10:34:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Addison</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[UK News]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[education]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[english]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[language]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[spelling]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2008/08/07/does-spelling-matter/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Professor Ken Smith says rather than constantly correct the most common spelling mistakes, we should simply accept them as "variants." Is this the beginning of the end?  ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL720807020080807"><img align="left" width="100" src="http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/files/2008/08/dictionary.thumbnail.jpg" alt="dictionary.jpg" height="150" class="imageframe" />Professor Ken Smith</a> is so fed up with endlessly correcting his students&#8217; spelling that he&#8217;s throwing in the towel.</p>
<p>Why not just accept that you&#8217;re never going to iron out the most common spelling mistakes and simply accept them as &#8220;variants,&#8221; he suggests.</p>
<p>&#8220;Either we go on beating ourselves and our students up over this problem or we simply give everyone a break and accept these variant spellings as such,&#8221; he says.</p>
<p>He&#8217;s thinking of words like argument, that often comes at him as &#8220;arguement,&#8221; or twelth (twelfth) and all those words that break the i-before-e rule like weird and seize.</p>
<p>What do you think? Is correct spelling just for pedants and crossword fiends nowadays?</p>
<p>(P.S. We promise not to put your replies through spellcheck)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2008/08/07/does-spelling-matter/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is it time to make English eezier?</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2008/05/13/shud-english-spelling-be-eezier/</link>
		<comments>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2008/05/13/shud-english-spelling-be-eezier/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2008 10:33:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kate Kelland</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[UK News]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[education]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[english]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[language]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[spanish]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[spelling]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2008/05/13/shud-english-spelling-be-eezier/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is English spelling far too complicated for the modern world?   ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/files/2008/05/book11.jpg" title="book11.jpg"><img align="left" width="100" src="http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/files/2008/05/book11.thumbnail.jpg" alt="book11.jpg" height="150" class="imageframe" /></a><a rel="attachment wp-att-510" href="http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2008/05/13/shud-english-spelling-be-eezier/510/" title="book.jpg"></a>The <a href="http://www.spellingsociety.org/">Spelling Society </a>(SSS), which celebrates its 100th birthday this year, says it&#8217;s time for the English language to drag itself into the modern world, leaving behind 15th century spelling rules that have no place in the 21st century.</p>
<p>After my son proudly produced his first hand-written book, delightfully entitled &#8220;Imfmashen about plarnts&#8221; and peppered with details about &#8220;leevs&#8221; and &#8220;roots &#8221; and &#8220;barc&#8221;, my sympathy for children (and teachers) across the English-speaking world<br />
deepened.</p>
<p>How is it possible that the spelling such words as <a href="http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,,2279434,00.html">&#8220;cough&#8221; and &#8220;although&#8221; and &#8220;through&#8221; </a>should be so similar when they sound so different?</p>
<p>In some ways, it would seem a shame to reduce our often beautiful and eccentric language to a series of text-message-like phonetics, but when you consider the cost of<br />
teaching spelling to our children &#8211;  the SSS estimates it at an eye-watering £18 million a year in Britain alone &#8212; the argument gains some weight.</p>
<p>In other languages, like Spanish, learning the alphabet gives you immediate access to be able to read, spell and pronounce every word &#8212; even those you have never come across and don&#8217;t understand.</p>
<p>And with Spanish competing with English as the world&#8217;s most dominant language, is it time for the English-speaking world to modernise or die.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://blogs.reuters.com/uknews/2008/05/13/shud-english-spelling-be-eezier/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
