tag:theconversation.com,2011:/africa/topics/spelling-tests-14096/articlesspelling tests – The Conversation2018-09-20T20:15:36Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/988312018-09-20T20:15:36Z2018-09-20T20:15:36ZCurious Kids: Why does English have so many different spelling rules?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/224570/original/file-20180624-152140-112kqg9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">More spelling problems came in when French scribes introduced new spelling conventions — their own of course, and not always helpful.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>This is an article from <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/curious-kids-36782">Curious Kids</a>, a series for children. The Conversation is asking kids to send in questions they’d like an expert to answer. All questions are welcome – serious, weird or wacky! You might also like the podcast <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/kidslisten/imagine-this/">Imagine This</a>, a co-production between ABC KIDS listen and The Conversation, based on Curious Kids.</em> </p>
<hr>
<blockquote>
<p><strong>Why does English have so many different spelling rules? – Melania P, age 12, Strathfield.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<hr>
<p>English spelling has been evolving for over a thousand years and the muddle we’re in today is the fall-out of many different events that have taken place over this time. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-why-do-aussies-have-a-different-accent-to-canadians-americans-british-people-and-new-zealanders-94725">Curious Kids: Why do Aussies have a different accent to Canadians, Americans, British people and New Zealanders?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>A bad start</h2>
<p>It was a rocky beginning for English spelling. Quite simply, the 23-letter Roman alphabet has never been adequate — even Old English (spoken 450-1150) had 35 or so sounds, and our sound system is now even bigger.</p>
<p>More spelling problems came in when French scribes introduced new spelling conventions — their own of course, and not always helpful. Using “c” instead of “s” for words like <em>city</em> was messy because “c” also represented the “k” sound in words like <em>cat</em>.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=914&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=914&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=914&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1148&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1148&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/236999/original/file-20180919-158246-2ex29k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1148&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">William Caxton set up the first printing presses.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/62/William_caxton.jpg">Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>And then printing arrived in the 15th century — and with it more mess. William Caxton (who set up the presses in the first place) liked Dutch spellings and so established the “gh” in <em>ghost</em> and <em>ghastly</em>. Some printers were European and they introduced favourite spellings too from their own languages. Not terribly helpful either! </p>
<h2>Those pesky silent letters</h2>
<p>One of the biggest problems for English spelling has always been changes in pronunciation. Printing helped to stablise the spelling of words, but then some sounds changed their shape, and others even disappeared altogether. Think of those silent letters in words such as <em>walk, through, write, right, sword, know, gnat</em> — these were once pronounced. </p>
<p>If only the printer Caxton had been born a couple of centuries later, or if these sound changes had occurred a couple of centuries earlier, our spelling would be much truer to pronunciation.</p>
<p>And now comes another little wrinkle in this story – there’s a bunch of silent letters that were never actually pronounced. They appeared because of linguistic busybodies who wanted to make the language look more respectable. This caused some serious mess. </p>
<p>Take how we spell the word <em>rhyme</em>. When we swiped the word from French, it had a much more sensible look — <em>rime</em>. But this was changed to <em>rhyme</em> to give it a more classy classical look (like <em>rhythm</em>) – an interesting idea, but hardly helpful for someone trying to spell the word!</p>
<p>The 16th and 17th centuries saw many extra letters introduced in this way. Think of the “b” added to <em>debt</em> to make a link to Latin <em>debitum</em>. Now, the “b” might be justified in the word <em>debit</em> that we stole directly from Latin, but it was the French who gave us <em>dette</em>. </p>
<p>The “b” consonant was a mistake, and now we accuse poor old <em>debt</em> of having lost it through sloppy pronunciation! </p>
<h2>Let’s make spelling more sensible</h2>
<p>And so it is from this haphazard evolution that we end up with the spelling system we have. </p>
<p>But you know, there are in fact over 80% of words spelled according to regular patterns. So wholesale change is not what we want. However simple improvements could certainly be made without any major upheaval. </p>
<p>We could iron out inconsistencies such as <em>humOUr</em> versus <em>humOrous</em>. To introduce uniform <em>-or</em> spellings would be a painless reform (well, perhaps not painless, since many people are quite attached to the <em>-our</em> in words like <em>humour</em>)</p>
<p>We could also restore earlier spellings like <em>rime</em> and <em>dette</em>, and while we’re at it give <em>psychology</em> and <em>philosophy</em> a sensible look by spelling them <em>sykology</em> and <em>filosofy</em>. </p>
<p>So now, you can see the problem. No matter how silly spellings are, people get attached to them, and new spellings – even sensible ones – never seem to get a foot in the door.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/curious-kids-who-made-the-alphabet-song-77297">Curious Kids: Who made the alphabet song?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Hello, curious kids! Have you got a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to us. You can:</em></p>
<p><em>* Email your question to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au
<br>
* Tell us on <a href="https://twitter.com/ConversationEDU">Twitter</a> by tagging <a href="https://twitter.com/ConversationEDU">@ConversationEDU</a> with the hashtag #curiouskids, or
<br>
* Tell us on <a href="http://www.facebook.com/conversationEDU">Facebook</a></em></p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/165749/original/image-20170419-32713-1kyojyz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=472&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><em>Please tell us your name, age and which city you live in. You can send an audio recording of your question too, if you want. Send as many questions as you like! We won’t be able to answer every question but we will do our best.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/98831/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kate Burridge does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It was a rocky beginning for English spelling. Then things got worse.Kate Burridge, Professor of Linguistics, Monash UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/576062016-05-06T10:02:19Z2016-05-06T10:02:19ZThe grammar police belong in the 18th century – let’s not inflict their rules on today’s children<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121040/original/image-20160503-19847-d9uba2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Hard for primary school children – what about you?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">TungCheung/www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Parents and teachers in England are angry about a <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/2016-key-stage-2-english-grammar-punctuation-and-spelling-sample-test-materials-mark-scheme-and-test-administration-instructions">spelling, punctuation and grammar test</a> that school children must sit at the end of primary school. First introduced in 2013, all 11-year-olds at local-authority-maintained schools will take the test on May 10. This year the difficulty level has increased significantly, in line with the new national curriculum, leading to <a href="https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/122038">calls for all key stage tests to be cancelled</a>. </p>
<p>In an interview on <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b078y2fy#play">BBC Radio 4’s The World At One on May 3</a>, schools minister Nick Gibb answered a typical question from the test incorrectly. He was presented with the sentence: “I went to the cinema after I’d eaten my dinner.” Asked whether the word “after” in the sentence was a subordinating conjunction or a preposition, Gibb said preposition. According to the terminology used in the tests this is the wrong answer, although the British-American linguist Geoff Pullum has argued that this terminology is based on an “<a href="http://chronicle.com/blogs/linguafranca/2015/11/08/prepositions-as-conjunctions-whales-as-fish/">ancient but incorrect analysis</a>”. </p>
<p>There are many aspects of the debate around these tests, and the wider culture of testing they are a part of, but a significant issue remains the purpose of learning grammar. </p>
<p>Grammar as a subject is distinct from the spelling and punctuation that it sits alongside in the test. Spelling and punctuation are artificial functions of the written language and can only be acquired explicitly. Grammar, by contrast, is an innate part of natural language which children acquire from birth – although the Standard English required for formal writing may differ in key aspects from their naturally acquired English.</p>
<p>At its best, learning about grammar is the process of enabling children to understand the structures of English. This <a href="https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/handle/10871/16506">can help them to improve their own writing</a> in a range of styles, and provides a foundation from which they can understand how the grammars of other languages differ from their own. At its worst, learning about grammar is about acquiring abstract terminology and <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-grammar-pedants-and-fashion-victims-have-in-common-55248">a set of nit-picking</a> (and occasionally outdated or simply invented) rules about “correct” grammar. This can result in children losing all interest in their own language, as well as any faith in their own ability to write well. </p>
<p>These two poles of grammar teaching – the “descriptive” (learning to describe structure) and the “prescriptive” (learning a set of prescriptions about language) – have been evident in the teaching of grammar from the outset.</p>
<p>The government’s own aims are sometimes nakedly prescriptive. The fact that “children will be expected to understand how to use the subjunctive” was trumpeted as a key feature of the higher standards in English introduced when the revised <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-primary-curriculum-to-bring-higher-standards-in-english-maths-and-science">National Curriculum</a> was announced in 2012. This decision makes little sense given that the use of the subjunctive is <a href="https://grammarianism.wordpress.com/2015/05/21/does-english-have-a-subjunctive/">rapidly dropping out of even the most formal English</a>. </p>
<h2>Grammar obsessions</h2>
<p>Before the 18th century, English grammar was rarely taught explicitly. If you learned grammar, you learned it via grammars of other languages, most notably Latin. The original purpose of grammar schools, first set up during the medieval period, was to teach Latin.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=579&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=579&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=579&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=728&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=728&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/121037/original/image-20160503-19828-12yivg5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=728&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Grammar obsessive: Robert Lowth.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ARobertLowthBishop.jpg">Engraving by LE Pine</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The 18th century saw an explosion in the publication of books about English grammar. The most influential grammarian of his day was Robert Lowth, whose 1762 <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tqgifS7RsAkC&redir_esc=y">Short Introduction to English Grammar</a> went through over 40 editions before 1800. Lowth has often been held responsible for all later prescriptive rules, including the split infinitive. As <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/The_Bishop_s_Grammar.html?id=n5_fQaPvXGYC&redir_esc=y">Ingrid Tieken Boon van Ostade</a> has shown, however, Lowth’s prescriptivism is less evident than has generally been assumed. He certainly had nothing to say about the split infinitive.</p>
<p>Still, the success of Lowth’s Grammar prompted others to emulate him and brought about a surge of linguistic consciousness quite unlike anything before. Grammar books became one of the publishing phenomena of the day. The result was a circular process. </p>
<p>The idea that incorrect grammar was a terrible social stigma meant that there was a lucrative market for self-improving grammar books. <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=sPXpnvI44gwC&dq=ian+michael+teaching+of+english&source=gbs_navlinks_s">Many authors</a> hastened to supply this market by writing grammar books, which reinforced the idea that bad grammar was a terrible social stigma. Along the way, many new “rules” were formulated by grammarians keen to fill their pages, and there was a proliferation of exercises in bad grammar designed to test students’ mastery of these rules.</p>
<h2>What the Romans didn’t</h2>
<p>In his preface, Lowth writes that: “The principal design of a grammar of any language is to teach us to express ourselves with propriety in that language.” This line of reasoning led one of his imitators, <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tfVeAAAAcAAJ&dq=william+milns+the+well+bred+scholar&source=gbs_navlinks_s">William Milns</a>, to make claims such as: “<em>Latiné loqui</em>, the speaking of correct Latin was an accomplishment which even the natives of ancient Rome could not attain but by long and assiduous study.” </p>
<p>No linguist today believes that Roman school children had to be drilled in <em>amo, amas, amat</em> in order to speak their native language fluently. Yet, pressures towards a prescriptive teaching of grammar remain, particularly in the context of the new nationally administered test. </p>
<p>The need to reduce grammar to something that can easily be tested through multiple choice questions gives the impression that grammar is a subject for which there are always simple right and wrong answers. It also confuses the ability to understand language structure with the ability to obey arbitrary, prescriptive rules.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/57606/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jane Hodson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>New, harder tests for primary school children have raised questions about the purpose of learning grammar.Jane Hodson, Senior Lecturer in English Language and Literature, University of SheffieldLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/455872015-08-03T23:55:32Z2015-08-03T23:55:32ZWhat spelling bees can tell us about learning to spell – and what they get wrong<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90671/original/image-20150803-15124-zsbkt6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Spelling isn't about memorising, it's about meaning.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Courtesy of Network Ten</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The world is divided into three types of people. Those who can spell – and know it. Those who can’t spell – and are ashamed of it. Those who can’t spell – and pretend they don’t care.</p>
<p>Spelling bees are full of the first type. They are usually <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com.au/where-are-they-now-scripps-national-spelling-bee-champions-2015-5#1992-winner-amanda-goad-went-to-harvard-law-school-and-became-a-staff-lawyer-on-the-aclus-lgbt-and-hiv-rights-project-">clever kids who can do much more than spell</a>. </p>
<p>Spelling bees don’t do much for the self esteem of the rest of the population that struggles with spelling. However, we CAN all be good spellers and if we are not, it is because we <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-some-kids-cant-spell-and-why-spelling-tests-wont-help-20497">haven’t been taught how words work</a>.</p>
<h2>How do we learn to spell?</h2>
<p>We don’t learn to spell words simply by being surrounded by them. There are many avid readers who can’t spell. Educated adults know around 60,000 words and they didn’t learn to spell those words just by remembering the look of each one. Spelling isn’t about “<strong>looking</strong>”. </p>
<p>We don’t learn our words by their sounds. Not only can hearing impaired students spell – and spell very well, as evidenced by one of the contestants on <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/the-great-australian-spelling-bee-gets-the-nation-buzzing-over-spelling-20150803-giqqjp.html">the Great Australian Spelling Bee</a> – but most words simply cannot be sounded out.
Spelling isn’t about “<strong>hearing</strong>”.</p>
<p>Spelling is about “<strong>meaning</strong>”. </p>
<p>When we know what the word means but can’t remember how to spell it, thinking about the meaning can help us spell it. When we read a word and don’t know what it means, unravelling its spelling can help us understand the word.</p>
<h2>How DO words make their meaning?</h2>
<p>The two questions we should ask when trying to spell a word are:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>What does this word mean?</p>
<p>How does this word make its meaning?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Children usually spell <em>magician</em> as they hear it – “majishun”. If we ask them to think about what the word means, they will tell us it is a person who does magic. That gives us the base word <em>magic</em>, and now we can hear the “ic” ending that disappears in <em>magician</em>.</p>
<p>Knowing the word is from French helps us choose a “g” to make the middle sound in “magic”.</p>
<p><em>Magician</em> makes its meaning by adding the suffix “ian” to the end of <em>magic</em>. This turns the base word <em>magic</em> into the person who does that word. It is a suffix that does this work in many other words that end in “ic”, e.g. electrician, physician and mathematician.</p>
<p>Understanding how <em>magician</em> makes its meaning uncovers the logic of its spelling. English spelling is not random and chaotic but neither is it natural and innate. English spelling is a human invention that has evolved over 1500 years of invasions, explorations, innovations, exchanges and egos. It needs to be taught.</p>
<h2>Spelling improves learning in all areas of schooling</h2>
<p>When spelling is focused on meaning, and how words make their meaning, spelling improves and <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20799003">so does reading comprehension, writing and vocabulary</a> across all subjects. </p>
<p>For example, when teaching the concept of <em>perimeter</em> in mathematics the teacher can unpack the two meaningful parts of the word, “peri” – meaning <em>around</em>, and “meter” – meaning <em>to measure</em>.</p>
<p>This helps students spell the word, but it also teaches them that <em>perimeter</em> means they must measure <em>around</em> the shape. This clearly differentiates the mathematical concept of <em>perimeter</em> from <em>area</em> – two concepts students often confuse. </p>
<p>It also turns a long word of nine letters into two much more manageable chunks to learn to spell.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/90673/original/image-20150803-15127-x1hyl8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Knowing what the word means makes it easier to spell.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Courtesy of Network Ten</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What can we learn from spelling bees?</h2>
<p>Watching contestants in spelling bees can show us how good spellers spell. In the big US spelling bees, which have been captivating that nation for decades, the contestants are allowed to ask a number of questions as they attempt to spell their words. </p>
<p>They can ask for the meaning of the word and this helps unpack any of the meaningful parts of the word. For example, <em>magic</em> and <em>ian</em>. </p>
<p>They can ask to hear the word in a sentence so they know what kind of word it is, and this may help them decide how to spell some of the sounds they can hear. For example, choosing <em>ian</em> rather than <em>ion</em>.</p>
<p>They can ask for the word’s origin and this can help them decide which letters are most likely to represent the sounds they can hear. For example, choosing <em>g</em> rather than <em>j</em>, and <em>c</em> rather than <em>k</em> in a French origin word. </p>
<p>Before giving their answer they often write the word to visually check their spelling.</p>
<p>Each of these questions gives an insight into how good spellers tackle spelling. They don’t just memorise a dictionary. </p>
<h2>What do spelling bees get wrong?</h2>
<p>We learn to spell words best while they are doing their day job – communicating. Spelling bees take words away from their day job, and place them in some sort of party game. </p>
<p>Words do nothing and mean nothing when they sit by themselves in long lists - randomly selected and disconnected from context. When spelling words are learned from isolated lists, they are learned as a discrete skill and quickly forgotten. This explains why the words learned for the Friday spelling test <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-some-kids-cant-spell-and-why-spelling-tests-wont-help-20497">are often forgotten</a> by the time Monday comes around again. </p>
<h2>An opportunity lost?</h2>
<p>The only question some contestants asked in the Australian version of the Spelling Bee was “Can I have the definition of the word?”. Perhaps the other questions which feature in US spelling bees were not allowed.</p>
<p>That would be a shame, because having the children simply bark letters back at the judge just reinforces the misconception that good spelling is the freakish talent of a lucky few, and robs us all of an opportunity to improve our own spelling.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Further reading: <a href="https://theconversation.com/spelling-bees-dont-teach-kids-literacy-or-much-else-39692">Spelling bees don’t teach kids literacy, or much else</a></em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45587/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<h4 class="border">Disclosure</h4><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Misty Adoniou has received recent government funding to investigate the needs of refugee learners, and to evaluate the implementation of Professional Standards for Teachers. She is affiliated with ACT association for Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), and sits on the Board of Directors for TESOL International. She has provided professional learning on spelling to teachers in many jurisdictions across Australia.</span></em></p>Spelling bees don’t do much for the self esteem of the rest of the population that struggles with spelling. However, we CAN all be good spellers and if we are not, it is because we haven’t been taught how words work.Misty Adoniou, Senior Lecturer in Language, Literacy and TESL, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/354772014-12-17T03:49:20Z2014-12-17T03:49:20ZTime for a New Year’s resolution? Definately? Defiantly? Definitely!<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=450&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67441/original/image-20141217-19891-6mjn7m.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=566&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Looking for a New Year’s resolution? Forget losing weight, exercising more and quitting the bad stuff. How about we all resolve to spell “definitely” correctly … and “separate” … and “lose” … and “you’re” …</p>
<h2>Spelling is a treasure hunt</h2>
<p>We all have words that trip us up and it is tempting to blame the apparent randomness of English spelling for our errors, and absolve ourselves of any responsibility for getting them right. After all, spell-check will fix them for us. </p>
<p>But when we rely on spell-check we miss out on some great learning. Contrary to popular opinion, English spelling is not random and chaotic. The spelling of a word is the story of its meaning and history. Spelling is a fascinating treasure hunt - a genealogy of the English language.</p>
<p>There are five ways into a word:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Think about the meaning of the word </p></li>
<li><p>Unpack the way the word is making that meaning by looking for the base word and prefixes and suffixes</p></li>
<li><p>Find out where the word has come from</p></li>
<li><p>Listen to the sounds in the word</p></li>
<li><p>Check if any spelling rules apply</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Good spellers use all of these strategies. Poor spellers rely on sounds - so it is odd that we focus almost exclusively on sounds with poor spellers in schools, denying them the very tools that could help them most.</p>
<h2>Getting spelling right</h2>
<p>Rather than provide an accusatory list of the “most annoying” spelling errors of 2014, I’m offering a “genealogical” approach to getting them right in 2015. </p>
<p>Definitley, definately, defiantly. </p>
<p>This is <em>definitely</em> the most commonly misspelled word I see in my work with undergraduates. It’s also the first response to all questions asked of athletes - “Yeah, definitely”. So it is must be a word worth investigating!</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=178&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=178&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=178&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=224&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=224&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/67440/original/image-20141217-19879-1dh8b4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=224&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Damian Du Toit</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Let’s take the word back to its roots - <em>definite</em>. <em>Definite</em> is an adjective that we can use to describe nouns - a <em>definite</em> advantage. </p>
<p>We add the suffix ‘ly’ to turn the adjective into an adverb - <em>definite</em> + ly. An adverb gives us more information about verbs and adjectives. For example,</p>
<p>Interviewer: “You must be relieved to have the win”. </p>
<p>Sportsperson: “Yeah, definitely [relieved]”. </p>
<p>Interviewer: “It was a great match”. </p>
<p>Sportsperson: “Yeah, definitely [was]”.</p>
<p>So “<em>definite</em>” + “ly” won’t be “<em>definit</em>” + “ley”. </p>
<p>You can use this understanding of how suffixes work to get all those “ly” endings right - truly, madly, deeply right. </p>
<p>It works for “ty” as well. So next time you are stuck on safety (or is it saftey?) and ninety (or is it nintey?), strip them back to their base and suffix - safe + ty, nine + ty.</p>
<p>It will also help with accidentally (not accidently) and publicly (not publically).</p>
<p>Remember, we put the suffix “ly” on the end of adjectives to turn them into adverbs. Accident is a noun, so we can’t write accident + ly. To turn accident into an adjective we add the suffix “al” to make “accidental”. Now we have an adjective to which we can add “ly” - accidental + ly.</p>
<p>“Public” is a noun as in “the general public”. But it can also be an adjective as in “a public statement”. So we can put the “ly” on the end of “public” - “public” + “ly”. </p>
<h2>Sounds right?</h2>
<p>But what about “definately” - why is that such a common error? And if it is one of your errors how can you fix it? </p>
<p>The reason for this error accounts for about 50% of our spelling errors as adults. When we get to that second “i” in <em>definitely</em> we hit a very special sound in English called the schwa. The schwa is that caveman sounding grunt - “uh”. In Australian English it seems to be everywhere - on the end of mother and tractor, and in the middle of words like “defin_i_te” and “separate”. In Kiwi English it’s there in words like “f_i_sh” and “ch_i_ps”. </p>
<p>It is a sound we can write in any number of ways and in “<em>definitely</em>” many of us opt for an “a”. So when sounding out lets us down (and it so often does in English spelling) go back to meaning and look at the base word - “<em>definite</em>”. </p>
<p>This is where a little family history comes in handy. “<em>Definite</em>” shares the same Latin root as “<em>finite</em>”. It means to be bound by something, to have limits. And in “<em>finite</em>” that pesky schwa sounds disappears and we can hear the second “i” making a much less ambiguous sound that leads us more directly to choosing the letter “i”.</p>
<h2>First rule of spelling - what does it mean?</h2>
<p>And as for “defiantly” - well that it is a different word altogether, from the root word “defy”. This is an important reminder that correct spelling is pointless if you don’t know the meaning of the word. And I’ve written before on <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-some-kids-cant-spell-and-why-spelling-tests-wont-help-20497">the pointlessness of spelling tests</a> and spelling lists for this very reason.</p>
<h2>How do we learn?</h2>
<p>We learn new information by making connections to existing information. Stories about words give us context, and a logic we can connect to next time we need to spell the word. And when we look at words this way, not only do we improve our spelling but we build our vocabulary as well. </p>
<p>Spelling reformists who’d like to change English so it is written the way it sounds would be destroying the language’s DNA and wiping out the family history of every word. Advocates of “phonics first” approaches are doing the same thing. Spelling is reduced to abstract sounds and letters, rather than the fascinating exploration of word meaning, language history and vocabulary building it should be. </p>
<h2>Make your resolution now</h2>
<p>So what is your spelling Achilles heel? Occasionally, independent, accommodation, recommend, relevant, embarrass, February? Tackle it head on in the new year by investigating its family history. </p>
<p>And if you are inspired to share your most annoying spelling error in the comments section, give us your strategies for getting it right too. </p>
<p>This is one New Year’s resolution that is easy to keep, and with benefits well beyond January 31st.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/35477/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Looking for a New Year’s resolution? Forget losing weight, exercising more and quitting the bad stuff. How about we all resolve to spell “definitely” correctly … and “separate” … and “lose” … and “you’re…Misty Adoniou, Senior Lecturer in Language, Literacy and TESL, University of CanberraLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.