The English spelling system is “absolutely, unspeakably awful.” That is the conclusion of new research that has found that children face 800 words by the age of 11 that hinder their reading because of the way they are spelt.
Monkey, asparagus, spinach, caterpillar, dwarf, banana, handkerchief, pliers, soldiers, stomach, petal and telescope have all been included on the long list of words that baffle children because they contain letter combinations that are more commonly pronounced in a different way.
The words have all been identified as problematic for reading, as opposed to writing, because of their “phonic unreliability,” according to the study The Most Costly English Spellings. It was presented on June 7 at the conference of the Spelling Society, held at Coventry University, England. Masha Bell, the literacy researcher who carried out the work, argued that there were 200 words on the list that could be improved by simply dropping “surplus letters” such as the “i” in friend or the “u” in shoulder.
“English has an absolutely, unspeakably awful spelling system,” said Bell, a former English teacher and author of the book Understanding English Spelling. “It is the worst of all the alphabetical languages. It is unique in that there are not just spelling problems but reading problems. They do not exist anywhere else.”
Bell argued that the spelling system was a huge financial burden on schools and was to blame for poor literacy results compared with the rest of Europe. In Finland, where words are more likely to be pronounced as they look, children learn to read fluently within three months, she said. In the UK, academics have found that it takes three years for a child to acquire a basic level of competence. The tricky spellings make English particularly difficult for children with dyslexia and those from disadvantaged families, who are less likely to be read to regularly by their parents.
In the research Bell highlights examples of words that have the same pronunciation but different letter combinations. Examples include “to” and “two”; “clean” and “gene”; “same” and “aim”; “day” and “grey”; “kite” and “light”; and “stole” and “coal.”
Then there are those that look alike but sound different, with the combinations of “ea,” “ee” and the letter “o” causing most trouble. Among the words falling into that category are “eight” and “height”, “break” and “dreamt”, and “move” and “post.” The letters “ough” can also be pronounced in a number of different ways.
Simplifying the system would transform literacy results, Bell said, but people were resistant to change.
“People feel that they have suffered so much at the hands of English spelling that they are reluctant to look at it,” she said.
Yet other countries have made changes. Last month the parliament in Portugal, where the spelling system is also thought to be complicated, voted to reform and simplify it, bringing it into line with Brazil.
“In 1928 the Turks changed their entire alphabet from Arabic to Latin,” said John Wells, professor of phonetics at University College London and president of the Spelling Society. “It happened in the Soviet Union.”
In Germany there were changes made in the 1990s to make the writing system more consistent. English has also developed with words such as “olde” and “worlde” dropping the “e.”
Wells wants to see things change again and feels there are two possible approaches. The first would be to simplify the way in which words are spelt and then allow people to choose whether to use the new or old system, while the second approach would involve a complete change.
“The Spelling Society favors the first,” he said.
Chris Davis, spokesman for the UK’s National Primary Headteachers’ Association, said the spelling system had a major impact on children’s literacy progress: “It definitely slows English children down. In international comparisons, languages that are phonetically uniform always come top.”
But he said that teachers would be reluctant to see things change.
“It would be such a major revolution that people would find it very difficult to contemplate,” he said. “There are already problems because of the different spelling system in America, but there would also be resistance about going down that route. I think it is an ownership thing, that it is our language.”
Davis said people felt that spelling was linked to the origin of words.
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is