Spell Check

   Spelling is arbitrary now, but at one time it reflected the speech patterns of those who used the language.

   When the prominent dialect and its speech patterns changed, however, spelling did not, and people felt required to continue using the standardized spellings. Written content is permanent, while speech is not. As a result, people continued their writing patterns even as their speech changed. 

  Sometimes, however, spelling also changes to match speech patterns, despite efforts by academics to maintain spelling and pronunciation. 

   One example is the use of the word "ain't." The apostrophe indicates that something is missing. In this example, the original phrase was "am not," and despite efforts by teachers and upper class speakers to stop it, the new word stayed and expanded. 

  Two current examples are the words "gonna" and "wanna." Both have been common in speech for a long time, but the first, "gonna," is now making its way into print. 

   The first, "going to," as in "going to," is leading its companion into print acceptability. Soon, we will see "wanna" appearing as a replacement for "want to." 

   Already, news announcers on local TV stations are using these and other terms critical teachers would call "corruptions," but that's not likely to change the pattern. 

   Language changes. Spelling lags. 

   Meanwhile, computer spell check programs are wonderfully useful gadgets, but they often check individual words that do not match their lists.

   The single word may be properly spelled, but would be the wrong word. For example, the words carat, karat, caret and carrot are all spelled correctly, but to use carat in reference to gold and karat for a diamond would not be correct. And caret is a proof-reader's mark indicating "insert here." 

  All are pronounced the same, but each has a different meaning.