#kind of makes it sound like a proposition

[janmisali]

now, for the previously mentioned unanswered question. (even though this will be above that mention because of the way asks are ordered):

I have one MAJOR disagreement with your spelling reform video. And that is the idea that it would make more sense to break the orthographic relationship between short vowels and their historical long counterparts (like drEss and flEEce). The ONLY people it would benefit are ESL speakers who are generally NOT the intended audience for English spelling reforms. And even if they were, I don't think it'd really help that much because the sounds ARE actually related. BIT is still more related to BITE than it is to BEET, even if it sounds more like the latter and imo, it's very shortsighted(?) no, that's not the word. I guess if there's a word for the kind of mentality that misses the forest for the trees, that'd be it. It'd be reckless to not have a clear orthographic relationship between nation and national. It's the sort of proposition only a liguist would make because they're looking on a purely audio level and not at the patterns.

I also have a small gripe with your example of "phlegm" because you kinda glossed over the ph sounding like an f and never in my life have I actually heard someone pronounce the g in phlegmatic. I do, however agree that ghoschi is WAY better than ghoti.

so did you have a question or like