Back to part 1.

NEWS SHEET 4. Part 2.


The following is a list of members who are entitled to vote at this year's election. Only one member wished not to have his name included in it. The names of any new members joining between now and the date of the election will be published in NEWS SHEET. We should be grateful to readers who may point out errors or omissions from the list.
[First names, street numbers and names, towns and postcodes have been omitted.]

Prof. J Algeo, University of Georgia, Dept. of English, Athens, Georgia, USA.
Mrs B.D. Askew, Yorks.
Mrs M.P. Asquith, Yorks.
Dr E.A. Betts, University of Miami, Fla, USA.
Mrs E.M. Binns, Cheshire.
Mr A.R. Brown, London.
Mr G.S. Bryden, Edinburgh.
Bund fur vereinfachte rechtschreibung, Zurich, Switzerland.
Mr A.Cashdan, UKRA, The Open University, Milton Keynes.
Miss M.Chaplin, Brighton.
Mr L. Collins, Yorks.
Mrs Collins, Yorks.
Mr S.T. Cradick, Essex.
Mr Ralph Cropper, Kent.
Miss M. Cross, Northants.
Miss B.M.S.T. Darley, London.
Mr W.J.F. Davies, Hants.
Mr Leo. G. Davies, Calif., USA.
Mrs G.Dekker, Yorks.
Mr J.S.Dekker, Yorks.
Mr W.Bryan Dockrell, Scottish Council for Research in Education, Edinburgh.
Prof. John Downing, Faculty of Education, Victoria University, British Columbia, Canada.
Mr Raymond Elser, NJ, USA.
Mrs Eustace, Guildford.
Mr C.E.C. Eustace, London.
Mr S.S. Eustace, London.
Mr L.R. Fennelly, IOW.
Dr Percy Freer, Rondebosch, South Africa.
Mr Stanley Gibbs, Middx.
Mr C.I.C. Harrison-Wallace, Sussex.
Mr R.E. Hayley, London.
Mr Alan Hobson, Caernarvon.
Mr J.Kenneth Jones, London.
Mr G.H. Landsborough, Middx.
Mr K.H. Lavender, Kent.
Mr R.J. Lawler, London.
Mr A.P. Lawson, London.
Dr W.R. Lee, Middx.
Miss V.M. Lengyel, Essex.
Mr J. Fergus McBride, Edinburgh.
Mr Michael McCallion, London.
Mr D.J. McCann, Swindon.
Mrs P. McKeown, Bristol.
The Rt. Hon. The Lord Maybray-King, P.C., Southampton.
Mr R.Mayhew, Calif, USA.
Prof. J.E. Merritt, Milton Keynes.
The Rt.Hon. The Lord Merthyr of Senqhnenydd, P.C., Pembrokeshire.
Mr C. Milburn, Lincoln.
Mr J.E.P. Mordaunt, Devon.
Mr Donald Moyle, Lancs.
Mr H.M. Mustapha, Univ of Essex, Colchester.
Mr G. O'Halloran, London
Mrs E. O'Hara, Co Durham.
Mr C.W. Orange, Bristol.
Mr J.R. Orange, London.
Mrs R.B. Orange, London.
Mr V.P. Paulsen, Calif, USA.
Mr G. Rae, London.
Mrs G. M. Rolls-Willson, Surrey.
Mr W.J. Reed, Kent.
Mr V.G.T. Rosewel1, Wimbledon.
Mr A.E. Rupert, Ontario, Canada.
Mrs J.M. Shelley, Surrey.
Mr E.Smith, Kent.
Prof. D.H. Stott, Ontario, Canada.
Dr A Tauber, NY, USA.
Mr M. Taylor, Hants.
Mr K. Tillema, Ontario, Canada.
Mr Newell Tune, Calif, USA.
Mrs J.A. Turner, Yorks.
Mr Maurice Varney, Worcs.
Prof. G Verboven SUCL, Antwerp, Belgium.
Mrs E.J. White, Yorks.
Mr H.S. Wilkinson, Yorks.
Mrs D.Wilkinson, Yorks.
Mr J. Windsor Lewis, Leeds.
Mr Peter Wright, Stockport.
Dr Arne Zettersten, London.
Dr The Hon. D. Everingham, MHR, Queensland, Australia.
Mr W.Latham, Yorks.
Mrs V. Yule, Victoria, Australia.
Mr Robert L. Carvell, Wisconsin, USA.
Kerry Monahan, NJ, USA.
Dr Bryan Williams, Chichester.
Mr D.W. Latham, Yorks.
Mrs Dorothy Hewling, Exeter.
Mr A.R.G. Burrows, Velez-Malaga, Spain.
Mr D.I. Masson, Leeds.

Internal Open Juncture.

It is generally recognized that the difference between the pronunciation of <nitrate> and <night rate> is the internal open juncture in the latter. This means simply that the speaker feels a break in <night rate> and uses the allophone of /t/ he would normally use at the end of a word instead of the allophone he would normally use before /r/.

These words could be distinguished instead by defining a /tr/ phoneme. To abolish the concept of internal open juncture, one would need to define as a unit phoneme not only /tr/, but /dr/, /pl/, and countless others. The typographic difficulties of such a practice are evident. More important, it would violate an axiom fundamental to science:- the most economical theory that fits the facts is the best.

The word <kittenish> is commonly written in phonetic notation as ['kitņiʃ], with a syllabic [ņ] distinct from [n] in <catnip> ['katnip]. The [ņ] in <kittenish> is syllabic, however, because the speaker feels that [iʃ] is a suffix added to ['kitņ]. He feels a break, or internal open juncture, between ['kitņ] and [iʃ].

Recognizing this open juncture, one will find no word in the English language that has syllabic [ņ] in a context where nonsyllabic [n] could occur. Thus it is clear that syllabic [ņ] is a member of the /n/ phoneme, and <kittenish> is better analysed as /kitn+isc/, where the stress marks /'/ for primary stress, /-/ for secondary stress, and /+/ for weak stress are placed at the open juncture preceding the indicated stress. (The reasons for analysing /ʃ/ as /sc/ are beyond the scope of this paper.)

In some positions [i] and [j] have complementary distribution:- [pin], <yell>[jel]. In other positions there is diaphonic variation, some speakers saying ['mi:diel] while others say ['mi:diəl]. In the ending of <holier> most speakers have [i], but in <failure> every speaker has [j]. This contrast arises because in <holier> the speaker feels open juncture between the root and the suffix. Thus [i] and [j] have complementary distribution and should be assigned to the same phoneme /i/. <Failure> and <holier> can be analysed as /feilir/ and and /howli+r/.

A parallel case is [u] and [w]. The distribution of these related sounds is complementary, with diaphonic variation in <usual>. Therefore they should be assigned to the sane phoneme, which be represented by /w/. <Usual> is analysed as /iwziwal/, <wood> as /wwd/.

<Least> can be defined as /liist/ if <holiest> is analysed as howli+ist/. <Yiddish> must be excluded as a foreign word, and several ephemeral cant words must be ignored.

Similarly <boot> can be defined as /bwwt/, noting that /ww/ exhibits two allophones, the <oo> of <boot> and the <wo> of <wolf>. The first allophone always follows close juncture or precedes a voiced spirant or (if an example existed) open juncture. The second allophone appears otherwise. Again foreign words and cant words must be excluded.

The contrast between the medial consonant clusters of <homestead> and <Hampstead> is the contrast of open and close juncture. The [p] or [ʔ] often heard in <Hampstead> is a regular feature of close juncture in this co nsonant cluster and would be redundant in a phonematic description. The same is true of the consonant clusters in <empty, pumpkin, chamfer, warmth, glimpse, redemption>/emti, pumkin, camfr, wormθ glims, re'demsian/.

The sound represented by <ng> in <sing> has a distribution analogous to /mb, nd/ rather than /m, n/, and it would be desirable if this sound could be derived from a phonologic cluster such as /ng/. The <ng> contrasts in <singer: finger> and <wineglass: wingless> offer no difficulty if the role of internal open juncture in these words is understood:- /sing+r, fingr, wain-glas, wing+les/.

Somebody from the Midlands would rime <finger> and <singer>, and it might be asked whether he has no internal open juncture in <singer>. Whatever the accent, /sing+r/ phonologically has internal open juncture. There is no phonetic realization in the Midlands accent because /ng/ is always phonetically the same [Gg], whether before close juncture as in <finger> or before open juncture as in <sing>, <singer>.


Proper attention to internal open juncture allows greater economy of description than has been usual in phonematic transcription. The distribution of phonemes becomes more regular. The inventory of phonemes is greatly reduced and for the spelling reformer the contest between digraphs and new letters becomes largely irrelevant. Departures from traditional practice can be with the following examples. For Comparison, a conventional phonetic notation and New Spelling are also given.

[In the table below, G should be upside down.]


night rate
tarry (adj.)
tarry (verb)
furrier (adj.)
furrier (noun)


' fiGgə (r)

niet raet

Edward Smith.


We have now reached the stage where we ought to be able to keep NEWS SHEET stocked with contributed articles. We have many members whose widespread knowledge and experience would be of interest and benefit to our readers and we look to these to provide us with interesting material to publish. We will, of course, be willing to print good items written by non-members also. We cannot, unfortunately, pay for articles but we will be happy to send free additional copies of NEWS SHEET to authors who wish to have them.

Articles will be preferred which have some bearing on spelling reform, the teaching of reading and writing, the design of orthographies and also on linguistics, phonetics, phonology, etc. Descriptions of personal experiences in these fields would also be welcomed.

Articles may be as eruditely written as Edward Smith's "Internal Open Juncture" in this issue or as topically written as the unsigned item "Spelling Reform: the Shape of Things to Come" in NEWS SHEET 3. Authors should, however, remember that the majority of the members of the Society are not academic phoneticians, trained teachers nor specialist linguists. If, therefore, writers wish to use technical terms which are not in common knowledge they should take care to explain them, preferably (as Mr Smith has done) inside the text of the article - although footnotes may in some cases be acceptable.

We are not able to reproduce a special script nor lettering which we feel that the most phonetic transcription New Spelling of the 1948 edition is quite suitable. Authors who particularly wish to have their work reproduced in a special script would have to send us their work suitably paged and set out in a medium from which we could have it printed. The only such medium we can use for the next issue or so will be ordinary waxed duplicating 'skins'. Mr Smith sent us beautifully typed 'skins' for his article in this issue.

Later, we hope to be able to reproduce by some kind of offset process when an ordinary typescript will serve. But we will give plenty of notice when this is to happen.

At present the editor is taking responsibility for accepting articles for publication but has invited two members of the committee with special knowledge to assist him with advice in their own fields on articles about which he may be doubtful or which may have been the subject of a disagreement. It would be pretentious to talk about an editorial board at this stage of our development but if members with special knowledge would volunteer to be advisers this would be very helpful. In the interval we invite all our members - and others who feel they have something relevant to say - to bombard us with articles for publication!


When Kingsley Read joined the Society not long before his death he had already made his reputation in the field of spelling reform and had behind him a long and fruitful career. He entered the Birmingham School of Art in 1903 and an intensive study of lettering there and later became joined to a growing interest in phonetics. These together led to his entering, along with 476 others, into the Shaw alphabet competition. He shared the prize money with three other contestants but six months later Shaw's executor appointed Read as sole responsible designer. He spent four years testing correspondence in the Shaw alphabet. He later produced a 'Junior Quickscript' and a 'Senior Quickscript'.

In spite of the fact that 13,000 library copies of Shaw's 'Androcles and the Lion' were printed in the Shaw Alphabet and sent out free of charge to libraries all over the world, Education Authorities and, indeed, the general public showed little interest. Read became convinced that Shaw's concept could be pushed no further. He came to the conclusion that an enlargement of the Roman alphabet was the only promising means to reform English spelling. During his last years he set to work again and produced such an alphabet - the 'Spel'. He joined the Society to get it better known and, if it had not been for his death, might well have presented a paper on it at our conference this year.

Back to the top.
Forward to part 3, part 4.