Proper spelling conveys nuance of meaning lost in "txtng"
Spelling and Grammar help make the English language so useful and powerful.
Creating nuance is something that requires proper spelling and grammar. Without it, English loses much of it's precision. The precision available within the English language is what has made it the language of science and medicine internationally.
Take this as an example: "Even the simple apostrophe is a very useful contraption for the construction of a contraction."
Modern (read: idiotic) spelling: "eevin da simpul uhposstruhfee is a verry yusefull kuntrapshun 4 da kunstrukshun uv uh kuntrakshun" destroys all the visual clues to the meaning of the statement, makes it actually LONGER to write, and loses nuances of pronunciation as well.
There are reasons that the key words all begin with "con", and all in "tion"
There is a difference between pronunciation of "shun" and "tion".. the first is simply "shunn".. the second is more like "shee-unn".. but the "ee" part is only barely perceptible.
There are fine nuances of meaning in simple words such as "its" and "it's".. one of which is a possessive noun, and the other a contraction of the phrase "it is." Are they going to suddenly mean only one thing, or is the surrounding context going to be the only clue?
How about "Their," "There," and "They're" ?? One is is a plural possessive noun, the second is a noun that means something completely different, and the third is a contraction of the phrase "They are."
Again, there are VERY slight differences in the pronunciation of these three.
"Their" is pronounced properly with the beginning of the word starting at a higher pitch than the nominal pitch of the speaker's voice, which then "falls" into the second half of the word.
"There" is properly pronounced with the entire word at the nominal pitch of the speakers voice.
"They're" is properly pronounced with the same raised pitch at the beginning of the word as in "their" and a slight elongation of the middle of the word where the "y" is.
Go ahead and say (out loud!) "They're not home right now, but their house is over there."
These very slight variations in cadence make it much easier to pick out which of the meanings should be ascribed to the pronounced word, without having to extrapolate from the current context of the word. This makes communication of meaning significantly faster and more accurate.
Still further, if you extend this nonsense into other languages, things such as the French, "Voila" become "wallah" and then are drastically mispronounced. (since the pronunciation of the French is vwah-lah, not wah-lah.)
The article seemed to state that French and Spanish spellings were not as dependent and they don't need spelling bees in either of those languages.. but those are two of the most closely related to English. (English being close to 50% Germanic, close to 50% Latin-root, with a mix of Gaelic, Norse etc.. etc.. thrown in for good measure.. and both French and Spanish being true Latin-Root languages, with some other influences.)
i d nt wnt to c dis knd uv nonsens.. I would much rather read something intelligently put together! If one cannot learn to structure one's thoughts, one will be a poor communicator and hence a poor learner, and the entire world will suffer for it!