Editing English orthography (section)

=== Underlying representation ===
Like many other [[alphabet]]ic orthographies, English spelling does not represent non-contrastive [[phonetics|phonetic]] sounds (that is, minor differences in pronunciation which are not used to distinguish between different words).

Although the letter {{vr|t}} is pronounced by most speakers with [[Aspiration (phonetics)|aspiration]] {{IPA|[tʰ]}} at the beginning of words, this is never indicated in the spelling, and, indeed, this phonetic detail is probably not noticeable to the average native speaker not trained in phonetics.

However, unlike some orthographies, English orthography often represents a very abstract [[underlying representation]] (or [[morphophonology|morphophonemic]] form) of English words.{{sfn|Rollings|2004|pages=16–19}}{{sfn|Chomsky|Halle|1968}}{{sfn|Chomsky|1970}}

{{Blockquote| [T]he postulated underlying forms are systematically related to the conventional orthography ... and are, as is well known, related to the underlying forms of a much earlier historical stage of the language. There has, in other words, been little change in lexical representation since [[Middle English]], and, consequently, we would expect ... that [[lexicon|lexical]] representation would differ very little from dialect to dialect in [[Modern English]] ... [and] that conventional orthography is probably fairly close to optimal for all modern English dialects, as well as for the attested dialects of the past several hundred years.{{sfn|Chomsky|Halle|1968|page=54}}}}

In these cases, a given [[morpheme]] (i.e., a component of a word) has a fixed spelling even though it is pronounced differently in different words. An example is the [[past tense]] [[suffix]] -{{vr|ed}}, which may be pronounced variously as {{IPA|/t/}}, {{IPA|/d/}}, or {{IPA|/ᵻd/}}{{efn|name=schwa|The vowel of the suffixes -{{angbr|ed}} and -{{vr|es}} may belong to the phoneme of either {{IPA|/ɪ/}} or {{IPA|/ə/}} depending on dialect, and {{angbr IPA|ᵻ}} is a shorthand for "either {{IPA|/ɪ/}} or {{IPA|/ə/}}". This usage of the symbol is borrowed from the ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]''.}} (for example, ''pay'' {{IPAc-en|ˈ|p|eɪ}}, ''payed'' {{IPAc-en|ˈ|p|eɪ|d}}, ''hate'' {{IPAc-en|ˈ|h|eɪ|t}}, ''hated'' {{IPAc-en|ˈ|h|eɪ|t|ᵻ|d}}). As it happens, these different pronunciations of -{{vr|ed}} can be predicted by a few [[phonology|phonological]] rules, but that is not the reason why its spelling is fixed.

Another example involves the vowel differences (with accompanying stress pattern changes) in several related words. For instance, ''photographer'' is derived from ''photograph'' by adding the [[Morphological derivation|derivational]] suffix -{{vr|er}}. When this suffix is added, the vowel pronunciations change largely owing to the moveable stress:

{| class="wikitable"
! Spelling
! Pronunciation
|-
| ''photograph''
| {{IPAc-en|ˈ|f|oʊ|t|ə|ɡ|r|æ|f}} or {{IPAc-en|ˈ|f|oʊ|t|ə|ɡ|r|ɑː|f}}
|-
| ''photographer''
| {{IPAc-en|f|ə|ˈ|t|ɒ|ɡ|r|ə|f|ər}}
|-
| ''photographical''
| {{IPAc-en|ˌ|f|oʊ|t|ə|ˈ|ɡ|r|æ|f|ɪ|k|əl}}
|}

Other examples of this type are the -{{vr|ity}} suffix (as in ''agile'' vs. ''agility'', ''acid'' vs. ''acidity'', ''divine'' vs. ''divinity'', ''sane'' vs. ''sanity''). See also: [[Trisyllabic laxing]].

Another example includes words like ''mean'' {{IPAc-en|ˈ|m|iː|n}} and ''meant'' {{IPAc-en|ˈ|m|ɛ|n|t}}, where {{vr|ea}} is pronounced differently in the two related words. Thus, again, the orthography uses only a single spelling that corresponds to the single morphemic form rather than to the surface phonological form.

English orthography does not always provide an underlying representation; sometimes it provides an intermediate representation between the underlying form and the surface pronunciation. This is the case with the spelling of the regular [[plural]] morpheme, which is written as either -{{vr|s}} (as in ''tat, tats'' and ''hat, hats'') or -{{vr|es}} (as in ''glass, glasses''). Here, the spelling -{{vr|s}} is pronounced either {{IPAslink|s}} or {{IPAslink|z}} (depending on the environment, e.g., ''tats'' {{IPAc-en|ˈ|t|æ|t|s}} and ''tails'' {{IPAc-en|ˈ|t|eɪ|l|z}}) while -{{vr|es}} is usually pronounced {{IPA|/ᵻz/}}{{efn|name=schwa}} (e.g. ''classes'' {{IPA|/ˈklæsᵻz/}}). Thus, there are two different spellings that correspond to the single underlying representation |{{IPA|z}}| of the plural suffix and the three surface forms. The spelling indicates the [[Epenthesis|insertion]] of {{IPA|/ᵻ/}} before the {{IPA|/z/}} in the spelling -{{vr|es}}, but does not indicate the [[Voice (phonetics)|devoiced]] {{IPA|/s/}} distinctly from the unaffected {{IPA|/z/}} in the spelling -{{vr|s}}.

The abstract representation of words as indicated by the orthography can be considered advantageous since it makes etymological relationships more apparent to English readers. This makes writing English more complex, but arguably makes reading English more efficient.{{sfn|Chomsky|1970|page=294}}{{sfn|Rollings|2004|page=17}} However, very abstract underlying representations, such as that of Chomsky & Halle (1968) or of [[underspecification]] theories, are sometimes considered too abstract to accurately reflect the [[communicative competence]] of native speakers. Followers of these arguments believe the less abstract surface forms are more "psychologically real" and thus more useful in terms of [[pedagogy]].{{sfn|Rollings|2004|pages=17–19}}