Monday, December 11, 2006
Poorly-designed labels for kids' drinks are hardly the place to look for linguistic logic but here's a corker nevertheless from Minute Maid (who? - no idea).
Whoa what are you saying man, do you see how they've spelled 'fruit'? That's not logic, it's madness.
Point taken, but don't you think it's actually far more logical to spell the word 'f-r-o-o-t' than 'f-r-u-i-t'? Yes, I know 'Froot' is only a name conjured up by some marketing loon, and let's face it, a couple of hours in a strip-lit meeting room surrounded by other 'marketeers' is likely to make even the sanest spout bollocks.
But 'fruit'. Or, 'frewit' as it conceivably might be pronounced. I mean, why? What's wrong with spelling words as they are sounded?
Steady on you fool, do you know what you're saying?
What vocab snobs in Britain deride as poor American English spelling could also be termed common sense. Why does 'colour' need a 'u'? Color. There, see. And with the constant seepage of US culture into all parts of the globe, will 'English' eventually be identified by American spelling? And called 'American'?
What rot! I shall be writing a very stiff letter to the Daily Mail about this!
After all we have 'Kwik Save' and 'Kwik Fit'. Yes, I know, brand names. But surely a more sensible way to spell the word than 'q-u-i-c-k'. And it's not dissimilar to 'cwic', an olde englishe word that meant 'alive'. Probably because in those days running fast improved one's life expectancy.
So, could spelling be going back to its roots?
Then of course, we have text speak. Or should that be 'txt spk'?