"The other day, Master, I tried to convince Ge B Es of the necessity to make the World-Language phonetic, in a phanatic manner. I told him that if it wasn't for his children, who are native speakers, then at least for the benefit of the foreigners, adults and children all over the globe, who have to learn from scratch and out of books. I could not convince him."
"Did you not tell him that many ENGLISH children first pronounce 'truth' as 'troof', 'clothes' as 'kloves' and so forth, just because they have not yet learned to read? When they start reading, they have already mastered the 'th' and, used to the general stupidity of hearing 'khet' but written 'cat' yet this with the 'a' of 'Cate' (khate), they see nothing unusual in the writing of 'th' for that sound, nor in always writing 'wh' when hearing 'hw' (hweel, hwen, hwich, etc. ). Tell him then, that it is ONLY after foreigners start believing their teachers who advise to use the unvoiced 'f', or the voiced 'v', when 'th' is too difficult (kloves, klofs etc. ), only after that, it is, that they begin to sound intelligible. Tell him that it is only the manner of writing that make Italians pronounce 'think' as 'teenk', that Dutch Diplomats speak of 'udder' and 'turd' for 'other' and 'third'. Both cases would sound clearer was the 'f' or 'v' normally writ. Thus, 'fink'- Feenk, Furd, and Uvver, not over (like cover, clover or mover or ore, o re, res ...). Why not have an f with two curls instead of the th ? Certainly there is no t sound in the th."