For USA English-based phonetics,

English is the lingua franca of the world. It’s time to rebased phonetics on English rather than a hodge podge of languages and special symbols as the IPA does. The IPA was replaced by SAMPA in 1986, but SAMPA has the same problem. Neither system is used in USA for reading instruction, or in newspapers, or government publications. Instead truespel phonetics was created (also in 1986) to solve this problem. It’s free. See tutorials at Use English-Based Phonetics - Truespel Phonetics - The free converter is at For the first time, English literacy can integrate reading instruction with dictionaries, translation guides, remedial aids in one phonetic system. Truepsel phonetics is only USA accent (75% of native speakers are in USA and Canada)
Tom Zurinskas, creator of truespel phonetics

Tom, can you convert your paragraph into truespel to see what it looks like.

I must say that I am not in favour of this kind artificial writing system. We all need to learn to read and write the way the language is written, whatever language we are learning. We need to listen to hear the sounds, and to be able to relate the sounds to the writing system.

However, it is possible that some people would find this kind of phonetic system useful.

It is at least useless, if not harmful. But to have such kind of converter for IPA would be fun!

I am also not a fan if IPA
We have mp3, we just need to listen.

I defy anyone to learn Aussie ,Ulster or Southern US vowels using IPA

There is a converter for IPA. It’s The following passage is converted in IPA and truespel phonetics:

“Here is text written in the IPA converter. Does it look like fun?”

hɪ́r ɪ́z tɛ́kst rɪ́tən ɪn ajpié fənɛ́tɪks. də́z ɪ́t lʊ́k lájk fə́n?

The same sentence using the converter at

Heer iz tekst ritin in thu truespel kunvverter. Duz it look liek fun?

My take is that the IPA thwarts phonetic usage rather than promoting it. The IPA is not used in the USA in k-12 schools, newspapers or gov. publications. It’s time to upgrade to truespel, the only English based pronunciation guide. Big capability - the ability to “write” phonetics easily, using just letters. This allows testing of what people hear or think they hear for aptitude assessment or remediation. Phonemic awareness is the key correlate for a child’s reading success. -Stanovich

There is an IPA converter at Compare that converter to the truespel phonetic converter at I dare say the IPA converter is not fun. It’s painful.
The beauty of truespel phonetics is that it’s writeable. This brings up tremendous evaluation capabilities for phonemic awareness, the key correlate to reading success - Stanovich

The author has a misconception of IPA. It attempts to map out the phonetics of all spoken language sounds, not just a “hodgepodge”. Also, I fear a learner of English might confuse the “truespel” for the actual word spelling and then look awfully silly when attempting to write.

Another problem I see with it is that it does not seem all that consistent. I “tranlsated” the following four words: paste bat saw palm. They were truespelled to paest bat sau paam. For one thing, Here in the Midwest “heart” of America we pronounce the L in palm. Hearing palm pronounced like “paam” immediately brings to mind a 1930’s Boston gangster. Also, “bat” didn’t change spelling, meaning that the a as pronounced in bat is the de facto pronunciation of the a in this system, a pronunciation which only exists in English. Also, native speakers themselves will never adapt to this. "Paste text here or click
above to get samples " becomes “Paest tekst heer or klik
ubbuv tue get sampoolz”, which actually made me giggle when I read it. Anything listed in truespel looks like a 2nd grader wrote it and I find it impossible to take any of it seriously.

And why “sampoolz”? As an American hearing someone say sampoolz would sound very foreign to me. Should it not be sampls or samplz?

The pronunciation model was taken from the spoken voices of “talking” dictioaries, mainly American Heritage. I’ve used and , which has UK, USA and a third pronunciaton button to click to hear accents. Because I use no special symbols in truespel, I had to listen to all words to spell schwas out. I found they stand for many sounds. This is heard for the first time via talking dictionaries that we never had before. (They don’t say the “l” in “palm”)
Funny how well kids can spell phonetically. (English has twice as many dyslexics as phonetically spelled languages, like Italian.)
IBM’s “Writing to Read” had up to 100,000 kids use their phonetic system in the 80’s via PC Jrs. In k-1 they typed words,even stories, as they learned to read. The kids could shift to traditional spelling was not a problem. ETS testing went well. Unfortunately the system was expensive, proprietary, and the creator, Dr. Martin, died suddenly.
The ~ool sound is not well realized. It’s pronounced as in “wool” ~wool. So examples (egzzampoolz) as sample (~sampool) have it. Also “trouble” ~trubool, "table ~taebool, “carole” ~kairool. Lots of them. You need a vowel for each syllable.
Face it. All phonetics seems funny. But traditional spelling is funnier yet Remember this is 40 spellings for 40 sounds, that’s it.

There is an IPA converter at

Thanks for that one! :slight_smile:

talking dictionary voices are at best an approximation of human speech. Would not the model be better based on human speakers?

what is your platform for this system? Where is your market? It will be impossible to truespel vocabulary from non English language words with this system as there are many sounds in other languages that do not exist in English.

The speakers in the talking dictionaries are human. Check them out at I like the speaker icon best.
Lots of market especially ESL. Truespel book 1 investigates 13 other popular languages for 60 common words/phrases. There were 10 new sounds, thus 10 new phoneme spellings. French had the most. See
There are 4 truespel books.