---
id:
aliases: []
title: _Gregg Notehand_
tags:
  - authorship/original
  - destiny/permanent
  - status/incomplete
  - topic/shorthand
  - type/media-commentary
---
# _Gregg Notehand_

Gregg Notehand is a simplified form of Gregg Shorthand.
It is described in the namesake [[leslie-et-al_1968_gregg-notehand]]

This note is a description and critique
of both the book and the shorthand,
since the latter is fully described nowhere else.

## Critiques

The lessons use sounds-like-(letter)-in-(word) type phoneme definitions,
and generally suffer from a facile understanding of phonology.
Totally unacceptable for a proposed alternative alphabet,
but then the text does not understand that's what it's proposing.

> [[leslie-et-al_1968_gregg-notehand#2-8. Notehand principles]]
> **Silent letters omitted.**
> In the English language many words contain letters that are not pronounced.
> In Notehand these silent letters are omitted,
> and only those sounds in a word are written that are actually pronounced.
> For example,
> in the word say, the y would not be written because it is not pronounced;
> say would be written s-a.
> The word face would be written f-a-s;
> the final e would be omitted because it is not pronounced,
> and the c would be represented by the s stroke because it is pronounced s.
>
> What letters in the following words would not be written in Notehand
> because they are not pronounced?
>
> * day
> * eat
> * main
> * mean
> * save
> * steam

***

> [[leslie-et-al_1968_gregg-notehand#2-8. Notehand principles]]
> Gregg Notehand is easy to learn---easier, actually, than longhand. Why?
> In longhand, there are many different ways of writing a given letter;
> in Gregg Notehand, there is only one way.

This is a baffling first paragraph.
Without further clarification,
the text seems to be implying that students learning longhand
are expected to learn to read and write
many forms of the same letter,
where reality is the opposite.

In fact, it is plain to see from the lessons in the text
that Gregg Notehand had far more individual character variation
than is accepted of the English alphabet.

The text does not specify winding direction for circular forms
(e.g. "a" and "e"),
nor is the illustrator consistent between words.
For many words, neither option is more intuitive,
and the choice _radically_ changes its form.

More damningly, in Lesson 26 we learn
the "s" stroke _is allowed to be written backwards._

It's a very strange choice,
claiming that a shorthand is less ambiguous
than the writing system it replaces.
I'm sure its possible,
but English doesn't have enough frills to cut off.
Shorthand trades certainty for speed,
that's the whole point.

***

Some words, especially those more than one syllable,
I believe are illustrated incorrectly
based on preceding text and examples.
"Navy" is particularly egregious.
