[erimir]

Originally Posted by Kamilah Hauptmann

Hukt on fonix werkt for me!

You laugh, like "hukt" doesn't make more sense than "hooked" despite having only one syllable. I suppose "hookt" would also be sensible, given that we don't have a special character for that vowel.

A fundamental problem with any spelling reform is that the English alphabet has 5 pure vowel characters, but English has 8-13 pure vowels (depending on the dialect*) and at least a few diphthongs and triphthongs. So you either have to make a bunch of digraphs or add a bunch of diacritics. Diacritics have the advantage of making it look more similar to the original spelling for many vowels, while digraphs require no changes to keyboards and the like. Digraph-based spelling reforms often come out looking kinda like Dutch though:

See: Weudent bee soe bad if wee chainjd Eenglish speling too bee intooitiv/intiuitiv...

*The traditional view would include beet, bit, bet, bat, bot, but, bought, put, boot, balm and perhaps you could include Burt (even in its r-colored variants), which would bring it to 11 pure vowels to be distinguished with only 5 letters. But then you also have the diphthongs of bait, boat, bite, bout and boy as well.

For whatever reason, b-t gives a minimal pair for almost every monophthong and diphthong in English.