W is for woeful

WIt’s time we get rid of “W”. No not the president, it’s 2013, he’s gone. Not the letter, which (unlike “K” or “X”) produces a sound unique to the alphabet. I am speaking of English “double U.” It’s bulky, misleading, and we should get rid of it.

The doubled-U has no relation to “U.” Physically, when cursive was still popular, one may have made a case, but today it’s more accurately a double-V (“doble V” is even the preferred name for the letter In many Spanish-speaking countries). Yet, any name, “double U,” “double V,” “U junior”, “U plus,” “U ultra”, “M amiss”, infers a false kinship between letters. A kinship that does not exist.

Having it doubled-U (or even doubled-V) fails to give an accurate representation of it’s pronunciation. The sound “wwwuh” is not like “oou.” There is not even a “wwwuh” sound in “double-U,” making it unlike all other letters in the alphabet (even “H” cheats with a “ch” sound). “Wwuh” is a sound that can survive on it’s own merit; it needs no alphabetical nepotism.

“W” is also the only letter in the English alphabet with more than one syllable. It has three! What a nightmare. English is already overwhelming (for example, spell “overwhelming”), there’s no need to extend any letter’s name 200 percent beyond the norm.

Let’s return to former president George W. Bush. His middle name is “Walker”. Two syllables. That’s right, the abbreviation of his middle name takes longer to say than his middle name. On what other planet, in what other universe, in what other alphabet, would we let this misconduct stand?

If we can wilfully elect and reelect George W. Bush, we can certainly impeach the letter “W.” Let’s get rid of it. Let’s repeal and replace. We should keep the “wwwuh,” and (if we have to) the symbol “W” too, but “double U” needs renaming. To unite all parties involved after the ousting of the tyrant “double U,” I suggest renaming it the “we.”

Yes “W” can.