Some exam-paper marker is saying that spelling isn't important. He is advocating a more flexible approach. I disagree.

Our language has spread across the globe (thanks partly to America)and, as far as possible we should protect its integrity.

That is not to say that it is immutable, its very strength is its flexibility.

English subsumes words into itself at a terrific rate, both by usage and abusage. Long may that continue. Spelling errors should be corrected,not ignored at the whim of some lofty academic.

Prior to Samuel Johnsons Dictionary c1755 there was no formalised spelling, even of names (Shakespeare signed his in a variety of ways).

Reading Chaucerian English is difficult, even with a commentary. Although his prologue to the Canterbury Tales is one of my favourites I would not like Standard English to regress to 'Whan thatte Aprille wyth showris sote the droughte of Marche is peercd to the rote,It beyths each veyne in swicht licquor, wyth sich vertue engendered is the fleur'.

An occasional lapse is expected but I wouldn't want a Doctor to misspell Hypotension as Hypertension etc.

I have heard an argument for 'Europeanising' our lexicon (eg Octobre,Novembre,Decembre etc). Whilst this has superficial appeal it is not an idea that 'has legs'. I can't see the French converting to English just because we have 'Frenchified' our wordstock.

Spellcheck still Americanises some words and some Grammar prompts are poor.What next after lazy spelling? A call for lazy Grammar?Lazy Punctuation?

Woman,without her man, is nothing.

Woman: without her, man is nothing. Shows how important that is.

Poor spelling follows on from poor diction and we have an influx of Afro-Carribean patoise to thank for much of that, (whilst some speakers from the Indian sub-continent often put many of us to shame with their perfect diction.) "So many are poor at spelling lets abandon it" equates with "so many people swear lets all do it.