The name Halstatt seems to mean Salt Town.
Stadt (town) was derived from Statt - here's a good explanation of that: https://www.duden.de/sprachwissen/sprachratgeber/Stadt-Statt...
Rob Words on YouTube had a video on it recently https://youtu.be/iP6n2zTHtUQ?t=1018
The name Hallstadt (not the two l letters) means Salt Town.
Or, actually "place". In a lot of location names of germanic origin "stadt" doesn't the current semantics, of being a town with > 10.000. More often than not it just means "place".
And "Hall" is an old term for salt. Many towns related to salt have it in their names, in many places of Germany and Austria. "Halle an der Saale" in Thüringen, Bad Reichenhall (Bayern), Hall im Tirol (Österreich), Schwäbisch-Hall (Baden-Württemberg) etc.
"Hall" is believed to be of celtic origin.
And the double l is important. German is a language where in the written form you look at the letters and you immediately see how it is spoken. A double vocal makes the speed slower, and a double consonant makes the speech faster. So "Halstadt" would be slow Hal (so more emphasize on the "a" instead), and "Hallstadt" would be a fast "Hall", similar in speed like the english "hell": little emphasize on the "a".
One of the most common words from Willaim Clark's journals (of the Lewis and Clark expedition of 1804) was "mosquito" and he used over a dozen different spellings. Spellings were never really standardized .. until the internet giving us the ability to critique every little detail of each other's writings.
From Google AI: "mesquestors, misquestors, misquitor, misquitoes, misquitors, misqutors, misqutr, missquetors, mosquiters, mosquitors, mosquitos, muskeetor, musqueters, musquetors, musquiters, musquitoes, musquitors, musqueters, musqutors"
Lol, written vs spoken German is just as ambigious as any other language with too few letters in the alphabet. Just look at "ich" vs "ach" (and then of course there's dozens of local dialects that don't even have spelling rules and would need even bigger alphabets if "done right").
Source: Read it somewhere a long time ago, sorry.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/about-us/spelling-reform
Maybe you meant a "complete" spelling reform, but hardly any reform is 'complete' if you look at it closely.
Spanish has notably gone through some orthography reforms since I learned it in high school, in the 1980s, and so among other things, the idiosyncratic "sort order" which we learned doesn't really apply anymore. In school, we also learned to be aware of the vosotros first-person plural, but we didn't really learn all the forms, because we were chiefly learning Mexican/LatAm vernacular Spanish.
Isn't most of it just the difference between british and american english? I was definitely taught the "old" style in my english education and still see it being used. So it does not seem to have been really universally acknowledged/adhered to as a reform?
Not that english language has not changed but it seems that there is not as much of a centralised, widely adopted and intentional reform to match the written form with the spoken one.
If they had said English has had no centralized or universally accepted spelling reform, then I'd have to agree with that statement! But they said English has had no spelling reforms, and that's clearly untrue.
Can you imagine trying to organize a spelling reform agreement between the US, India, Pakistan, Nigeria, Philippines, the UK, Germany and Canada?
Front vs back vowels. Not much different from "cinco", "gigolo", or "gelato"/"ragazza".