Elision ("the omission of one or more sounds in a word or phrase") produces the following:
going → goin(')
going to → gonna
Worcester → Wuster (ˈwʊstər)
However, this hasn't affected the accepted standard spellingspellings of the examples above. Are there any cases in the past century where the standard spelling has changed? (Note: I'm not looking for a list, just the existence of a documented change.)
If not, are there any notable trends that indicate we may see a spelling shift in the near future for certain words or phrases–perhaps due to the increasing acceptance of txtspk and informal English in previously "formal" communication?
A concrete example or two would suffice, but I'd prefer a link to a study or paper if one's available.
To reiterate, I'm looking for Edit:a change no earlier than the 20th century.
In the early 20th century, there were multiple efforts to simplify spelling (most unsuccessful). Arguably, it was to make the written word closer to speech, in which case elidid words may have been good candidates. Historically, that seems to be the case, yet it seems theyelided words don't catch on other than in informal speech. Still, at least one example of an elided word replacing the original exists, albeit centuries ago:
In speech, commonly elided in he, him, his, her in unstressed positions, especially following a consonant: What did 'e do; Tell us 'er name. This elision affected the spelling and pronunciation of the Middle English pronoun hit, resulting in Modern English it.
I've put this question up before going to bed because my current research wasn't very productive. I will make further edits as I gain relevant information. I won't be able to address critiques until sometime late Tuesday. Of course, comments or edits are welcome in the meantime. Lacking any concrete examples, perhaps someone can answer why does pronunciation not appear to pressure orthographic changes? Why do elision-based spellings, while noted in dictionaries, remain "informal" or "colloquial"?