3 ms·

I think this example is far-fetched and, due to being so far-fetched, is useless. I mean there are no actual english words where "gh" at the beginning of a word

I think this example is far-fetched and, due to being so far-fetched, is useless. I mean there are no actual english words where "gh" at the beginning of a word would be pronounced as "f", right? And "gh" at the end of a word hints heavily that you should pronounce it as "f", there are no irregularities here.

anamexis 6y ago
Off the top of my head, "nigh" is a counterexample.
- tryauuum 6y ago
  Yes, you are right. I should have said «..."ough" at the end of a word hints heavily ...» I am kind of pissed off how article attacks english language. Of course if you interpreter a letter without a context you will have silly results!
  - agar 6y ago
    As I'm sure many will jump in to say, "ough" is an unfortunate example. "A rough-coated, dough-faced, thoughtful ploughman strode through the streets of Scarborough; after falling into a slough, he coughed and hiccoughed."
    - tryauuum 6y ago
      hn proves again that I don't know english
  - balladeer 6y ago
    Imho I don't see it as attacking the English language, but rather an irregularity in it.
tom_ 6y ago
Riiiiight, so obviously you personally have no problems with the spelling rules of English (which do, in general, exist, contrary to popular belief). But, we need to ask ourselves: if it is at all conceivable that "ghoti" could be sounded out as "fish", just what the fuck is going on here? Sure, you don't have a problem dealing with this nonsense - I don't have one neither! But I struggle to believe that you've failed to notice that a lot of people do. Who is this system here to serve? Could it not be improved?
- tryauuum 6y ago
  (maybe I do not understand the definition of "conceivable") I think it is totally inconceivable that someone would read this word as "fish"! It would require extreme amount of mind-bending! Maybe this is why I am so angry with this article. They could have picked less artificial example to demonstrate irregularities.
  - anamexis 6y ago
    It's not supposed to be believable - quite the opposite. The entire point is that it's an artifical example to demonstrate irregularities.
    - tryauuum 6y ago
      Was there such a point? The person who invented this spelling was 21 years old, if I'm reading the article correctly. Who knows, maybe the entire point of inventing it was to impress opposite sex.
      - tryauuum 6y ago
        ...and then other people tried to use this word to advocate language reforms, of course. All I want to say is that this word doesn't make me feel there's need to change spelling rules. Other examples, like dough-through-enough are more moving.
      - tom_ 6y ago

anamexis 6y ago

Off the top of my head, "nigh" is a counterexample.

tryauuum 6y ago
Yes, you are right. I should have said «..."ough" at the end of a word hints heavily ...» I am kind of pissed off how article attacks english language. Of course if you interpreter a letter without a context you will have silly results!
- agar 6y ago
  As I'm sure many will jump in to say, "ough" is an unfortunate example. "A rough-coated, dough-faced, thoughtful ploughman strode through the streets of Scarborough; after falling into a slough, he coughed and hiccoughed."
  - tryauuum 6y ago
    hn proves again that I don't know english
- balladeer 6y ago
  Imho I don't see it as attacking the English language, but rather an irregularity in it.

tom_ 6y ago

Riiiiight, so obviously you personally have no problems with the spelling rules of English (which do, in general, exist, contrary to popular belief). But, we need to ask ourselves: if it is at all conceivable that "ghoti" could be sounded out as "fish", just what the fuck is going on here? Sure, you don't have a problem dealing with this nonsense - I don't have one neither! But I struggle to believe that you've failed to notice that a lot of people do. Who is this system here to serve? Could it not be improved?

tryauuum 6y ago
(maybe I do not understand the definition of "conceivable") I think it is totally inconceivable that someone would read this word as "fish"! It would require extreme amount of mind-bending! Maybe this is why I am so angry with this article. They could have picked less artificial example to demonstrate irregularities.
- anamexis 6y ago
  It's not supposed to be believable - quite the opposite. The entire point is that it's an artifical example to demonstrate irregularities.
  - tryauuum 6y ago
    Was there such a point? The person who invented this spelling was 21 years old, if I'm reading the article correctly. Who knows, maybe the entire point of inventing it was to impress opposite sex.
    - tryauuum 6y ago
      ...and then other people tried to use this word to advocate language reforms, of course. All I want to say is that this word doesn't make me feel there's need to change spelling rules. Other examples, like dough-through-enough are more moving.
    - tom_ 6y ago