Talk:Ghoti/Archive 1

Archive 1

Slang meaning of Ghoti

Recently, the slang meaning of ghoti has been argued and has turned into an edit war. Please discuss here what the slang meaning of it is in your town.Atcheavy (talk) 19:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

In Kelso, WA "Ghoti" means cool or awsome.Solo30 (talk) 02:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Google Hits

Whoever keeps listing Google hits on this article, please STOP IT! The number of hits any word gets via Google is likely to change over time as various web pages get spidered into Google. It is irrelevent and stupid. After all, anyone can go to Google themselves and see how many hits any term gets. It is pointless and idiotic to keep listing such information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wcrowe (talk • contribs) .

Stop holding back, tell us how you really feel. Dpbsmith (talk) 15:52, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I agree with Wcrowe. No other entry has Google hits Doc Strange 14:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree with all of you. Please STOP ALL OF IT!!!--Jack Upland (talk) 11:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Beroccaboy's comments, removed from the article

Note: I am new to WIKIPEDIA so I hope that my addition is done correctly.

While many would say that the rules of English are a bit like the "Pirates Code", there are distinct patterns of general usage that help. In this situation, I contend that GHOTI does not say fish because:

• GH only says F when it is preceded by OU
• TI only says SH when it is in front of a vowel

I am sure there are exceptions, but the key here is that there are distinct patterns of general usage that help. Special thanks to my partner Kerry Quayle Wyer who is a speech pathologist. It was her who answered this for me, without skipping a beat, or getting the joke for that matter when I asked her why GHOTI does not sound out as fish. That in itself was funnier, but you had to be there. Beroccaboy

For almost exceptions try Kiribati or doubly Kiritimati? --Henrygb 17:58, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Really? tell George Bernard Shaw!. Beroccaboy is talking this too seriously Doc Strange 14:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Kiribati and Kiritimati are not English words. Certainly they were once, but then they were appropriated into Gilbertese. Just as "salary" in Japanese becomes サラリ, and "日本" in English becomes Japan. So, your point is irrelevant. However, Beroccaboy has a point, but it's incomplete, because "TI" is not pronounced "ʃ", but "ʃɪ"; otherwise -tion would be, according to the claims in the article, be not be pronounced -ʃɪən, but -ʃən. We're talking about correct pronunciation here, because that's what the article draws from, and not the lazy or sloppy speech of people can barely read (i.e. the people you hear in pubs, discos, trailer parks, council house estates, American schools, and Star Trekkie meetings).--Rfsmit (talk) 17:42, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Aha. Then everybody but you can barely read and talks in a lazy or sloppy manner, as I've never even encountered the pronunciation variant you advocate. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 16:09, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

NPOV

I've edited the article to try to remove the slant against spelling reform. There remain a few unsupported and unattributed comments. This is particularly problematic:

Because of this, it is claimed that the rules of English spelling, which prohibit the formation of words like ghoti, are in fact reasonably sensible.

I know of no rules which "prohibit" this. A reasonable position - and a response to the comments above - would be that English spelling is irregular but not without patterns. There are rules, but all of these have exceptions etc. And certain highly irregular letter clusters, such as "ough" can be pronounced in multiple ways: in "though", "thought", "bough", "cough", "tough" etc.--Jack Upland 09:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

It's more that pronouncing "ghoti" as "fish" goes against the rules of English orthography. Word-initial "gh" is pronounced as "g," not "f," for example. That's why native speakers of English who haven't heard of this word before will, upon seeing it, assume it's pronounced more or less like "goatee." (Note: my only evidence for that is anecdotal. It would be nice to find a study that actually tested it for large samples.) Despite being famous, ghoti is actually a pretty unconvincing illustration of irregularity, since it's a misuse of the regular pronunciations of word-final "gh" and the "ti" in "-tion." Factitious 11:41, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I think you're taking the issue too seriously. No one has claimed that ghoti has been pronounced fish. It's just a humorous illustration of the inconsistencies of English spelling.--Jack Upland 00:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, as a joke, it's a good one. As an illustration of spelling inconsistencies, it's pretty badly constructed. I don't think it's reasonable to present it as meaningfully supporting spelling reform. (Though we should be clear about the fact that this doesn't make spelling reform a bad idea, obviously.) Factitious 08:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

And like a provocation for debate ... which most probably was Shaws original intention. As said above: taken factually, English rule by English rule, there's no chance in the Universe that ghoti will ever be pronounced "fish" – and now: here we're debating!! How successful wasn't Shaw? Now to the practicalities: anyone daring to list the words and formulations that are deemed to be weasely?? Rursus declamavi; 15:41, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Look no further than the {{Fact}} tags. They present an argument, without source, while using It has been noted/argued, giving a semblance of source when there is none. Obscurans 04:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, quote anyone whose put forward a scholarly argument on spelling reform based on ghoti....--Jack Upland 10:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Not my point. I'm just saying that the article shouldn't present this as being about the actual irregularities in English spelling. I think it does a pretty good job right now, but could use some more references. Factitious 11:21, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, what is it about???--Jack Upland 21:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

It's a joke using spelling irregularities that don't actually exist in English, of course. Sort of a "What if our rule about the 'ti' in '-tion' applied to any instance of 'ti'? Wouldn't that be crazy?" type of thing. Factitious 23:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that's hilarious. Tell that one in a bar some time...--Jack Upland (talk) 11:44, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Ghoti

What the hell happened to the actual meaning of the word 'Ghoti'?

I don't think such a word does exist. This page is just about this representative and well-known example sometimes attributed to Shaw, and gives among others the information that this attribution may not be correct. So I think it merits its existence, but of course this example is a joke and most of the above commentators seem not to understand that.— MFH:Talk 18:05, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Ghoti is a fish. It is closely related to phish. It khan bee court bye thoughs hoo R fission with a rod ore a nett. It is thwart by sum who R stupoured knot to egg-zest at awl. Fumperweez!--Jack Upland (talk) 11:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Spelling of Women

The article states "The pronunciation of the word women is the only word in English where o represents the sound /ɪ/ and this is partly due to the Great Vowel Shift." I believe this is an error. I can't quickly find it now, but I have seen somewhere the words wimen and women printed in an old "Gothic" type style such as those that were common in the 12th and 13th Centuries. In that type style, the seven consecutive verticals of wim form a visual jumble and the word is hard to read, so printers changed the i to o to break up the seven consecutive verticals and make the word more readable. I believe this is the true story of why the word is spelled women and the Great Vowel Shift has nothing to do with it.

The OED says this under the entry Woman:

The regular ME. descendants of OE wifman, -men, viz. womman, wimmen (cf. OE. léofman, ME lemman, LEMAN) continued in use until the 15th century. By c 1200 the rounding of wi- to wu- is clearly established, and is at that time characteristic of western ME. texts. The form womman appears in the late 13th century (first in western texts), and the corresponding pl. wommen appears in the late 14th. The simplification of mm in womman, -en and wimman, -en, and the consequent conversion of the first syllable into an open syllable gave rise to forms with o and e, which, continuing to the early modern period, provided the occasion for punning analyses of women and wemen. From c 1400 woman and women became regular spellings for sing. and pl., and have been retained as a properly corresponding pair to man and men; but in the standard speech the pronunciation (wu-) was ultimately appropriated to the sing. and (wi-) to the pl. probably through the associated influence of pairs like foot and feet.

From at least the 16th century, the only variety in the pronunciation of the pl. has been in respect of the quantity of the first vowel, wich was either short or long in the 16th and 17th centuries; but in the same period no lest than five pronunciations of the sing. are recognized by orthoepists ...."

Anomalocaris 00:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm not an etymology expert so I won't go into that part of it, but is there even a reliable source that says that "women" is the only word in which the 'o' is pronounced like that? Some people pronounce the first 'o' in "economics" like that. Okay, that might be more of a schwa than an 'ih' sound, but it's still a common pronounciation. Different words are pronounced differently in different cultures. And I'm not talking about how some people from Atlantic Canada say "slippy" instead of "slippery", I mean how Captain Picard would pronounce "charade" much differently from Captain Kirk, or like the person below who claims that nobody pronounces "issue" with a 'sh' sound, despite the fact that the standard American pronounciation (or pronunciation if you prefer) of that word does in fact use the 'sh' sound. - Ugliness Man 04:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Lots of sounds can fall together in unstressed syllables with vowel reduction, but the letter o" representing an unreduced short-i vowel in women is certainly rare (though I don't know whether it's unique). AnonMoos 11:44, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Neither Captain Quirk or Captain Picky are Klingons and I think this impertinent fact has been overlooked. Perhaps deliberately. Or perhaps not. I also think women are important (and impertinent). Perhaps their denunciation is unique, but it certainly shouldn't be understressed.--Jack Upland (talk) 11:56, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Issue

Does Sadowski really include "issue" in this list? "Tissue", maybe, but "issue" is never pronounced with a "sh".

I take ishue with that statement.

(seriously, "ishyu" is the standard pronunciation where I'm from)

Eleland 19:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

In some dialects of English, it's pronounced "isyoo" or "issoo", but still the most common pronunciation is "ishyu". --NetRolller 3D 20:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

In some dialects, especially northern native dialects, it's Is'-juː (or -ɪu) primarily, and Iʃ-juː rarely. --Rfsmit (talk) 17:26, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Dunno Y this's an issue. Orl polite people jest say "bless you" and change the subject...--Jack Upland (talk) 11:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Ghoughpteighbteau

We should include "ghoughpteighbteau" ("potato") in the article, since Ghoughpteighbteau redirects here. --NetRolller 3D 20:18, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, there are 386,000 google hits for ghoti and only 272 for ghoughpteighbteau, and I will mention the possibility of deleting the redirect (or, I suppose, leaving things as they are). Still, I was thinking of adding a mention of ghoughpteighbteau (it is mentioned in the Scobbie article we cite, for example). I wasn't sure, though, what to say about it. Was it a recent attempt to top ghoti by being longer? Was it published at the same time as ghoti itself? I don't know if we need lots of details, but it would be a bit awkward to work into the article without at least one or two. Kingdon 21:02, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Look, Klingon, I thawed wee dealt with yew earlier wen wee disgust Google (sick) hits. Pleas stop it!--Jack Upland (talk) 11:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

It appeared in the children's book Walking the Bridge of Your Nose in 1995:

GHEAUGHTEIGHPTOUGH spells POTATO.

How?

GH is P, as in hiccough;

EAU is O, as in beau;

GHT is T, as in naught;

EIGH is A, as in neigh;

PT is T, as in pterodactyl;

OUGH is O, as in though.

I don't know of it before that, but it must have been there. —[semicolons]— 12:29, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

I've added a section for Ghoughpteighbteau, since it redirects here. MuffledThud (talk) 11:58, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone actually say /pə͡ʊˈte͡ɪtə͡ʊ/? Semicolons' version with the /o/ as in "beau" sounds a bit more acceptable in my (non-native though trained) ears as it comes closer to the standard pronunciation of /pəˈteɪtəʊ/. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.93.212.74 (talk) 17:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, does the source use "though" because /pəʊˈteɪtəʊ/ was the standard pronunciation in Shaw's time? If there's any better analysis than what's in the article, it isn't swapping the "eau" and "ough" around, it's using "thorough" instead of "though". -- Smjg (talk) 15:35, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

'ti' used for 'sh' sound

What about the word 'fiction'? In that word 'ti' appears to have the 'sh' sound but it follows the consonant 'c' instead of a vowel as in the words 'nation' or 'initial'. Oops never mind...I see that the rule is 'ti' sounds like 'sh' only when it PRECEDES a vowel. In this case the vowel 'o' in 'fiction'. My bad...but I'll leave this here to clarify.

gh = f, not just at the ends of words

The article says "Likewise, "gh" can represent [f] only at the end of the word, as in "tough" or "laugh"."

This is simply not true. What about laughs? Laughter? Draught and draughts? Someone should fix this... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dickius (talk • contribs) 19:32, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Whilst it is true that 'gh' can be /f/ within words, it is not /f/ at the beginning of a word. Like many (most?) languages, English has several constraints on initial, medial and final consonant clusters both in terms of pronunciation and spelling (e.g. there are no English words beginning with 'nd' or 'ck' or ending with 'pr' or 'qu') . An initial 'gh' should be pronounced /g/ as in ghost, ghoul, ghastly, etc. Bartholemew Roberts (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2013 (UTC)Bartholemew Roberts

"Empty" reading

The article could mention another reading of the word:

gh as in "night"

o as in "people"

t as in "gourmet"

i as in "business"

By this one, the word "ghoti" cannot be read at all Alexmagnus2 (talk) 12:50, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually, with my pronunciations of those four words, that would become "ho" 24.13.77.44 (talk) 19:16, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

No adverse comments, so I am adding a "silent ghoti" section.Red Hurley (talk) 08:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Mac speech pronunciation

I've no idea where to hunt down the appropriate backup for this, but I note that on both of my macs (OS 10.4 and 10.5) the text-to-speech pronounces ghoti as it looks, rather than as fish. So either that has been taken out, or it was never in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.82.149 (talk) 21:47, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

'Ghoge' also can be read 'Fish'

The terminal 'ge', can be read like the 'ge' in the word 'Vegetable'. אביתרג (talk) 10:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC).

The word 'vegetable' does not (in any dialect that I know) contain the phoneme /ʃ/. Vilĉjo (talk) 21:46, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Phonemes

In the third sentence, the use of the word "phonemes" is unfortunate. Gh, o, t and i aren't phonemes in this context. I would replace it with "elements" or something like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cellindra (talk • contribs) 19:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can see, the pronunciation has three phonemes f-ɪ-ʃ, while the pseudo-spelling has three graphemic units, "gh", "o", and "ti" (where gh and ti are digraphs)... AnonMoos (talk) 21:44, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

"George Bernard SHAW ON LANGUAGE", Edited by Abraham Tauber, Published by Peter Owen, London, 1965.

In his "INTRODUCTION" on page xvii, of this book, Dr Tauber writes:

"Shaw is frequently associated with his innovation of the story of a "fish" - spelled "ghoti" - the "gh" of laugh, the "o" of women, and the "ti" of nation - the transliteration "ghoti" representing the sounds of the word "fish," as well as the irrational and inconsistent nature of English spelling. GBS carried on a crusade for Alphabet and Spelling Reform that attracted international attention - culminating in the publicity and controversy over his Will, and the publication of the Shaw Alphabet Edition of Androcles and the Lion."

Shaw's major works (including prefaces) and letters are included in this book. Of particular interest might include: - His plays, particularly: Captain Brassbounds Conversion, Pygmalion; - Various letters both public brochures and those to the editor of the Morning Leader, the Times of London, the Listener; - Articles in professional publications, the British Journal for Professional Writers, the Linguaphone Institute; - Transcripts from Debate on the SPELLING REFORM BILL in the House of Commons in 1949. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.49.117.95 (talk) 21:56, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

analysis

I propose that this be added (I added it a while ago, but it was taken out as original analysis):

Moreover, as an element of the argument for spelling reform, its use is somewhat self-defeating. The effect hinges on the audience being surprised that the word would be pronounced "fish", which presupposes that they in fact have notions of the typical pronunciation of the orthography involved. An average English speaker who encountered this word would expect it to be pronounced /ˈɡoʊˌti/ ("goaty"), or similarly, and it is from precisely this reliability that the argument for unreliability gets its force.

Flipping Mackerel (talk) 18:18, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

No can do. You know the reason already. Please re-affirm your allegiance to wikipedia policies. 03:40, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah. Hence the attempt on talk and not just reinstating it in the article. ;) Flipping Mackerel (talk) 02:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

"Thud"

Here is another interpretation of Ghoti:

• "Gh", makes a Th sound in Trough (as pronounced by some Americans)
• "o", like in "money"
• "T", as in "taoism", and American pronunciation of "metal"
• "I", silent like in "business"

It says "thud". Ticklewickleukulele (talk) 01:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Nope. It says 'God' Staszek Lem (talk) 03:45, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

Ticklewickleukulele -- the U.S. intervocalic t/d is a kind of flap consonant, and is not the same as an ordinary d... AnonMoos (talk) 03:48, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I know IPA and am familiar with phonetics. But I also know that "Taoism" and a couple of others are pronounced with an actual "D" sound. Ticklewickleukulele (talk) 01:30, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

50 years ago it was more often pronounced with a [t]. If you spell "Peking" and pronounce [beɪdʒɪŋ], then you can get "k"=[dʒ], but it's not useful for much of anything... AnonMoos (talk) 02:57, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Exactly how many ways are there of spelling "fish"?

Let's do the math.

The phoneme /f/: "F" in "fan", "ph" in "phone", "gh" in "enough", "ff" in "Jeff", "pf" in "Price-pfitzer (the name on a lot of faucets)" (5 spellings

The phoneme short I: "I" in "it", "Y" in "Myth", "A" in "salad", "E" in "English", "O" in "women, "U" in "busy", "OA" in the old pronunciation of "waistcoat, "IE" in "sieve", "UI" in "build" (nine spellings, including all six lone vowels)

The phoneme "sh" (sorry my keyboard doesn't do Long S): "sh" in "fish", "sch" in some German loanwords (but I cant name one), "ch" in "chef", "ti" of "nation", "si" of "emulsion", "ssi" in "emission", "s" in "sure", "ss" in "fissure", "ci" of "precious, "sci" of "luscious", "gstoneh" of "featheringstonehaugh" (yes, it is a word, in fact, a rare last name, pronounced the same as "fanshawe"). (eleven spellings, perhaps more if we include foreign words)

5*9*11 = 495 ways to spell fish

And that is not counting silent letters. There are many silent letters (not counting those that change the pronunciation), in fact, nearly every letter is silent at some times! There is even a silent "ph" in "phthalate", and a silent "j" in "marijuana". So you could get abcdefgphhijklmnooapqrstuvwxygstoneh to say fish.

But when you think about it, letters are just arbitrary symbols on paper with no link to how you pronounce them. So if you want, you can spell "orange" as "fish". Or you can write your name as "Joe", even if you pronounce it like "Mike" or "John" or "Jenny" or "Anna" or "Thomas" or "Anastasia". But if you want to sound educated, please stick to proper spellings. Ticklewickleukulele (talk) 01:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Dude Dear Sir or Madame, why don't you start blogging? People do read wikipedia, but hardly they read article talk pages. Especially archived ones. Especially since the are not indexed by google. Staszek Lem (talk) 02:09, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

THis is actually a suggested add to the article. You are right by saying that no one reads talk pages, but editors read them and put the stuff on Wikipedia, which people read. Ticklewickleukulele (talk) 02:20, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, all of them except "fish", "fysh", "phish", and "physh" (also possibly "ffish" as a Scottish proper name) are implausible in the extreme... AnonMoos (talk) 05:54, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

So then Ghoti is implausible. if anything Ghoti teaches us that our spelling system is quite efficient and phonetic, in that "gh" and "ti" only make the sounds they do in certain positions, and "women" is just an exception to be memorized. "Ghoti" makes as much sense as "pfuigstoneh". Why do we even have this article? Ticklewickleukulele (talk) 02:47, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

From the linguistic point of view, "ghoti" is stupid in the extreme, as linguists and serious scholars of orthographic patterns have been saying all along (to begin with, it's "ugh", not "gh" which sometimes means [f], but only after a main-stressed vowel, while "ti" can only mean [ʃ] before a vowel letter). However, "ghoti" is a famous quasi-enigma propounded by George Bernard Shaw many decades ago, while something that you just made up is something that you just made up... AnonMoos (talk) 23:11, 9 February 2013 (UTC)