Talk:Ghoti

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Google Hits 2 Beroccaboy's comments, removed from the article 3 NPOV 4 Ghoti

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

[edit] 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)

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)

[edit] 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)