The supposed difficulty of English spelling is overdone. Yes, it's tougher than Spanish or Russian, but the "ghoti" example is funny for English speakers because we all know it's an absurd example that intentionally breaks some rules in favor of others to reach a perverse conclusion.

I don't know if this reaches "common wisdom" status among native speakers of Chinese, but plenty of them (especially those who have struggled through dull English grammar classes) will tell you that spoken Chinese is incredibly simple and has "no grammar." The lack of inflections leads them to this conclusion. The common wisdom on written Chinese, on the other hand, is that it is the most complex thing in the world and holds 5000 years of tradition, etc. etc.

The supposed difficulty of English spelling is overdone.

What the hell? Name me one language that even approaches English in this regard -- and we're not talking about languages that use characters, because that's an entirely different ballpark. "Ghoti" is funny because it's true (and because the values are not possible in those word positions, but that's just the icing on the cake). I really don't think it's possible to overstate the difficulty of English spelling. Don't make me give you a test, because you'll flunk it; for any speaker of English, it is possible to find an unlimited number of proper nouns whose pronunciation they will not be able to guess from the spelling and vice versa. This is not true of any other language I know; examples like Lueger in German are vanishingly rare.

for any speaker of English, it is possible to find an unlimited number of proper nouns whose pronunciation they will not be able to guess from the spelling

Actually, this has been tested, and especially for native speakers of English, the above statement doesn't apply.It's not a random spelling system, it's a mix of four spelling systems, and one gets a feel for it after a while. That's why nobody actually writes "ghoti" in real life.

In my experience, although foreigners sometimes complain about the spelling system, spelling isn't where they make serious mistakes: the toughest part about English seems to be the verb tenses and colloquial usage, especially in verbal phrases.

Well, I put the coward's "one of" in there for a reason...

I didn't say it was random (or impossible to get a feel for), but you have to admit, four systems is definitely worse than one or two, and to them in any case I would add a fifth: "perverse, unpredictable meddling", including, for example, clerics inserting silent consonants to mimic related Latin vocabulary in some words but not others... Sure, English is not the only language to have been abused like this, and these can just be put under the "exceptions" banner anyway... but exceptions add up and are insidiously fundamental to English ("one", "two", "does")

Seriously, are there any alphabetic languages more difficult to spell? Anyone got any examples? I know that the very question is almost meaningless (what's "easier": language X with 10 rules that cover 70% of the vocabulary, but the rest have to be memorized, or language Y with 30 rules that cover 95% of the vocab?), but this is only a blog.

(P.S. I am aware of the apparent irony of having a conversation like this after gently mocking the entire world for the same thing. But it's not that I believe there cannot be a language more difficult to spell, it's just that if there is, I don't know it.)

I would argue that Gaeilge (Irish Gaelic) is more difficult to spell, and rather hard to guess the pronounciation of. Of course, that has alot to do with the fact that the latin alphabet is an ill-fit to the language.Your comment about no one thinking there language is easy reminds me of my high school Japanese teacher. He would always say that "Japanese was so easy! You can put it in any order you want!". It always amused me that he thought argument scrambling made things easier, because the class certainly did not agree with him.

I would argue that Gaeilge (Irish Gaelic) is more difficult to spell, and rather hard to guess the pronounciation of. Of course, that has alot to do with the fact that the latin alphabet is an ill-fit to the language.Your comment about no one thinking there language is easy reminds me of my high school Japanese teacher. He would always say that "Japanese is so easy! You can put it in any order you want!". It always amused me that he thought argument scrambling made things easier, because the class certainly did not agree with him.

I can't vouch for the Irish variety, but Scots Gaelic spelling is complex but consistent. The same is true of French, except that French spelling allows allophones.

Neither of the major Semitic languages (Arabic and Hebrew) use vowels in everyday written language, which is especially frustrating for a non-native speaker, as consonant clusters represent an idea and the vowels indicate the grammatical function.

To add icing to the cake, the Masoretic vowel points used for liturgical recitation of Classical Hebrew are horrendously complex, as the same point can represent several different vowel sounds based on the following letter, the surrounding syllables and vowels, the combination of points used, and the stress of the syllable.

--BGA

when i saw the question about languages where the native speakers thot it was very simple, i was going to mention spoken chinese. amida's already said it all, but i'll repeat it and agree.

most native chinese speakers seem to think that spoken chinese is a very easy language. i've never had to learn it from the ground up as a second language, so i don't kno about its difficulty. when mentioning chinese grammar to chinese people, they often ask, "what grammar?" chinese grammar isn't really taught in schools (or wasn't, i don't kno what they teach nowadays) like english grammar is, leading people to believe it's completely intuitive. of course, as amida said, where the chinese take pride in the difficulty and complexity of their language is in the writing system.

Actually, this has been tested, and especially for native speakers of English, the above statement doesn't apply.

Proper nouns. I can certainly vouch that a great many Scottish placenames and surnames catch most English visitors out. Some examples:CockburnMenziesDalzielBuccleuchKirkcudbright

The preceding are pronounced "Co-burn", "Ming-is", "Die-ell", "Buk-loo" and "Kir-coo-bree". And there are plenty of names which are similarly puzzling which are merely better known; Islay and Edinburgh are scarcely more sensible.

And there are plenty of confusing names for the Scot aboard; Gloucester and Greenwich and Plymouth and Salisbury and Worcester are all English names that present initial confusion, but are well-known enough that we eventually get round it. But if I went into the streets of Edinburgh and asked people how to pronounce Cholmondley, I wager I'd get many fewer right answers than wrong ones.

Has America sorted out these problems then? Given that it ranks Arkansas and Connecticut among its states, I'd say the answer's "No".

Knowing what system, if any, is being used in the spelling of an English proper noun merely by inspection is impossible. Imagine a hypothetical city called Splough. Now, we might guess that it sounded like "Splow", given the "plough" constituent; but it equally might be pronounced "Spluff" as in "tough" or "Sploh" as in "though", or "Sploff" as in "cough".

I don't know how to say this without sounding like a prat, but I also don't want to seem like a thoughtless jerk, so, thanks for the comments, everyone. I learned!