Why when you spell laughter is it pronounced that way, but you put an s in front of it and it sounds different

Question

english language question, the way words are pronounced

Answer 1

What you are looking at is probably THE biggest oddity of English spelling.
(Consider this list: http://eleaston.com/pr/sl-pat-gh.html )

It's too bad people simply dismiss this all with "English is just so illogical". There is actually a very clear (and to some of us very interesting!) historical explanation of how this came about, based on the variety of English dialects and the unfortunate fact that some MAJOR changes --esp. the unusual "Great Vowel Shift" (which explains many of the oddities of VOWELS in our spelling)-- took place when they did.

In other words, the key to it all is bad TIMING!

In late Middle English and in early Modern English (late 15th to 16th centuries)-- precisely when much of our current spelling was becoming established (thanks in part to the invention of the printing press in the 15th century)-- the "gh" WAS still pronounced in many English dialects. But it was in the prcoess of disappearing (or, in certain situations, giving way to the /f/ sound).

The sound of "gh" (in "night", "light", "eight", "thought", etc) is nearly the same as the "ch" in Scottish "loch", and in "acht", the German relative of 'eight', except that you add the VOICE while pronouncing it. (The technical name of the sound is "voiced velar fricative". It is made the same way as a hard "g" [as in "gum"], but instead of the tongue completely stopping the airflow, some air is allowed to get through.)

The loss of this sound, as well as its change to an f-sound in some situations --AND many other changes that produced other "silent letters"-- was related to "the Great Vowel Shift" in English.
These changes and their different shape in different English dialects to another gave us multiple pronunciations of the old "ough" (and somtimes "augh").

For more on these and related changes in the pronunciation of English see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phonological_history_of_English_consonants#Elimination_of_velar_fricatives_in_English


Actually, the /f/ pronunciation found in MORE gh-words in Elizabethan dialects. For example, we can see from Shakespeare's writing that "daughter" was pronounced (in the dialect he reflected) with an F-sound.

"The pronunciation of gh (as f) seems to have been more frequent than at a later date, when, however, we have it in words such as “laugh” and “draught.” In Chapman, “wrought” and “taught” appear with this sound-value; in Shakespeare, “after” is found riming with “daughter."
http://www.bartleby.com/213/2010.html

So very likely in some English dialects of the 1550s "laughter" and "slaughter" did sound the same.

But note the importance of dialects in all this! There were a VARIETY of English dialects with different pronunciations of these words. Modern "standard" English pronunciations of these words did not necessarily all come from one region or dialect. So when, AFTER the habit of spelling the words a particular way was becoming established, ONE dialect's way of pronouncing 'gh' "won out" in some words, but OTHER dialects won out in other words, we ended up with words spelled the same which HAD been pronounced the same (in each of the dialects), but no longer were.

William Caxton, an important early English printers is often credited/blamed for much of the confusion --
"The English language was changing rapidly in Caxton's time, and the works he was given to print were in a variety of styles and dialects. Caxton was a technician rather than a writer, and often faced dilemmas of how much to standardize the language in the books he printed. (He actually wrote about this subject in at least one of his books.) His successor Wynkyn de Worde faced similar problems. However Richard Pynson, who started printing in London in 1491 or 1492, was a more accomplished stylist; he also favoured Chancery Standard, the language of London government. Pynson therefore helped to nudge the printed language towards standardization."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Caxton


But there is much debate about exactly how he and other printers went about their work, and how much influence they had. At any rate, he DID reflect pronunciations current in his day.
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=Caxton+spelling
http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~cpercy/courses/6362Olague1.htm

Had their work all come a generation later, it is very possible modern English spelling would much more accurately reflect its pronunciation.
http://www.historyhouse.com/in_history/spelling/

Answer 2

I don't think anyone really knows that,but I am amazed by and slightly jealous of people that speak English as a second language.

Answer 3

My Spanish/English speaking wife is also curious about this and many other pronunciations. For example: BEAD = BED since READ is sometimes RED and LEAD is sometimes LED.

Answer 4

Welcome to English! It changes the meaning almost antithetically, too! Actually, laughter is pronounced lafter. It should be pronounced lawter...but, then, who would ever guess that c'est is pronounced say.

Answer 5

or a D instead of the L?
Its the same with Baseline and Vaseline, completely different. Whats that all about?

Answer 6

isn't the english language great!?

how about weigh and way?