I’ve been trying to learn a new language (Vietnamese) and a thing that has been driving me crazy are all these instances of letters being randomly pronounced differently in different words sometimes. If you don’t think about it too much, it’s easy to go “this language is dumb, why do they do this?” But then I think about English and we have so many examples of this or other linguistic oddities that make no sense but which I’ve just accepted since I learned them so long ago.
So I wanted to generalize my question: For all the languages where this applies, why are there these cases where letters have inconsistent pronunciations? For cases where it sounds like another letter, why not just use that one? For cases where the letter or combination of letters creates a new sound not already covered by existing letters, why not make a new one? How did this happen? What is the history? Is there linguistic logic to it beyond these being quirks of how the languages historically developed?
As a case study, I think Vietnamese is especially apt to show how the written language develops in parallel and sometimes at odds with the spoken language. The current alphabetical script of Vietnamese was only adopted for general use in the late 19th Century, in order to improve literacy. Before that, the grand majority of Vietnamese written works were in a logographic system based on Chinese characters, but with extra Vietnamese-specific characters that conveyed how the Vietnamese would pronounce those words.
The result was that Vietnamese scholars pre-20th Century basically had to learn most of the Chinese characters and their Cantonese pronunciations (not Mandarin, since that’s the dialect that’s geographically father away), and then memorize how they are supposed to be read in Vietnamese, then compounded by characters that sort-of convey hints about the pronunciation. This is akin to writing a whole English essay using Japanese katakana; try writing “ornithology” like that.
Also, the modern Vietnamese script is a work of Portuguese Jesuit scholars, who were interested in rendering the Vietnamese language into a more familiar script that could be read phonetically, so that words are pronounced letter-by-letter. That process, however faithful they could manage it, necessarily obliterates some nuance that a logographic language can convey. For example, the word bầu can mean either a gourd or to be pregnant. But in the old script, no one would confuse 匏 (gourd) with 保 (to protect; pregnant) in the written form, even though the spoken form requires context to distinguish the two.
Some Vietnamese words were also imported into the language from elsewhere, having not previously existed in spoken Vietnamese. So the pronunciation would hew closer to the origin pronunciation, and then to preserve the lineage of where the pronunciation came from, the written word might also be written slightly different. For example, nhôm (meaning aluminum) draws from the last syllable of how the French pronounce aluminum. Loanwords – and there are many in Vietnamese, going back centuries – will mess up the writing system too.
Oh I didn’t know the current alphabet came from the Portuguese. I assumed it was from the French when they colonized Vietnam.
The point about the logographic characters being distinct is interesting. I guess if you don’t have to phonetically spell it out you have some more freedom in picking what written characters will represent the meanings of the two words. It is still a shame we ended up with those homophones, but I guess that’s just a path dependency thing since the spoken words came first. I guess they just had to work with what they had when they converted them into characters.