# Is Mexico technically supposed to have a 'sh' sound to it? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 24, 2009, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mexico-technically-supposed-to-have-a-sh-sound-to-it/487197 "2009-02-24T15:23:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mexico-technically-supposed-to-have-a-sh-sound-to-it/487197/41 "2009-02-26T18:55:01Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Then “ghoti” is pronounced “fish”, right?:rolleyes: > [Ghoti - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghoti) No. I’ve always hated that example. For one thing, initial gh- is never pronounced /f/ in English. Final -ti is never pronounced /sh/. So that is not a possible interpretation of that set of letters in English, even if those sets of letters do have those individual sounds in other circumstances. But the point is, in English, there is ambiguity built in to our orthographic conventions. In Spanish, there is not. There is ambiguity in Spanish phonetics across dialects, but that is different from orthography. I really don’t understand your objection to all this. What would it take for Spanish to be orthographically consistent for you? ---
**Author:** ![Balthisar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/balthisar/32/2825_2.png) [@Balthisar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Balthisar)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mexico-technically-supposed-to-have-a-sh-sound-to-it/487197/42 "2009-02-26T18:57:00Z")
> [@sailor](#): > > You got it backwards. Why don’t you read the thread? I did, but I asked for an authority. You’re not one, or at any rate you’ve never comported yourself as one. In fact, you didn’t post a relevant cite until responding to me! And of course, it was only a Wikipedia cite! :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > As I have already posted and the OP suggests, the original sound was SH and was written X and when the sound changed the [orthography] in Spain changed to reflect that but not in Mexico. Thanks, but like I said, your posting pretty much means shit if you ascertain a fact without backing it up. Your reading comprehension is also in doubt, because you intimate that I’m making a statement of fact, wheras I was proposing a conjecture and asking for something solid. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Drake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Dr.Drake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Drake)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mexico-technically-supposed-to-have-a-sh-sound-to-it/487197/43 "2009-02-26T20:31:29Z")
For a more authoritative cite on how Latin x (ks) became Old Spanish x (sh), how about [_From Latin to Spanish_](http://books.google.com/books?id=oSzzpvHCLT0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=%22from+latin+to+spanish%22#PPA264,M1), pp. 264 ff. The shift to /h/ is also covered in this book, but that page is not visible online. ---
**Author:** ![Svejk\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea666f/32.png) [@Svejk\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Svejk_1)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 10:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mexico-technically-supposed-to-have-a-sh-sound-to-it/487197/44 "2009-02-27T10:16:35Z")
> [@Švejk](#): > > like ‘two below PAR IS ok’? I don’t think so; ‘Pair us’ approximates the pronunciation a lot better. > [@Colophon](#): > > Not really, because “Pair” has a long A, but Paris (as pronounced in English) has a short A. > > And I am not sure where you get the U vowel in the second syllable from - I’ve never heard anyone pronounce it like that! > > But trying to spell phonetically is always fraught with difficulty. I’d suggest: say “pat risk”, then delete the final letter sound of each word and put them together! > [@chowder](#): > > Pair us, pronounced Pare Uz. > > Shirley you jest Geez you guys, I said it approximates it _better_ than PAR IS as per the example given in my previous post, not that it’s a perfect approximation. And besides, it wasn’t me who came up with ‘Pair us’ in the first place, but **DSYounqEsq**. And this thread isn’t even about Paris, or French, or English. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mexico-technically-supposed-to-have-a-sh-sound-to-it/487197/45 "2009-02-27T17:58:52Z")
> [@Dr.Drake](#): > > I really don’t understand your objection to all this. What would it take for Spanish to be orthographically consistent for you? Well, honestly, my comprehension of Spanish Orthography is limited to the fact that my Grandmother taught me Castilian Spanish (with the pronounced “lisp”) and that got me beat up/teased in school by my Mexican schoolmates.😛 I can see that what you claim is CW, but I have provided a cite which casts doubt upon its complete accuracy. You need to come up with a competing cite, rather than a simple claim my cite is wrong and your personal opinion is right. Generaly, around here in GQ, “my post is my cite” carries little weight. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-mexico-technically-supposed-to-have-a-sh-sound-to-it/487197.md?page=2)