The dove dove into the water - phonics

[Pinkcupbluespoon]

DD was reading a bottle of Dove soap

She said it said dove (like dove into the water not dove the bird) because of a split digraph makes the O the name and not the sound. How do I explain it actually says dove (as in the bird)

Are you in the US? We don't say 'dove' into the water. It's dive/dived.

No was using that as an example so I could explain how she was sounding it.

I did the love thing! But then she said that split digraphs weren't true then . I'd be a rubbish teacher!

Just that ove can be pronounced like "love", "shove", "above" etc as well as like "stove", "clove" etc. Also "dived", not "dove", used in the UK.

Praise her for using her phonics, but tell her that it's an unusual word because the same letters can make 2 different words. 'Dove' like water is one of the words, but the company is actually called 'dove' like a bird. And yes, compare it to love. O making the 'u' sound is pretty common (done, some, money, mother) and so is 've' for the v sound (leave, have, live, love)

I would say dove rather than dived. Am in the uk

The "magic e" doesn't always apply

Sorry, I might have read that wrong!
The 'O' is sounded as 'Uh', as in love/above/cover, etc.
I've had wine tonight, I'm making no sense.

I agree with MrsK. Does she know any other spellings that have more than one pronunciation? You could link it to that.

Was it the school that taught her about split digraphs making the name not the sound? It's an explanation I'd steer clear of because as you've just found, it isn't necessarily true. You're probably better off steering her towards sounds and spellings for sounds and the idea that the same spelling can be pronounced in different ways. She sounds like she might take that idea on board better.

Split digraphs, split 'e's, graphemes, CVCs; how many of us knew what they were at the age of 6?
English is ridiculous language!

Yes it's the school that taught her

Some great explanations, thanks!

When teaching phonics, we usually teach the rule and then teach the exceptions to the rule. So it's not a case of spit digraphs not being 'true', just a case of that rule applies in many cases, but not all.

As someone who learnt to read without using phonics, and whose 4 children used Look and Say, and at a time when reading books were never taken home I do wonder whether all the angst about phonics which is expressed on here is worth it.

Just don't teach rules. Teach the basic principles of English phonics.

44+ sounds.
Sounds can be represented by single letters or groups of letters.
There's more than one way of spelling each sound
Some spellings have more than a one way of pronouncing them.

There's no need for any exceptions or unteaching of anything then.

It's worth it if you are in the 20% who don't learn to read and spell using those methods eddies.

Only having about 5% unable to read and spell is better. Particularly for the 15% who can't read well for no other reason than they haven't been taught.

For the 50% who will learn whichever way it doesn't really make much difference.

So hard! I remember having the ough conversation with my eldest and it was ridiculous, we both nearly cried!

Though
Thought
Slough
Rough
Cough
Plough
Thorough

Looking again, I still might!!

Dove / dove is pretty easy, just two sounds and depend on which O sound.

Explaining about the rough hiccoughing thoughtful ploughman coughing through borough market is a little more complicated, but I don't think that's YR.

AKissACuddleAndACheekyFinger great minds... If I'd not taken so long trying to put in a sentence!

It just seems so technical for little 4 and 5 year olds. What methods do other countries use? e.g. Finland which apparently has a very good reputation for education.

That's definitely one I'd plan to leave until later in year 1 unless a child brings it up.

Hopefully by that point they have a reasonable grasp of the basics and will be used to sorting spellings by sound.

Pretty much everywhere else uses phonics only. Whole language is a fairly unique invention to English speaking countries. Unless you are talking about languages that use pictures i.e. some forms of Japanese, Chinese languages etc.

You don't need to use the technical terms with YrR children. You can get by with letters, sounds and spellings if you need to. Unfortunately at some point around the Rose review we seem to have complicated it slightly.

The thing about English is that there are no 'rules' for which there aren't exceptions. There are so many irregulars. They just have to be learned by rote.

Personally I think the "look and say" method of reading that was used when I was a child in the early '60s is a better teaching method. It's a much more natural way to learn to read.

How old is she? I'd say nothing as she will learn with school.

I should clarify - I mean the moment has passed now. So at the time I would have said that the sound is different in that word. But wouldn't revisit it at a later date.
I've got the jolly phonics book which is great for explaining the different sounds in a way that Ds learns at school so I don't accidentally confuse him!

Tricky words - covers everything that doesn't quite fit according to the rules that have been covered so far...