I do believe it’s high time that schools stopped this mistaken “oi” for “oh”; it’s inserting a “yud” into the word; how could it not change the meaning?
MiddlePath: I found blockhead’s post, which you agreed with, to be perturbing and I don’t know why you still back it despite some points like “quf”. To justify the saf as “t” because that’s how people say it, is, for kodseh purposes, prima facie absurd, not to mention in a dikduk discussion.
What he writes is anyways very puzzling: it is much more incorrect to use a “t” than using a samech for a saf. It may be more precisely pronounced as a “th” rather than a “s”, but an Ashkenzaic “s” is much closer to a “th” than a Sefardic “t” is.
While on the topic, the sefardi “oh” is somewhere between a kamatz and a cholam, but is not a true cholam. It is better than “oi”, though.
Regarding the chaf and Spanish “Guadalajara”, their “j” in that context is awfully close to our ches. So the ashkenaz “ches” is actually quite reasonable.
Again, the typical Ashkenazi havarah is off only in a matter of degrees, as noted. The sefardi havara is simply off, with saf and kamatz completely disregarded, pronounced identically to “taf” and “patach”, respectively (and even “oh” is not fully pronounced).