For me, only goodbye is hard to pronounce.
Well, there are differences on etimology and grammatical base, because our ortography tries to reflect the grammatical structure, too; and we assimilation (? is this the right English term?) that may be familiar for those who learn Italian or Welsh, where we pronounce the "stronger" consonant in a group – but this is also easily predictable and based on quite well defined rules.
Of course, that was a kind of typo, I tried to find the right word and missed the other :) It should be "we use assimilation".To make it clear because I am still not sure about the terms, here is an example. "With this" in Hungarian is "ez" + "-vel" suffix. Since the "°ezvel" would sound horribly, v changes to "z" (and always the suffix changes) to "ezzel". This example has one more thing to observe: many Hungarians miss the rule in the brackets up there, and say "°evvel". This is incorrect but it is so frequent that nobody would care. For other words assimilation is more strictly follows the rule.
(Since asterix converts to italic here, I used ° sign to mark the incorrect versions.)
I would agree with Edelweiss73 in that 'evvel/avval' is not incorrect but less literate. Consider 'ebben/abban', which is the archetype of regressive assimilation (the ending influences the word, not the other way round) - you just cannot say 'ezben/azban'. This 'evvel/avval' uses the same logic. Just when and why this logic can/must be applied is not answered by linguists - they simply say that both 'ezzel/azzal' and 'evvel/avval' are correct, and experience shows that the latter is more frequent in less literate environments.
Interesting. Often in Indo-European languages, when the pronunciation of two consonants is assimilated, the spelling is usually changed after some time to reflect it. At least, the spelling was changed until modern times when the spelling of most languages is set in stone because of dictionaries, the internet, etc. More recent shifts in pronunciation just leave everything looking like it's spelled wrong. ;)
Edelweiss73: nem győztél meg teljes mértékben, bár valamennyire igen. Egy blogbejegyzés, még ha szakmai blog is, nem igazán forrás nyelvi szabályokra. Viszont az "ahhoz", "akkor" viselkedése elgondolkodtatott. Megpróbálok még utánanézni, addig meg duzzogva elfogadom, amit írtál :D
Edelweiss73: could you give me a reference? The rule is, that always the suffix changes the vowel, as far as I know. This means that "evvel" is definitely wrong, even if some (quite a lot) people use it.
On the other hand, language is changing, developing all the time. Back in a century, the definite article "a" was a mistake (it was expected to be "az" and after a while they started to write it with an apostrophe to show the missing "z". It was quite a time that the abbreviated form got a foot in the door. Perhaps "evvel" is one of the first words that invalidate the mentioned rule.
Almost... We cannot really say 'включить', so we say something like "фключить". You find this also in Hungarian: we cannot really say 'vasgolyó' (iron ball), so we say, easily and comfortably something like "vazsgolyó" (or важгойо in Cyrillic). But, when you hear "vazsgolyó" in a dictate, the rules of ortography are to be observed and you would put down 'vasgolyó'.
Other examples are Finnish or Italian, etc.
включить is a Russian word. Transliterated, it would be vklyucheet, with the v (в) being pronounced more like an f (ф). It means to turn on, enable or include. важгойо is an approximate transliteration of vazsgolyó/vasgolyó. To English speakers, it may be more readily understood as vazhgoy'o. See: