Different etymologies for spoken and written forms

I know a word in another language which appears at first to have a highly irregular spelling that does not match the pronunciation. However, further examination suggests that the spoken and written forms have different - and unrelated - etymologies. Are there any examples of this in English?

The example in another language is the Scots Gaelic word leugh /lʲeːv/ which means "read". Dwelly. Even without a knowledge of Gaelic orthography it can be appreciated that /v/ is a strange rendition of gh. The expected form would be /lʲeəɣ/. Leugh is clearly similar to the Latin lego ("read") from which it is assumed to derive. This fits with the introduction of reading by Latin-speaking monks. So where does the /v/ come from? It was inevitable that the monks introduced reading and books at the same time. The Latin for "book" is liber and the French livre demonstrates that b can change to v /v/. The corresponding word in Gaelic is leabhar /lʲevər/ (except that /v/ and /w/ are interchangeable, as in many languages). It seems that /lʲeːv/ is simply the verb backformed from /lʲevər/, as if /lʲevər/ "book" is simply the thing you use to /lʲeːv/ "read".

In short, the anomaly has arisen because of the close semantic link between reading and books, and the co-incidental similarity of the words, leading to confusion.

Solution 1:

This isn't quite what you're looking for, but it's close.

The word island comes to us from the old English word iegland, which became yland in Middle English. Note that there is no "s" in it. The "s" was added by mistake.

The "s" in the spelling comes from confusion with the unrelated word isle. This was ile in Middle English, from Old French ile, from Latin insula. This word had an "s" added in the 16th century because there had been one in Latin.