Many words in English sound the same. Can you tell which one it is when you speak？

Usually context is the clue you're looking for, they're homophones, but you don't use "to" in the same context as "too" or "two". "Two would be too many to fathom." Swap the "to" sounding words around and that sentence in text form devolves in to nonsense, but would be spoken exactly the same.

In your first example, the words do sound a little bit different. Otherwise, we just figure it out based on context. 'They're', 'there', and 'their' may sound the same, but I can't think of a sentence where I couldn't tell which one it was. Like in the sentence "They're taking their cars there", you couldn't swap any of them around and have it still make sense.

"I'm going too the store" is a nonsense sentence, so you know they're saying 'to'. Likewise if someone says "What's happening there/their/they're" I know they mean 'there' because the other two aren't valid in that sentence. It kind of sucks because you have to basically know what the sentence means gramatically first to figure out what word they're using, which can be hard if you're not a native speaker.

To and too don't sound the same. In too the vowel sound is held longer and can shift a little where as in to the vowel sound is very short and you are already saying the next word.  To is also much shorter in how it is said than two. 

As others have mentioned already, it's just... context. English has so many homophones (words which sound exactly the same but are spelt differently) that, as a native speaker, you just get used to them. If there's doubt, you usually just ask a clarifying question.

I saw something on Instagram that I found interesting: in English we emphasize different words in a sentence and it changes the meaning. We don’t even realize we do this. *I* didn’t see her vs I didn’t see *her* convey different ideas. In your example, if I heard “I’m going 2” or “I’m going *2*” I would know you meant “too”. If I heard “I’m *going* 2” I would know you meant “to”

Same way a German tells the difference between "er ist" (he is) and "er isst" (he is eating) which sound the same. I'm sure that there are similar examples in your own language which you just don't notice. You tell them apart from context.

Context, basically As an aside, since we're talking about homophones, I'm curious about how people in the sub pronounce this: >Mary and Murray will marry in a merry ceremony How many of the 'm' words sound the same to you? They're all different to me

Too and to are not homophones but their and there are Actually too and to is very different, give a look on yt on the schwa sound

Usually with perfect homophones like that, it's quite clear from context which one it's meant to be. "Bring this cup over there" just does not work as a meaningful sentence if you swapped in "they're" or "their".

For to/too/two the way I learned it as a kid in school was that "two" is the spelling of the number 2, "too" would be used as a replacement for the word, "also" so if you use "too" try switching it with "also" and see if it still makes sense. If it does, then "too" is correct. And "to" is everything else. For their/they're/there, there are some quick and easy things you can do to tell which one to use or which one you heard. "They're" is a contraction (combination) of the words "they are," so try saying the sentence separating the words and see if it still makes sense. "Their" is meant to show possession or ownership, "that is their house." That leaves "there" for everything else. So "there" and "to" are the basic default uses, and the other forms are used only in certain cases, so try the tests above for each scenario and you should be able to figure out which one is meant.

You can tell which word it is from the context in the sentence.

I'm going too - I'm going too I'm going to school - I'm goina school I'm going to the bank - I'm goinin the bank I'm going to learn that - I'm gonna learn that

I’m going to the store vs I’m going too, to is very short and too is quite a lot longer.

To/too/two and they’re/their/there are probably the most famous homophones in English. Possibly someone with a linguistic degree and a very sensitive ear would be able to hear any differences in pronunciation, but the majority of native English speaks will tell you they sound the same. So the only way to tell which one a person means is context. In most cases, substituting one word for another homophone wouldn’t make sense grammatically so it’s fairly easy to tell what the person means. ( “I’m going to school” is a sentence that makes sense. “I’m going too school” and “I’m going two school” do not make sense so someone wouldn’t say those). Sometimes people do a bit of word play with it. Like someone will say “who wants ice cream?”. Someone will respond “me!” A second person will usually say “me too!” (Meaning I also want ice cream). And then a third person will say “me three!” (Playing off the fact that “too” and “two” sound the same.)

When spoken? Always. This is a common mistake that native speakers make in writing. However, i’ll point out that whenever a native speaker makes this mistake, they know what they are trying to say semantically they just forget the proper written form. As many other commenters have pointed out, there isn’t much of a way to confuse them in speech unless you haven’t memorized the forms yet. Once you learn the forms, they can’t occur in the same place and you’ll know from context. I will stress again that this is a writing problem not a speaking problem. As a learner, you will probably struggle with this less than native speakers. Mistakes that are common for native speakers tend to happen less in learners. There are different sets of mistakes than learners and native speakers make in a given language, albeit sometimes with overlap.

yes, based on context, because saying “i’m going too the store” doesn’t make sense. i live in england, the way people pronounce “to” and “too” are different here, or at least in my particular region. the vowel in “to” is shorter than the vowel in “too”. and with their, they’re and there, they’re also deductible based on context, because if i said “they’re going there because their sister is also there”, something like “their going they’re because there sister is also their” wouldn’t make sense. it’s a bit of a long example, but i hope you’d get what i mean.

The context of the sentence makes it obvious

Just from context. I always wonder about this for French too bc they also have a lot of homophones but I assume it’s clear from context. If you understand the structure enough there’s no way you could confuse the meanings of “I’m going too” with “I’m going to the store.” That said MANY English speakers consistently use the wrong word in writing even if they understand the spoken difference.

Unless you put emphasis on the "to," "I'm going to the store" doesn't sound like "I'm going too." The o in to makes more of a schwa sound than an oo sound, or something in between. It's like people don't pronounce the articles in "the store" and "a store" like "thee" and "ay" unless they're emphasizing the article for a specific reason.

This is so relatable! English homophones like to/too/two and there/their/they’re trip me up all the time, especially in fast conversations. Context usually helps, but when people speak quickly, it’s easy to get lost. I’ve been practicing by listening carefully and repeating sentences to catch the differences.

Context.

I mean some people still say "thar" instead of "there." But the difference is that they are all used in contexts without overlap: they're is a noun and verb, their comes before a noun, and there is a noun without a verb within it. Some of us say "dare" and "there" the same and dare can be a noun or verb but it's rare this would lead to unclarifiable ambiguity. You are unlikely to ever meet this sentence: "Over there, they're their own dare." Which is still not ambiguous.

Context. While they are homonyms (sound the same), the meanings are very different, so most of the time only one of the words makes sense.

Native/fluent English speakers generally know which word is being used when it comes to homophones based on context. There are very few, if any, sentences in which two/to/too or there/their/they're could be used interchangeably and the sentence would still make sense.

To, too, and two all have completely different meanings. I don't think there are many sentences where you can use them interchangeably.

It sounds a bit like "I'm going [tuh] the store" and too is like [tew]. This is exaggerated, it's not really that different, and usually context is a bigger indication.

Context. For example, "I'm going two the store" and "I'm going too the store" don't make sense. Or there's also sentence stress. For example, "to" tends to be unstressed. So you can tell sentences like "I'm going too" and "I'm going to" apart from stress. "I'm going too", meaning "I'm also going", would typically be "I'm going TOO", while "I'm going to" as an answer to "Have you done that yet?" would typically be "I'm GOing to"

Weak forms for the difference between too and to, Geoff Lindsey has a good video about them

Too is used as also because the O has a friend

It's mostly context which is why you see people mix them up in texting since they sound the same. For some reason my they're sounds different than their or there

You can differentiate them by context. The words you gave as examples would not be used in the same situations. Nobody can tell them apart just by hearing them.

Here’s another ambiguous example for you that actually are complete and common sentences: “he’s coming to” (he was unconscious and is regaining consciousness) and “he’s coming too” (he is coming also). They sound exactly the same. You need context to differentiate.

Too is incorrect in your example. The meaning of too is “as well” going somewhere is “go to.” Two is quantity. So by context clues you can tell which you are using. They are said the same way. Same thing for they’re there and their They’re is “they are.” There is that place. And their is that belongs to them. All known through the rest of the sentence not through sound.

> the words 'too' and 'to' sound the same No, they don't. “To” is a function word, and it gets reduced (not contracted, like it happens with many other function words). Watch these [two](https://youtu.be/EaXYas58_kc?feature=shared) [videos](https://youtu.be/qlbGtEg68x4?feature=shared) by a professional phonetician Dr. Geoff Lindsey about weak forms to get an in-depth answer.

You usually work it out through Context; 'They're' (They are) is referring to a separate person(s). 'There' is referring to a place in physical space (Over there/Under there) 'Their" Is a passive form, it comes before a noun to indicate something belonging to some one (Their car/Their tv) You need to listen for what has been previously said (or what you can infer from visuals, if you're watching something for input) and use that as a clue to help you guess which one is being used similarly Two is written form of 2, so listen out for if the context of the conversation has things like, numbers, time quantifies ect. I'll fully admit to you as a native speaker I couldn't tell you the difference between 'to' and 'too' I just generally know which one to use when writing. The main thing is just to keep practicing listening out for context and it will come to you more naturally as time goes on.

Usually you can tell from context. Sometimes tone/emphasis also. Like in "I'm going too." You'd usually hear the "too" being emphasized. Whereas in "I'm going to the store." The "to" would not be emphasized.

Off the top of my head I can come up with two homophone pairs where the words are the same part of speech and truly swappable and that's root/route and creek/creak. Even in this set, the meaning is so different I think you'd be likely to know which one you're talking about. And if not you'd ask. (I guess in some dialects you have issues with pen/pin/pan. These are basically indistinguishable when my dad says them and if you aren't sure you just ask which with a really exaggerated vowel sound)