The phonological history of English includes various changes in the phonology of consonant clusters.
H-cluster reductions
editThe H-cluster reductions are various consonant reductions that have occurred in the history of English, involving consonant clusters beginning with /h/ that have lost the /h/ (or become reduced to /h/) in some or all dialects.
Reductions of /hw/
editThe cluster /hw/ (spelled ?wh? since Middle English) has been subject to two kinds of reduction:
- Reduction to /h/ before rounded vowels (due to /hw/ being perceived as a /h/ with the labialization characteristic of that environment). This occurred with the word how in the Old English period, and with who, whom and whose in Middle English (the latter words having had an unrounded vowel in Old English).
- Reduction to /w/, a development that has affected the speech of the great majority of English speakers, causing them to pronounce ?wh-? the same as ?w-? (sometimes called the wine–whine merger or glide cluster reduction). The distinction is maintained, however, in Scotland, most of Ireland, and some Southern American English.
Reduction of /hl/, /hr/ and /hn/
editThe Old English consonant clusters /hl/, /hr/ and /hn/ were reduced to /l/, /r/, and /n/ in Middle English. For example, Old English hlāf, hring and hnutu become loaf, ring and nut in Modern English.
Reduction of /hj/
editIn some dialects of English the cluster /hj/ is reduced to /j/,[1] leading to pronunciations like /ju?d?/ for huge and /?ju?m?n/ for human, and making hew, hue, and Hugh homophones of ewe, yew, and you. This is sometimes considered a type of glide cluster reduction, but it is much less widespread than wh-reduction, and is generally stigmatized where it is found. Aside from accents with general H-dropping, in the United States this reduction is mostly found in accents of Philadelphia and New York City; it also occurs in Cork accents of Irish English. In other dialects of English, hew and yew remain distinct; however, the cluster /hj/ of hew, human, etc. is often reduced from [?j] to just [?] (a voiceless palatal fricative).[2][3]
Y-cluster reductions
editY-cluster reductions are reductions of clusters ending with the palatal approximant /j/, which is the sound of ?y? in yes, and is sometimes referred to as "yod", from the Hebrew letter yod(h), which has the sound [j]. Many such clusters arose in dialects in which the falling diphthong /?u/ (the product of the merger of several Middle English vowel sequences) became the rising diphthong /ju?/. (For more information, see Phonological history of English high back vowels.) They were thus often found before the vowel /u?/, as in cube /kju?b/ – which was in some cases modified to /??/ or /?/ before (historical) /r/, as in cure, or weakened to /?/ or /?/ as in argument. They also occurred in words ending in -ion and -ious, such as nation and precious.
This change from /?u/ to /ju?/, which had occurred in London by the end of the 17th century, did not take place in all dialects. A few dialects, notably in Wales, as well as in some parts of northern England, New England, and the American South, still retain a (falling) /?u/ diphthong where standard English has /ju?/ – these dialects therefore lack the clusters with /j/ and have not been subject to the reductions described here.[4]
The diphthongs /ju?/ or /???/ are most commonly indicated by the spellings ?eu?, ?ew?, ?uCV? (where C is any consonant and V is any vowel), ?ue? and ?ui?, as in feud, few, mute, cue and suit, while the historical monophthong /u?/ is commonly indicated by the spellings ?oo? and ?ou?, as in moon and soup.
Yod-dropping
editYod-dropping is the elision of the /j/ from certain syllable-initial clusters of the type described above. Particular cases of yod-dropping may affect all or some of the dialects that have the relevant clusters.
The change of [?] to [j] in these positions (as described above) produced some clusters which would have been difficult or impossible to pronounce, which led to what John Wells calls "early yod dropping" in which the [j] was elided in the following environments:[5]
- After /?, t?, d?/, for example chute /?u?t/, chew /t?u?/, juice /d?u?s/
- After /j/, for example yew /ju?/ (compare [j???] in some conservative dialects)
- After /r/, for example rude /ru?d/
- After stop+/l/ clusters, for example blue /blu?/
The previously mentioned accents that did not have the [?]→[j] change were not subject to this process. Thus, for example, in much Welsh English pairs like chews/choose, yew/you and threw/through remain distinct: the first member of each pair has the diphthong /???/, while the second member has /u?/:[6]
- chews /t????z/, choose /t?u?z/
- yew /j???/, you /ju?/
- threw /θr???/, through /θru?/
Conversely, an initial /j/ does not appear in Welsh English before /i?/ in words such as yeast and yield.[7]
Many varieties of English have extended yod-dropping to the following environments if the /j/ is in the same syllable as the preceding consonant:
- After /s/, for example suit /su?t/
- After /l/, for example lute /?lu?t/
- After /z/, for example Zeus /?zu?s/
- After /θ/, for example enthuse /?n?θu?z/
Yod-dropping in the above environments used to be considered nonstandard in England but now also occurs by educated RP-speakers.[8] (The /j/ after /s/ is not normally dropped in RP in medial positions, however: compare pursuit /p??sju?t/.) In General American, yod-dropping is found not only in the above environments but also after /t/, /d/ and /n/ (for example, tune /?tu?n/, dew /?du?/, and new /?nu?/).
The lack of yod-dropping in those contexts has occasionally been held to be a shibboleth distinguishing Canadians from Americans. However, in a survey conducted in the Golden Horseshoe area of Southern Ontario in 1994, over 80% of respondents under the age of 40 pronounced student and news without yod.[9]
General American thus undergoes yod-dropping after all alveolar consonants. A few accents of American English, such as working-class Southern American English, however, preserve the distinction in pairs like do/dew because, like in the Welsh English dialects discussed above, they retain a diphthong /???/ in words in which RP has /ju?/: /lut~l???t/, /du~d???/, etc.[10]
However, in words like annual, menu, volume, Matthew, continue, etc., with a syllable break before the /j/, there is no yod-dropping. The same applies accordingly to British and other accents; the yod is often dropped after initial /l/, for example, but it is not dropped in words like volume or value. (British speakers omit the /j/ in figure, but most Americans retain it.)
Additionally, there is no /j/ in British pronunciations of coupon and Pulitzer, /?ku?p?n/ and /?p?l?ts?/ respectively, but many American speakers keep the yod, realizing them as /?kju?p?n/ and /?pju?l?ts?r/, although Pulitzer with the pew sound is widely incorrect.[11][12]
In New Zealand and to some extent Australian English, debut is mainly pronounced without the yod as /?d?eb??/.[13]
Yod-dropping after /t/, /d/, and /n/ was also a traditional feature of Cockney speech, which continues to be the case after /n/, but now, after /t/ and /d/, yod-coalescence is now more common.[14]
Some East Anglian accents such as Norfolk dialect extend yod-dropping not only to the position after /t/, /d/ or /n/ but also to the position after nonalveolar consonants as well: pairs like beauty/booty, mute/moot, cute/coot can then be homophonous.[15] A well-known series of British television advertisements beginning in the 1980s featured Bernard Matthews, who was from Norfolk and described his turkeys as "bootiful" (for beautiful). Such accents pronounce a /j/ in words like "use", "unit", etc. only if there is no consonant before the /j/.
| /???/ | /u?/ | IPA | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| brewed | brood | ?bru?d | |
| brume | broom | ?bru?m | |
| chews | choose | ?t?u?z | |
| chute | shoot | ??u?t | |
| drupe | droop | ?dru?p | |
| rheum | room | ?ru?m | |
| rude | rood | ?ru?d | |
| rue | roo | ?ru? | |
| ruse | roos | ?ru?z | |
| threw | through | ?θru? | |
| yew | you | ?ju? | |
| yule | you'll | ?ju?l |
| /???/ | /u?/ | IPA | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blume | bloom | ?blu?m | |
| glume | gloom | ?glu?m | |
| Lewis | Louis | ?lu??s | |
| lieu | loo | ?lu? | |
| lieu | Lou | ?lu? | |
| Luke | look | ?lu?k | With foot–goose merger. |
| lune | loon | ?lu?n | |
| lute | loot | ?lu?t | |
| slew | slough | ?slu? | |
| slue | slough | ?slu? | |
| sue | Sioux | ?su? | |
| suit | soot | ?su?t | With foot–goose merger. |
| /???/ | /u?/ | IPA | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| adieu | ado | ??du? | |
| dew | do | ?du? | |
| Dewar | doer | ?du??r | |
| due | do | ?du? | |
| dune | Doon | ?du?n | |
| knew | nu | ?nu? | |
| new | nu | ?nu? | |
| tune | toon | ?tu?n |
| /???/ | /u?/ | IPA | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| beaut | boot | ?bu?t | |
| beauty | booty | ?bu?ti | |
| butte | boot | ?bu?t | |
| cue | coo | ?ku? | |
| cute | coot | ?ku?t | |
| feud | food | ?fu?d | |
| few | foo | ?fu? | |
| fuel | fool | ?fu?l | With vile–vial merger. |
| hew | who | ?hu? | |
| hews | who's | ?hu?z | |
| hews | whose | ?hu?z | |
| hue | who | ?hu? | |
| hues | who's | ?hu?z | |
| hues | whose | ?hu?z | |
| Hugh | who | ?hu? | |
| Hughes | who's | ?hu?z | |
| Hughes | whose | ?hu?z | |
| Kew | coo | ?ku? | |
| kyu | coo | ?ku? | |
| mew | moo | ?mu? | |
| mew | moue | ?mu? | |
| mewed | mood | ?mu?d | |
| muse | moos | ?mu?z | |
| muse | moues | ?mu?z | |
| mute | moot | ?mu?t | |
| pew | poo | ?pu? | |
| pule | pool | ?pu?l | |
| pure | poor | ?p??(r) | |
| Q; cue | coo | ?ku? | |
| que | coo | ?ku? | |
| queue | coo | ?ku? |
Yod-coalescence
editYod-coalescence is a process that fuses the clusters /dj, tj, sj, zj/ into the sibilants [d?, t?, ?, ?] respectively (for the meanings of those symbols, see English phonology). The first two are examples of affrication.
Unlike yod-dropping, yod-coalescence frequently occurs with clusters that would be considered to span a syllable boundary and so commonly occurs before unstressed syllables. For example, in educate, the /dj/ cluster would not usually be subject to yod-dropping in General American, as the /d/ is assigned to the previous syllable, but it commonly coalesces to [d?]. Here are a few examples of yod-coalescence universal in all English dialects:
- /tj/ → [t?] in most words ending -ture, such as nature [?ne?t???]
- /dj/ → [d?] in soldier [?so?ld???]
- /sj/ → [?] in words ending with -ssure such as pressure [?p?????] (also in words ending with consonant+sure, consonant+sion, -tion)
- /zj/ → [?] in words ending vowel+sure such as measure [?m????] (also vowel+sion, r+sion)
In some other words, the coalesced pronunciation is common in English dialects around the world, but an older non-coalesced form still exists among some speakers of standard British English:
- educate [??d??ke?t] (also in standard RP: [??dj?ke?t])
- azure [?????] (also in RP [??zj??])
- issue [???u?] (also in RP [??sju?]), the intermediate form [???ju?] being also common
Coalescence can even occur across word boundaries, as in the colloquial "gotcha" /?ɡ?t??/ (for got you /?ɡ?tju/) and "whatcha" /?w?t??/ (for what're you /?w?t?rj?/).
In certain English accents, yod-coalescence also occurs in stressed syllables, as in tune and dune. That occurs in Australian, Cockney, Estuary English, Zimbabwean English, some speakers of Hiberno-English, Newfoundland English, South African English, and to a certain extent[16] in New Zealand English, RP,[17] many speakers in Scottish English, and even some varieties of English in Asia, like Philippine English (many speakers because of the influence by the phonology of their mother languages). That results in pronunciations such as the following:
- dew/due [d?u?] (RP: [dju?])
- tune [t?u?n] (RP: [tju?n])
In certain varieties such as Australian, Ugandan, and some RP,[17] stressed [sj, zj] can also coalesce:
- resume [????u?m] (RP: [???zju?m])
- assume [???u?m] (RP: [??sju?m])
That can lead to additional homophony; for instance, dew and due come to be pronounced the same as Jew.
Yod-coalescence has traditionally been resisted in Received Pronunciation. It has certainly become established in words of the first group listed above (nature, soldier, pressure etc.), but it is not yet universal in those of the second group (educate etc.), and it does not generally occur in those of the third group (dew, tune etc.).[18]
| /?u/ | /ju?/ | IPA | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| deuce | juice | ?d?u?s | |
| dew | Jew | ?d?u? | |
| dewed | Jude | ?d?u?d | |
| dual | jewel | ?d?u??l | |
| due | Jew | ?d?u? | |
| duel | jewel | ?d?u??l | |
| duke | juke | ?d?u?k | |
| duly | Julie | ?d?u?li | |
| dune | June | ?d?u?n | |
| duty | Judy | ?d?u??i | With intervocalic alveolar flapping. |
| sue | shoe | ??u? | |
| sue | shoo | ??u? | |
| suit | chute | ??u?t | |
| suit | shoot | ??u?t | |
| 'tude | chewed | ?t?u?d |
See also
Other initial cluster reductions
editReduction of /wr/ and /wl/
editOld and Middle English had an initial /wr/ cluster (note that /r/ does not denote [?] here), hence the spelling of words like write and wrong. This was reduced to just /r/, apparently during the 17th century. An intermediate stage may have been an [r] with lip rounding.[19]
As a result of this reduction, pairs of words like rap and wrap, rite and write, etc. are homophones in practically all varieties of Modern English. They remain distinct in the Doric dialect of Scots, where the wr- cluster is pronounced /vr/. Alexander John Ellis reported distinctions between wr and r in Cumbria and in several varieties of Scots in the nineteenth century.[20]
Old English also had a cluster /wl/, which reduced to /l/ during Middle English. For example, the word lisp derives from Old English wlisp(ian).
Reduction of /kn/
editMiddle English initial /kn/ is reduced in modern English to /n/, making pairs like knot/not and knight/night homophones.
The /kn/ cluster was spelled cn- in Old English; this changed to kn- in Middle English, and this spelling survives in Modern English, despite the loss of the /k/ sound. Cognates in other Germanic languages usually still sound the initial /k/. For example, the Old English ancestor of knee was cnēo, pronounced /kne?o?/, and the cognate word in Modern German is Knie, pronounced /kni?/.
Most dialects of English reduced the initial cluster /kn/ to /n/ relatively recently; the change seems to have taken place in educated English during the 17th century.[21] Several German-language grammars of English from the late 17th and early 18th centuries transcribed English kn- as tn-, dn-, implying that a stage of assimilation (or perhaps debuccalization to /?n/) preceded that of complete reduction.[22]
The cluster is preserved in some Scots dialects,[23] and Alexander John Ellis recorded it in parts of the Northern English counties of Cumbria and Northumberland in the late nineteenth century.[24]
Reduction of /ɡn/
editThe Middle English initial cluster /ɡn/ is reduced to /n/ in Modern English. Like the reduction of /kn/, this seems to have taken place during the seventeenth century.[25] The change affected words like gnat, gnostic, gnome, etc., the spelling with gn- being retained despite the loss of the /ɡ/ sound. The cluster is preserved in some Scots dialects.[23]
The song The Gnu jokes about this silent g and other silent letters in English. In fact the g in gnu may always have been silent in English, since this loanword did not enter the language until the late 18th century.[26] The trumpeter Kenny Wheeler wrote a composition titled Gnu High, a pun on "new high".
S-cluster reductions
editIn some types of Caribbean English, the initial clusters /sp/, /st/, and /sk/ are reduced by the loss of /s/. The following stop is then subject to regular aspiration (or devoicing of the following approximant) in its new word-initial environment. Some examples of such pronunciations are:
| spit | → 'pit | [?sp?t] | → [?p??t] |
| stomach | → 'tomach | [?st?m?k] | → [?t??m?k] |
| spend | → 'pen | [?sp?nd] | → [?p??n] (also affected by final cluster reduction) |
| squeeze | → 'queeze | [?skwi?z] | → [?k?w?i?z] |
According to Wells, these reductions occur only in the broadest creole.[27]
Final cluster reductions
editNG-coalescence
editNG-coalescence is a historical sound change by which the final cluster /nɡ/, pronounced [?ɡ] (the /n/ being realized as a velar nasal by assimilation with the velar /ɡ/), came to be pronounced as just [?] – that is, the final [ɡ] was dropped, but the velar quality of the nasal remained. The change took place in educated London speech around the end of the 16th century, and explains why there is no [ɡ] sound at the end of words like fang, sing, wrong and tongue in the standard varieties of Modern English.[28]
The change applies not only at the end of a word, but generally at the end of a morpheme. If a word ending in -ng is followed by a suffix or is compounded with another word, the [?] pronunciation normally remains. For example, in the words fangs, sings, singing, singer, wronged, wrongly, hangman, there is no [ɡ] sound. An exception is the comparative and superlative forms of adjectives: in the words longer/longest, stronger/strongest, younger/youngest, the [ɡ] is pronounced in most accents. The pronunciation with [ɡ] is thus possible only before a vowel; before a consonant, the only possibility is a bare [?].
In other cases (when it is not morpheme-final), word-internal -ng- does not show the effects of coalescence, and the pronunciation [?ɡ] is retained, as in finger and angle. This means that the words finger and singer do not rhyme in most modern varieties of English, although they did in Middle English. The process of NG-coalescence might therefore be referred to as the singer–finger split.
Some accents, however, do not show the full effects of NG-coalescence as described above. In these accents, sing may be found with [?ɡ], and singer may rhyme with finger.[29] This is particularly associated with English English accents in areas such as Lancashire, the West Midlands and Derbyshire, and is also present in north-east varieties of Welsh English. This includes the cities of Birmingham (see Brummie), Manchester (see Manchester dialect), Liverpool (see Scouse), Sheffield and Stoke-on-Trent (see Potteries dialect). This also occurs in a small area of Kent. As this occurs around the mining area of Kent, it might be a result of large-scale migration by miners from other more northerly coalfields to Kent in the 1920s.
It is also associated with some American English accents in the New York City area.[30]
On the other hand, in some accents of the west of Scotland and Ulster, NG-coalescence is extended to morpheme-internal position, so that finger is pronounced /?f???r/ (cf. Dutch vinger /?v???r/), thus rhyming with singer (although the [ɡ] is not dropped before a stressed syllable, as in engage).
It is because of NG-coalescence that /?/ is now normally regarded one of the phonemes of standard English. In Middle English, the [?] can be regarded as an allophone of /n/, occurring before velar consonants, but in Modern English, in view of minimal pairs such as pan–pang and sin–sing, that analysis no longer appears to hold. Nevertheless, some linguists[who?] (particularly generativists) do regard a word like sing as being underlyingly /s?nɡ/, positing a rule that deletes [ɡ] after a nasal before a morpheme boundary, after the nasal has undergone assimilation. A problem with this view is that there are a few words in which [?] is followed neither by a velar nor a morpheme boundary (such as gingham, dinghy, orangutan and Singapore, for those speakers who pronounce them without [ɡ]), and some in which the [ɡ] is not deleted before a morpheme boundary (such as longer, stronger, younger noted above). In the case of longer, a minimal pair occurs for some speakers between /l??ɡ?(r)/ (comparative form of the adjective long) and /l???(r)/ ("someone who longs"; agent noun of the verb long).
The above-mentioned accents which lack NG-coalescence may more easily be analyzed as lacking a phoneme /?/. The same may apply to those where NG-coalescence is extended to morpheme-internal position, since here a more consistent [ɡ]-deletion rule can be formulated.[31]
G-dropping
editG-dropping is a popular name for the feature of speech whereby /n/ is used in place of the standard /?/ in weak syllables. This applies especially to the -ing ending of verbs, but also in other words such as morning, nothing, ceiling, Buckingham, etc. G-dropping speakers may pronounce this syllable as [?n] or [?n] (reducing to a syllabic [n] in some cases), while non-G-dropping speakers have /??/ (/??/ with the weak vowel merger) or /i?/.[32]
Relative to the great majority of modern dialects, which have NG-coalescence, G-dropping does not involve the dropping of any sound, simply the replacement of the velar nasal with the alveolar nasal. The name derives from the apparent orthographic consequence of replacing the sound written ?ng? with that normally written ?n?. The spelling -in' is sometimes used to indicate that a speaker uses the G-dropping pronunciation, as in makin' for making.
The pronunciation with /n/ rather than /?/ is a long-established one. Old English verbs had a present participle in -ende and a verbal noun (gerund) form in -ing(e). These merged into a single form, written -ing, but not necessarily spoken as such – the /n/ pronunciation may be inherited from the former distinct present participle form. The /n/ variant appears to have been fashionable generally during the 18th century, with the alternative /??/ being adopted in educated speech around the 1820s, possibly as a spelling pronunciation.[33]
Today, G-dropping is a feature of colloquial and non-standard speech of all regions, including stereotypically of Cockney, Southern American English and African American Vernacular English. Its use is highly correlated with the socioeconomic class of the speaker, with speakers of lower classes using /n/ with greater frequency. It has also been found to be more common among men than women, and less common in more formal styles of speech.[34]
The fact that the /n/ pronunciation was formerly associated with certain upper-class speech is reflected in the phrase huntin’, shootin’ and fishin’ (used in referring to country gentry who frequently engaged in such field sports). Further evidence that this pronunciation was once standard comes from old rhymes, as in this couplet from John Gay's 1732 pastoral Acis and Galatea, set to music by Handel:
- Shepherd, what art thou pursuing,
- Heedless running to thy ruin?
which was presumably pronounced "shepherd, what art thou pursuin', heedless runnin' to thy ruin", although this would sound very odd in an opera today. Similarly, in the poetry of Jonathan Swift (1667–1745), -ing forms consistently rhyme with words ending in /?n/, as in this verse of A Ballad on the Game of Traffic, where "lining" rhymes with "fine in":
- But Weston has a new-cast gown
- On Sundays to be fine in,
- And, if she can but win a crown,
- 'Twill just new dye the lining.
Reduction of /mb/ and /mn/
editIn later Middle English, the final cluster /mb/ was reduced to just /m/ (the plum-plumb merger). This affects words such as lamb and plumb, as well as derived forms with suffixes, such as lambs, lambing, plumbed, plumber.
By analogy with words like these, certain other words ending in /m/, which had no historical /b/ sound, had a silent letter ?b? added to their spelling by way of hypercorrection. Such words include limb and crumb.[35]
Where the final cluster /mn/ occurred, this was reduced to /m/ (the him-hymn merger), as in column, autumn, damn, solemn. (Compare French automne, where the cluster has been reduced to /n/.) Both sounds are nonetheless still pronounced before vowels in certain derivatives, such as columnar, autumnal, damnation, solemnity.
Generalized final cluster reduction
editGeneral reduction of final consonant clusters occurs in African American Vernacular English and Caribbean English. It also appears in the Local Dublin English.[36] The new final consonant may be slightly lengthened as an effect.
Examples are:
| test | → tes' | [t?st] | → [t?s(?)] |
| desk | → des' | [d?sk] | → [d?s(?)] |
| hand | → han' | [h?nd] | → [h?n(?)] |
| send | → sen' | [s?nd] | → [s?n(?)] |
| left | → lef' | [l?ft] | → [l?f(?)] |
| wasp | → was' | [w?sp] | → [w?s(?)] |
The plurals of test and desk may become tesses and desses by the same rule that gives plural messes from singular mess.[37][38][39][40]
Medial cluster reductions
editWhen a consonant cluster ending in a stop is followed by another consonant or cluster in the next syllable, the final stop in the first syllable is often elided. This may happen within words or across word boundaries. Examples of stops that will often be elided in this way include the [t] in postman and the [d] in cold cuts or band saw.[41]
Historically, similar reductions have taken place before syllabic consonants in certain words, leading to the silent ?t? in words like castle and listen. This change took place around the 17th century. In the word often, the [t] sound later came to be re-inserted by some speakers as a spelling pronunciation.[42]
An earlier reduction that took place in early Middle English was the change of /ts/ to /s/ (the sent-cent merger). This led to the modern sound of soft ?c?.
Consonant insertions
editPrince–prints merger
editFor many speakers, an epenthetic [t] is inserted in the final cluster /ns/, making it identical or very similar to the cluster /nts/. For example, the words prince and prints have come to be homophones or nearly so.
The epenthesis is a natural consequence of the transition from the nasal [n] to the fricative [s]; if the raising of the soft palate (which converts a nasal to an oral sound) is completed before the release of the tongue tip (which enables a fricative sound), an intervening stop [t] naturally results.[43] The merger of /ns/ and /nts/ is not necessarily complete, however; the duration of the epenthetic [t] in /ns/ has been found to be often shorter (and the [n] longer) than in the underlying cluster /nts/.[44] Some speakers preserve a clearer distinction, with prince having [ns], and prints having [nts] or [n?s]. The epenthesis does not occur between syllables, in words like consider.[45]
Other insertions
editThe merger of /nz/ and /ndz/ is also possible, making bans and pens sound like bands and pends. However, this is less common than the merger of /ns/ and /nts/ described above, and in rapid speech may involve the elision of the /d/ from /ndz/ rather than epenthesis in /nz/.[46]
Epenthesis of a stop between a nasal and a fricative can also occur in other environments, for example:
- /n?/ may become /nt?/ (so pinscher is often pronounced like pincher)
- /ms/ may become /mps/ (so Samson becomes "Sampson", hamster becomes "hampster")
- /?s/ may become /?ks/ (so Kingston becomes "kinkston")[46]
Epenthesis may also happen in the cluster /ls/, which then becomes /lts/, so else rhymes with belts.
An epenthetic [p] often intervenes in the cluster /mt/ in the word dreamt, making it rhyme with attempt.
Some originally epenthetic consonants have become part of the established pronunciation of words. This applies, for instance, to the /b/ in words like thimble, grumble and scramble.[35]
For the insertion of glottal stops before certain consonants, see Glottalization below.
| fricative | affricate | IPA | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron's | errands | ??r?n(d)z | With Mary-marry-merry merger. |
| -ance | -ants | -?n(t)s | |
| ANSI | antsy | ??n(t)si | |
| bans | bands | ?b?n(d)z | |
| Ben's | bends | ?b?n(d)z | |
| bines | binds | ?ba?n(d)z | |
| brans | brands | ?br?n(d)z | |
| bunce | bunts | ?b?n(t)s | |
| Bynes | binds | ?ba?n(d)z | |
| chance | chants | ?t??n(t)s, ?t?ɑ?n(t)s | |
| dense | dents | ?d?n(t)s | |
| dense | dints | ?d?n(t)s | With pen-pin merger. |
| -ence | -ents | -?n(t)s | |
| Erin's | errands | ??r?n(d)z | With weak vowel merger. |
| fines | finds | ?fa?n(d)z | |
| fens | fends | ?f?n(d)z | |
| Finns | fends | ?f?n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| fins | fends | ?f?n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| glans | glands | ?ɡl?n(d)z | |
| Hans | hands | ?h?n(d)z | Hans may also be pronounced /?hɑ?nz/ or /?hɑ?ns/. |
| Heinz | hinds | ?ha?n(d)z | Heinz may also be pronounced /?ha?nts/. |
| hence | hints | ?h?n(t)s | With pen-pin merger. |
| Hines | hinds | ?ha?n(d)z | |
| inns | ends | ??n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| ins | ends | ??n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| intense | intents | ?n?t?n(t)s | |
| Kines | kinds | ?ka?n(d)z | |
| LANs | lands | ?l?n(d)z | |
| lens | lends | ?l?n(d)z | |
| men's | mends | ?m?n(d)z | |
| mince | mints | ?m?n(t)s | |
| mines | minds | ?ma?n(d)z | |
| N's; ens | ends | ??n(d)z | |
| patience | patients | ?pe???n(t)s | |
| pawns | ponds | ?pɑn(d)z | With cot-caught merger. |
| pens | pends | ?p?n(d)z | |
| pins | pends | ?p?n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| ponce | ponts | ?pɑn(t)s | |
| pons | ponds | ?pɑn(d)z | |
| presence | presents | ?pr?z?n(t)s | |
| prince | prints | ?pr?n(t)s | |
| rinse | rents | ?r?n(t)s | With pen-pin merger. |
| sans | sands | ?s?n(d)z | |
| sense | cents | ?s?n(t)s | |
| sense | scents | ?s?n(t)s | |
| since | cents | ?s?n(t)s | With pen-pin merger. |
| since | scents | ?s?n(t)s | With pen-pin merger. |
| spins | spends | ?sp?n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| Stan's | stands | ?st?n(d)z | |
| tens | tends | ?t?n(d)z | |
| tense | tents | ?t?n(t)s | |
| tense | tints | ?t?n(t)s | With pen-pin merger. |
| tins | tends | ?t?n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| Vince | vents | ?v?n(t)s | With pen-pin merger. |
| wans | wands | ?wɑn(d)z | |
| wens | wends | ?w?n(d)z | |
| wens | winds (n.) | ?w?n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| wince | Wentz | ?w?n(t)s | With pen-pin merger. |
| whence | Wentz | ?w?n(t)s | With wine-whine merger. |
| whines | winds (v.) | ?wa?n(d)z | With wine-whine merger. |
| wines | winds (v.) | ?wa?n(d)z | |
| wins | wends | ?w?n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| wins | winds (n.) | ?w?n(d)z | |
| wyns, wynns | wends | ?w?n(d)z | With pen-pin merger. |
| wyns, wynns | winds (n.) | ?w?n(d)z |
Alterations of clusters
editAssimilation
editIn English as in other languages, assimilation of adjacent consonants is common, particularly of a nasal with a following consonant. This can occur within or between words. For example, the /n/ in encase is often pronounced [?] (becoming a velar nasal by way of assimilation with the following velar stop /k/), and the /n/ in ten men likely becomes [m], assimilating with the following bilabial nasal /m/. Other cases of assimilation also occur, such as pronunciation of the /d/ in bad boy as [b]. Voicing assimilation determines the sound of the endings -s (as in plurals, possessives and verb forms) and -ed (in verb forms): these are voiced ([z], [d]) following a voiced consonant (or vowel), but voiceless ([s], [t]) after a voiceless consonant, as in gets, knocked.[47]
Glottalization
editWhile there are many accents (such as Cockney) in which syllable-final /t/ is frequently glottalized (realized as a glottal stop, [?]) regardless of what follows it, the glottaling of /t/ in clusters is a feature even of standard accents, such as RP. There, [?] may be heard for /t/ in such words and phrases as quite good, quite nice, nights. More precisely, it occurs in RP when /t/ appears in the syllable coda, is preceded by a vowel, liquid or nasal, and it is followed by another consonant except (normally) a liquid or semivowel in the same word, as in mattress.[48]
Another possibility is pre-glottalization (or glottal reinforcement), where a glottal stop is inserted before a syllable-final stop, rather than replacing it. That can happen before /p/, /t/ and /k/ or also before the affricate /t?/. It can occur in RP in the same environments as those mentioned above, without the final restriction so a glottal stop may appear before the /t/, as in mattress. It can also occur before a pause as in quite! spoken alone but not in quite easy. In the case of /t?/, pre-glottalization is common even before a vowel, as in teacher.[49]
According to Wells, this pre-glottalization originated in the 20th century (at least, it was not recorded until then). Glottalization of /t/ spread rapidly during the 20th century.[48]
S-cluster metathesis
editFinal consonant clusters starting with /s/ sometimes undergo metathesis, meaning that the order of the consonants is switched. For example, the word ask may be pronounced like "ax", with the /k/ and the /s/ switched.
This example has a long history: the Old English verb áscian also appeared as acsian, and both forms continued into Middle English, the latter, metathesizing to "ask". The form axe appears in Chaucer: "I axe, why the fyfte man Was nought housband to the Samaritan?" (Wife of Bath's Prologue, 1386), and was considered acceptable in literary English until about 1600.[50][failed verification] It persists in some dialects of rural England as well as in Ulster Scots[51] as /?aks/, and in Jamaican English as /?a?ks/, from where it has entered London English as /?ɑ?ks/.
S-cluster metathesis has been observed in some forms of African American Vernacular English, although it is not universal, one of the most stigmatized features of AAVE and often commented on by teachers.[37][failed verification] Examples of possible AAVE pronunciations include:
| ask | → /??ks/ |
| grasp | → /?ɡr?ps/ |
| wasp | → /?wɑps/ |
| gasp | → /?ɡ?ps/ |
Merger of /str/ and /skr/
editFor some speakers of African American Vernacular English, the consonant cluster /str/ is pronounced as /skr/. For example, the word street may be pronounced as /skrit/.[52]
The form has been found to occur in Gullah and in the speech of some young African Americans born in the Southern United States. It is reported to be a highly stigmatized feature, with children who use it often being referred to speech pathologists.[53]
Yod-rhotacization
editThis section contains content that may be misleading to readers. (March 2025) |
Yod-rhotacization is a process that occurs for some Memphis AAVE[37] speakers, where /j/ is rhotacized to [r] in consonant clusters, causing pronunciations like:
| beautiful | → [?bru??fl?] |
| cute | → [krut] |
| music | → [?mruz?k] |
Compare yod-dropping and yod-coalescence, described above (and also the coil–curl merger, which features the reverse process, /r/ → /j/).
See also
editReferences
edit- ^ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2025-08-05. Retrieved 2025-08-05.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link) - ^ Gimson, A. C. (1980). An Introduction to the Pronunciation of English (3rd ed.). London: Edward Arnold Publishers. ISBN 0-7131-6287-2.
- ^ Ladefoged, Peter (2001). A Course in Phonetics (4th ed.). Fort Worth, Texas: Harcourt College Publishers. ISBN 0-15-507319-2.
- ^ Wells, John C. (1982). Accents of English. Vol. 1. Cambridge University Press. p. 207. ISBN 0-521-22919-7.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 207.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 385.
- ^ Mees, Inger M.; Collins, Beverley (1999). "Cardiff: A Real-time Study of Glottalisation". In Foulkes, Paul; Docherty, Gerard (eds.). Urban Voices. Arnold. p. 192. ISBN 0-340-70608-2.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 206.
- ^ "Changes in Progress in Canadian English: Yod-dropping". CHASS.UToronto.ca. University of Toronto. Archived from the original on February 29, 2008. Retrieved March 30, 2010. Excerpts from: Chambers, J. K. (1998). "Social embedding of changes in progress". Journal of English Linguistics. 26: 5–36. doi:10.1177/007542429802600102. S2CID 144942447.
- ^ a b Labov, William; Ash, Sharon; Boberg, Charles (2006). The Atlas of North American English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ISBN 3-11-016746-8.
- ^ Duryee, Tricia (6 November 2011). "A Nation Divided on How to Say the Word "Coupon"". All Things D. Dow Jones & Company Inc.
- ^ "FAQ". The Pulitzer Prizes. Columbia University.
24. How is 'Pulitzer' pronounced? The correct pronunciation is 'PULL it sir.'
- ^ L. J. Bauer; P. Warren (2008). "New Zealand English: phonology". In Burridge, Kate; Kortmann, Bernd (eds.). Varieties of English 3: The Pacific and Australasia. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. p. 60. ISBN 9783110208412.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 330.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 338.
- ^ Bauer, L.; Warren, P. (2005). "New Zealand English: Phonology". In Schneider, E. W. (ed.). A Handbook of Varieties of English: Phonology. Vol. 1. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ISBN 9783110175325.
- ^ a b Why some say CHUBE and some say TOOB, 8 November 2022, retrieved 2025-08-05
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 247.
- ^ Jespersen, O., A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, vol. 1, 12.81-82.
- ^ "Ellis Atlas survival of distinction between wr- and r-". www.lel.ed.ac.uk. Retrieved 2025-08-05.
- ^ Jespersen, O., A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, vol. 1, 12.71.
- ^ Vietor, Wilhelm: Elemente der Phonetik und Orthoepie des Deutschen, Englischen und Franz?sischen, 2nd ed., Heilbronn, 1887, p. 171
- ^ a b "Wir Ain Leed - Mid Northern Scots". Scots Online. Retrieved 21 March 2020.
- ^ "Ellis Atlas survival of distinction between kn- and n-". www.lel.ed.ac.uk. Retrieved 2025-08-05.
- ^ Jespersen, O., A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles, vol. 1, 12.72.
- ^ The first recorded use of the word gnu in English dates back to 1777, according to Merriam-Webster's dictionary.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 567.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 188.
- ^ Bailey, George (15 December 2020). "Insertion and deletion in Northern English (ng): Interacting innovations in the life cycle of phonological processes". Journal of Linguistics. 57 (3). Cambridge University Press: 465–497. doi:10.1017/S0022226720000365.
- ^ Wells (1982), pp. 189, 366.
- ^ Wells (1982), pp. 60–64.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 262.
- ^ Wyld, H.C., A History of Modern Colloquial English, Blackwell 1936, cited in Wells (1982), p. 262.
- ^ Wells (1982), pp. 17, 19, 26.
- ^ a b Liberman, Anatoly (21 October 2009). "The Oddest and Dumbest English Spellings, Part 15, With a Note on Words and Things". OUP. Retrieved 28 January 2015.
- ^ * Hickey, Raymond (2007). Irish English: History and Present Day Forms. Cambridge University Press. p. 353-354. ISBN 9781139465847.
- ^ a b c "Phonological Features of African American Vernacular English (AAVE)". www.rehabmed.ualberta.ca. March 17, 2001.
- ^ HLW: Word Forms: Processes: English Accents
- ^ List of AAVE features contrasting with MUSE Archived 2025-08-05 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Rickford, John R. (December 1996). "Ebonics Notes and Discussion". Stanford University. Archived from the original on 3 April 2025.
- ^ Denham, K., Lobeck, A., Linguistics for Everyone: An Introduction, Cengage Learning 2012, p. 162.
- ^ Algeo, J., Butcher, C. The Origins and Development of the English Language, Cengage Learning 2013, p. 49.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 95.
- ^ Yu, A.C.L., in The Blackwell Companion to Phonology, Wiley 2011, p. 1906.
- ^ Wells, J.C., "Some day my prints will come", John Wells's Phonetic Blog, 25 August 2010.
- ^ a b Alan Cruttenden, Gimson's Pronunciation of English, Routledge 2013, p. 99.
- ^ Nathan, G.S., Phonology: A Cognitive Grammar Introduction, John Benjamins Publishing 2008, pp. 77–78.
- ^ a b Wells (1982), p. 261.
- ^ Wells (1982), p. 260.
- ^ Online Etymology Dictionary - Ask
- ^ Kperogi, Farooq A. (2015). Glocal English: The Changing Face and Forms of Nigerian English in a Global World. Peter Lang. p. 208. ISBN 978-1-4331-2926-1.
- ^ Green, Lisa J. (2002). African American English : a linguistic introduction (1. publ., 4. print. ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 122. ISBN 978-0521891387.
- ^ Dandy, E.B., Black Communications: Breaking Down the Barriers, African American Images, 1991, p. 44.