Talk:American and British English pronunciation differences/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

FACE and GOAT vowels

I don't really think these can be thought of as British/American differences; there's too much variation on both sides of the Atlantic for that. I've left the GOAT one in with a comment on the variation because of the difference in the commonly used symbols, but I've deleted FACE, where /eɪ/ is commonly used for both RP and GA.--JHJ 19:42, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Issue with issyu vs ishu

The article presently states "In some words where [j] has been coalesced in GAm, it may be retained in RP: e.g. issue is RP ['ɪsjuː] or (as GAm) ['ɪʃuː]" ... I must take ['ɪʃ·juː] with this assertion... Anyone who said ['ɪʃuː] when speaking GAm would raise eyebrows and cause people to wonder what kind of bizarre accent they were trying to cover up with such an affectation. I can't think of an alternative example ATM...perhaps someone else can? Kwami? Tomer^talk 05:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. Maybe I'm wrong. I say "ishyu", but according to the [American Heritage] dictionary (which, as everyone knows, is the only correct source for pronunciations), the only pronunciation given is "ishu". Tomer^talk 05:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

TShilo, you must be putting me on. The only real pronunciation reference is Webster's Third. Period. AHD can't hold a candle to W3. Get real, man. --JackLumber 22:43, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah :-p, but >:-o ...<back to my point? :-\> Tomer^talk 01:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Why don't you just speak English instead of jotting down a haphazard hodgepodge of weird punctuation marks? Half-kidding. Anyways, that's what Webster's third has to say about the issue pronunciation issue:

/'i(,)shü, 'ish(,)yü, 'i(,)shůə, 'ish(,)yů, before a vowel often -_sh(y)əw; chiefly in the southern US -_sh(y)ə before a consonant or pause or before a vowel in a following word; chiefly Brit 'i(,)syü or 'i(,)syů or 'isyəw/.

' and , are primary & secondary stress; ü is as in "moon," ů as in "foot," other symbols are self-explanatory. Hope this helps.--JackLumber 13:03, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

So I'm not a freak then...well, at least not bcz of how I pronounce "issue". My point stands then, that we need to find a better example, if, indeed, one exists. Tomer^talk 00:35, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... Based on a cursory investigation, I'd say that the commonest General American pronunciation is the "coalescing" one. Assuming there is such a thing as General American. I personally would table the ishu until someone comes up with a better solution.--JackLumber 19:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Just to add to the discussion, my oxford electronic dictionary has ['ɪsjuː] and ['ɪʃuː] as equal transcriptions of issue (no pronunciation is associated with American and British speech as this dictionary tends to do). However, tissue is ['tɪʃuː]. I pronounce tissue as a perfect rhyme of issue but I honestly wouldn't notice if someone epenthisized a [j] right after the /ʃ/. I'm not saying that GA does one or the other, I just don't think that it's all that marked or even noticeable. AEuSoes1 20:13, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

The somewhat cumbersome transcription of Webster's 3rd actually highlights your point, AE—some nuances are really hard to catch. "Tissue" & "issue" rhyme in my own speech too. Not surprisingly, W3 transcription of "tissue" goes exactly like "issue" (except for allowing for a dialectal "tishee" in the phrase "tissue paper.")--JackLumber 18:28, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Loanword 'o'

Can't see this mentioned anywhere. There's a marked difference between RP and GAm of loanwords with the letter 'o'. For example the penultimate vowels in risotto and gnocchi are pronounced with ɒ in RP but oʊ in GAm. Also applies to French and Spanish loanwords.

(Curiously, both RP and GAm agree on the use oʊ of for the final vowel.)

Anyway, I'm not a trained linguist so maybe someone else could write this up properly if it's not buried in there already.

That sounds fairly accurate, but I don't know if it's OK with others yet. Your observation on the "different" British vowel is simply to do with the normal pronunciation of "o" before two or more consonants, eg. doting (oʊ) vs. dotting (ɒ). -- THE GREAT GAVINI {T|C|#} 19:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Some examples are already in the Miscellaneous pronunciation differences table; there is a remark "(And A in many other foreign names and loanwords)" in the chianti-gulag-pasta row in the table. Something similar for O would I think suffice; it applies to some such words but by no means all. Add any you can think of to the table (check dictionaries first though: dictionary.com disagrees with you about the American pronunciation of risotto ) jnestorius^(talk) 18:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

-atory

From the article:

... regulatory with AmE /'ɹɛgjʊlɪˌtɔɹi/ and BrE /ˌɹɛgjʊ'leɪtəɹiː/...

But the OED Online clearly gives first-syllable stress as the only acceptable pronunciation, and I as a native Brit agree with it. So something's amiss. —Blotwell 04:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I suspect this is a disputed change in progress in BrE. Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary gives only the third-syllable stress, marking the first-syllable stress as US. Many OED pronunciations are decades old; the CALD is highly non-prescriptive. However, the general claim made seems plain wrong in any case ("The ending -atory is similarly different: in BrE primary stress moves from the root word to the first syllable of the suffix, while in AmE the stress of the root is unchanged"). In mandatory, retaliatory, conciliatory, discriminatory, there is no shift in BrE; in oratory, there is a BrE shift backwards; in compensatory, there is an AmE shift, though not the same as BrE. So I've expunged the offending sentence, and just enumerated the individual differences. The moral is: if you're looking for a pattern, don't just make one up, find a reliable source. jnestorius^(talk) 22:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Clippings and Hackish

I'm wondering whether/how to incorporate this from The New Hacker's Dictionary, s.v. Commonwealth Hackish:

It is reported that Commonwealth speakers are more likely to pronounce truncations like `char' and `soc', etc., as spelled (/char/, /sok/), as opposed to American /keir/ and /sohsh/. Dots in newsgroup names (especially two-component names) tend to be pronounced more often (so soc.wibble is /sok dot wib'l/ rather than /sohsh wib'l/).

• I wonder if the dots in newsgroups difference is still current; in Web URLs don't the dots always get pronounced (as in Oracle's blurb "We're the dot in dot com")? In which case, has this affected Newsgroup usage?
• Do Americans pronounce SOC in one consistent way? If it's newsgroup "soc.foo.bar" then [soʊʃ] would correspond to "social" as stated. If you have a SOC101 sociology course, it should be [soʊs] for the majority who say [ˌsoʊsiˈɑlədʒi] rather than [ˌsoʊʃiˈɑlədʒi]. For "Law Soc." I surmise one simply says "Law Society" rather than "Law Suss". In BrE in all these, SOC is [sɒk] "Sock".
• The [keɹ] given for char presumably corresponds to [ˈkeɹəktɚ] for character; for those without the Marry-Mary merger the full word is [ˈkæɹəktɚ], which can't make [kæɹ] but might make [kɑɹ].

Most pertinently, if there is as stated a greater tendency for BrE to pronounce truncations without regard for the pronunciation of the source word, this should be reflected in other words, and indeed in non-geek words. But I'm having trouble finding further examples. One candidate is cos for cosine (still geeky, I know): BrE [kɒs] or [kɒz] (Concise OED); is the AmE [koʊs], [ˈkoʊsaɪn], or [kɑs]? (cite?) OTOH, sin is always pronounced like sine. OTOH there are cases where AmE changes the pronunciation as BrE. This guy lists these (not all of which I agree with):

• spec (short for specification)
• mayo (short for mayonnaise, where the "y" is never pronounced)
• bro (short for brother; it's a completely different vowel)
• expat (short for expatriate; the vowel in the short form is short, but it corresponds to a long vowel in the original)
• deli (last vowel is longer)
• bio

There is not enough evidence to support the general claim IMO, so maybe just the specific examples should be added. jnestorius^(talk) 23:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Translation to English

Can someone translate the phonology so that someone besides a phonologist can understand this? Militärschokolade 23:10, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I can't view IPA properly!

Some symbols, such as the symbol for lengthening a vowel (similar to :) and the symbol that represents the "bit" vowel, do not appear properly - they instead display as a square. I'm using IE6 on WinXP Pro. Does anyone know why this could be, and is there a font I can download to fix the problem? I can't upgrade to IE7. Thanks! Avengah (talk) 17:01, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Try SIL's IPA fonts. —SlamDiego_←T 04:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation of "calm" and "palm"

In England, these words are pronounced with the "ah" vowel, but I often (but not always) hear Americans pronouncing them with the "aw" vowel instead. Also, some Americans pronounce the L, which doesn't happen in England. Is this worth integrating into the article? I think it is a valid difference.

Incidentally, why do some Americans use the "aw" vowel instead of the "ah" vowel used in normal English? Avengah (talk) 01:47, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

British English hasn't been peculiarly normal in a long time. And, in various dialects, “aw” and “ah” may not have quite the values that you presume, leading to misinterpretation of your question. I suggest that you use the IPA in your queries. —SlamDiego_←T 04:55, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

As an American, I am also quite curious why our pronunciations differ since our way isn’t normal English.--DavidD4scnrt (talk) 04:21, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, well I'm trying to help the article, and if you can't get past my use of "normal English" to actually help the article, it's Wikipedia's loss, not mine. Anyway, I don't know IPA, not to mention it doesn't display properly on my computer anyway (using IE6, Win XP Pro, and I can't upgrade to IE7). I'll try to explain it more clearly.

In England, the words "talk", "walk" etc. use the "aw" vowel, which is the same as "or" for England. However, the words "calm", "palm", "psalm" etc. use the "ah" vowel.

In America, the words "talk" and "walk" also use the "aw" vowel (which is a different "aw" vowel than the English "aw", but nonetheless it is still "aw"). Some Americans merge "aw" and "ah"; for these people this is irrelevant, but for the others, there are some Americans who use their "ah" vowel in "calm" and "palm" etc. but some who use their "aw" vowel in "calm" and "palm" etc. I hope I've made it a bit clearer! I'm trying to write this from a NPOV, so please give me a little bit of credit! Avengah (talk) 16:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia certainly wants your positive contributions, but it has limited tolerance for arbitrarily labelling other cultures as abnormal or improper. (Unless, perhaps, you could show them to be objectively such, but that won't be possible in the case of American English.)

Wikipedia is a pretty good place to learn the IPA, and it has long been a popular system in British dictionaries. You can look up the words of interest in recent editions of the OED and of the SOED; the IPA is used therein. And, below, I've supplied a link to decent TTFs of the IPA.

When it comes to the words that you list, there is more variation within American English (and within British English) than is captured by your description. I'm not sure that there is much hope for a practical discussion unless someone can dig-up a statistical study to which to refer. —SlamDiego_←T 04:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with SlamDiego - I suspect there is more variation in the range of pronunciations of palm/calm within BrE and within AmE than there is between BrE and AmE, and that there is therefore nothing for this particular article here. (And, as something of an aside, but to illustrate such variability, the suggestion made by Avengah that in BrE "the aw vowel ... is the same as or" is complete nonsense, in the variety of BrE that I speak!) Snalwibma (talk) 11:42, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Lady, reading

When people in England pronounce the /d/ in words like lady or reading, do they use an alveolar tap like Americans or do they have some other allophone? Thegryseone (talk) 14:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Words starting with "an-"

A teacher of mine pronunciates words such as "answer" as "unswer"(on an American perception). Is that a British style or is it really wrong? Robfbms (talk) 04:38, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

• You can look these sorts of things up in an appropriate dictionary, or… {{wiktionary|answer}} …but there are many British accents.

— RVJ (talk) 08:48, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

tergiversate

opposite of both UK and US pronunciations indicated also exist[1] --Espoo (talk) 12:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

No mention of intonation?

Where is the matter of intonation discussed? The most glaring omission to my mind is that of the simple yes/no question, which in GenAm is simply monotone-mid to the tonic where it glides or steps up to a high (as in "Are you OK?" / 2-2-3) but in British it's clearly quite different and much harder for me to describe, but might be some thing like 3-3-3/1 or 3-3-3/2/3 or 3-3-3/1/2. or high till the tonic where it dips down and then back up again slightly. Or something, I've only studied American intonation and am just trying to describe they way BritEng sounds to me as best I can. Actually, that's why I came here, looking to learn more about it.Chrisrus (talk) 07:11, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

You are correct that it's missing. This is part of a wider lacuna in Wikipedia. Prosody (linguistics), intonation (linguistics), and English phonology#Intonation are all very short. I think it would be better to get those fleshed out more first, so that whatever information is added here will have something to wikilink to. jnestorius^(talk) 11:28, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm happy you feel that way. I can't do much about it, though, as it's only glancingly my field (ESL instructor). Who would you nominate for the job, at least for this article?Chrisrus (talk) 03:20, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Apart from "Not me", I can't say. You might have better luck asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Linguistics. jnestorius^(talk) 08:18, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Move?

Most of this deals with only the standard dialect of both. Sometimes, non-standard dialects are either closer to the other standard or are more like a 3rd different thing. Also, very few people actually speak actually like the standard especially with British English, only 2% of folk in the UK speaking RP. Because of this, I think the title should include RP and General American not British and American. Munci (talk) 14:07, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

As it happens, most of the current deals with the lexicon, only a little with accent, and none with prosody. Lexical differences of phoneme and stress show less inter-dialect variance than accent does. jnestorius^(talk) 15:17, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Could we no split it into 2 articles maybe then? One for specific words and another for comparision between the standard dialects? Actually, in the lexicon, words like Asia, barracuda, schedule and pitta for example I pronounce closer to the American. Munci (talk) 16:28, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Asia and schedule already have the B2 superscript; barracuda probably should too. I don't see pitta listed.

We could split, maybe.

• Differences between General American and Received Pronunciation might overlap with existing articles a bit much, and might seem to exclude some intermediate accents worth discussing in the same place.
• List of words pronounced differently in American and British English might suggest a simpler structure than the current one.

jnestorius^(talk) 17:13, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't too attentive with the BP's. Probably why you're no finding pitta is it's listed as "pi(t)ta". How about Pronounciation Differences of Particular Words in American and British English ? I'm not sure what precedance there is for titles so long though. In any case, I feel the misunderstandings would be less with the new titles than with the current one. Munci (talk) 09:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The idea that there are consistent differences between the pronunciation English in the UK and USA is preposterous. The pronunciation rules in the RP set are not followed by any but a negligible portion of the UK population, and in many cases transatlantic similarities in pronunciation outway differences; e.g. pronunciation in most of England is more similar to that of the USA than it is to Scotland or Northern Ireland. The article may make political sense, but it makes no phonological sense. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 03:48, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Are you just talking about accent, or did you intend your assertions to apply equally to the lists of particular words which constitute the bulk of the article you have just renamed? jnestorius^(talk) 14:03, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Both. All of the article has a low percentage of correctness when named BE and AM, but a high percentage using the invented pronunciation sets labelled RP and GA. Also, read the opening lines of the article. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 06:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Read them? I wrote them. "In this article, transcriptions use RP to represent BrE and GAm and to represent AmE" is intended to allow for differences in the phonetic realisation of vowel classes. It does not imply that non-RP speakers of British English use US stress patterns in words ending in -ary or -ile, or the PALM vowel in words like pasta, Natasha, or pronounce quinine or Tunisia like Americans. jnestorius^(talk) 19:52, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

French stress: exposé and renaissance

"Exposé" always has syllable-final stress in American English and "renaissance" usually does. (Check Webster.) Neither should be listed as stressed on the first syllable in American English. I would move or remove the words, but I'm not certain about British pronunciation.70.225.39.52 (talk) 00:57, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you about "exposé" but not "renaissance". It seems to me that the former is probably always pronounced with the stress on the last syllable, but although "renaissance" is almost always "full stress, no stress, secondary stress", although I wouldn't be suprised if Webster also accepts the full stress on the last syllable as an acceptable varient. Websters wouldn't argue that the way a French word is correctly stressed in French would be considered had to be always incorrect in English. Websters, I've noticed, actually instructs us to use foreign vowels in some cases, mostly French and German, and foreign consonants as in the name of the composer Bach. I'm speculating. Chrisrus (talk) 05:31, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Is it just me...

Or are a lot of these entries seemingly written for linguists? In order to effectively read this entry, chances are, you are already aware of the content. It's fairly incomprehensible to someone not already well versed in linguistics. I think more examples should be given to make this article useful for laypersons.

I agree completely. Whereas the other articles on differences between British and American English (e.g. the one on spelling differences) are extremely clear, this one is incomprehensible to the non-linguist. I think this article should be a candidate for a complete re-write to make it useful for non-specialists. ~~

IS IT JUST ME...or is much of this article completely incomprehensible to the average person? More examples would be nice, but to the average person some of these topics - particularly parts of speech and the MASSIVE Institutional and Commercial infrastructure section- are complete overkill and should be considered for revision and/or separation from the main article. I would suggest a section within this article, or perhaps standing alone, devoted to English/American slang (which is probably at or near the top of the list for most people seeking to understand British or American English). Granted, most people looking for 'American and British English pronunciation differences' will tend to have an intellectual lean, but the 'slang' article on wiki is less than 1000 words (and lacking sufficient cultural/national distinctions within the main body). Slang is an extension of a regional/cultural dialect, but since the average person probably has no idea what a regional dialect is, the mass of information here could definitely be split up into more manageable (and convenient) sections. Socrates' Favorite Cocktail (talk) 08:12, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

It's a difficult concept in the first place to try to explain phonetic and phonological differences between two accents to laypeople in a written article. It would be infinitely easier to pronounce "caught" and "cot" the British, then American way, and people would have much less difficulty compared to deciphering IPA symbols (which, for most laypeople, are interpreted to fit their native dialect anyway). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.130.65 (talk) 06:05, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Los Angeles, his, etc.

I often hear a /iː/-like sound in the last syllable of Los Angeles and in his in England. I haven't found anything about this anywhere. I don't know if this is a good place to remark on this, but oh well. Maybe I should've gone to the English English talk page. Thegryseone (talk) 20:12, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by /i:/...last syllable of "Angeles" rhymes with "kiss" for me, though it could sometimes be a schwa, and sometimes with a voiced [z], depending on my mood...but not a long [i:]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DelAster (talk • contribs) 06:17, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

pronunciation of "tall" and similar

I was wondering whether the difference in they way Britons and Americans pronunce the vowel in "tall" (and "all", "wall", etc) is consistent or if there are too many local variations to regard it as a 'true' difference, since I don't see it listed (tough I'm not 100pc sure of which IPA symbols would represent those sounds) --Mb 3r7864 (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Try Differences between General American and Received Pronunciation jnestorius^(talk) 17:37, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

-ance, -ant, -amp, -ast, -aph, -ans, -ass letter groupings, soft and hard 'a' sounds

The Queens English and Cultivated Australian English pronounce these letter groupings with a soft 'a' sound, while American english pronounce these with a hard 'a' sound, for example; example, dance, plant, circumstance, castle, enhance, advance, trance, graph, answer, can't, lance, grass all have completely different pronounciation this is one major noticable difference between the dialects, why hasn't it been included? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.32.139.233 (talk) 01:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC) '

see the trap-bath split, which is explicitly excluded from this table. Grover cleveland (talk) 20:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

formidable

This table states that the word 'formidable' has a second-syllable stress in British English and first-syllable stress in American English. Fowler seems to think otherwise:

formidable. The standard pronunciation is with the stress on the first syllable, although the word is often heard with the stress on the second syllable.

I didn't want to move it immediately in case there were conflicting sources, but considering the reliability of Fowler, I think it should be changed: en-UK has a first-syllable stress, en-US second, with a second-syllable stress being an en-UK variant. 79.67.148.247 (talk) 08:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The Wells LPD (1st edition) also gives first-syllable stress as the 1st choice for BrE (somewhat to my surprise). Given this, it should probably be removed from the table. Grover cleveland (talk) 20:23, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Treatment of r

The accent used for British English is classed as non-rhetoric. I have given better information for R pronunciation.Nobleness of Mind (talk) 19:27, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

I deleted it as a copyright violation. You (or someone) simply copied & pasted a section from a dictionary. I haven't followed the subsequent edits, but it also ended up being factually wrong, with car claimed to be /ka:/ in non-rhotic dialects when, in spite of what the OED will tell you, it's actually /'kar/--the final /r/ may have a zero allophone when utterance final, but it's still /r/. kwami (talk) 22:40, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Kwami, you are wrong here, as I have told you a thousand times. The phonemon of intrusive R proves you are wrong. Find me one reliable source that gives underlying /r/ at the end of RP "car". Grover cleveland (talk) 20:24, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

launch and salt in AmE

What authority gives these as having /ɑː/? The Wells LPD (1st edition) gives the THOUGHT vowel as first choice for both in AmE. Grover cleveland (talk) 20:20, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I've removed them. Grover cleveland (talk) 05:50, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

LAUNCH /ˈlɑ:ntʃ/ http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/launch

SALT /ˈsɑ:lt/ http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/salt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.136.135.91 (talk) 09:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation of "experience"

I was watching Nintendo's E3 presentation, and the guy (I think some high-up managing director-type person of Nintendo of America)'s pronunciation of "experience" made me cringe.

I've always thought of it as "ex-pEAR-ee-uhnce" with a stress on the "ear" which is a longer vowel sound than the rest of the vowels in the word. However, his pronunciation was more like "expirrience" with a really short vowel in that place. Is this pronunciation common in America? I'm English by the way, if it makes any difference.

If this is relevant, a section on it should be added to the page (apologies if it's already there; I may have missed it). 90.214.108.162 (talk) 20:59, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The guy's name is Reggie Fils-Aime, by the way. He's the president of Nintendo of America. If anyone wonders what I mean by the way he says "expirrience", watch Nintendo's E3 presentation for this year. It's near the beginning of the video. Thanks! 90.214.108.162 (talk) 19:24, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

That difference belongs at Differences between General American and Received Pronunciation rather than here. (Not that it's currently mentioned there.) It's the mirror-nearer merger. jnestorius^(talk) 18:38, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I think most people say "expeerience", but I think if you say it fast enough or don't pronounce it very clearly, the word might not have as much of an accent in the middle, and it becomes "experience" with "er/ir", not ear/eer. - M0rphzone (talk) 05:25, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

In General American, the second syllable is pronounced the same as the word "spear". As in Britain, however, there may be much variation in the pronunciation of specific vowels if a person speaks with a regional or subcultural accent. Chrisrus (talk) 05:12, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

More A2's

debut, decor, precis, salon, soupcon, negligee, De Beauvoir, Debussy, limousine, magazine, casein, stalactite, stalagmite, transference, kilometre/er, defense/ce, formidable, advertisement, Pyrenees, oregano. (I'll have still more, but that's enough to begin with.) (Left out the accents and cedilla to save time.) Kostaki mou (talk) 05:33, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

electricity

BBC staff stress the first syllable of "electricity," but even the Oxford online stresses the third, as do Americans. Are the numerous BBC speakers "violating" RP here? (I'm not talking about the ones with clear regional dialects.) Kdammers (talk) 10:36, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Electricity normally has a double stress /ˌɛlɪkˈtɹɪsᵻti/ in British English, but there are regional variations. I have never noticed BBC newsreaders giving greater emphasis to the first stress, but I'll listen for it now. I would regard it as non-standard, but many modern newsreaders seem to give odd stresses to certain words -- is it the effect of the teleprompt? Dbfirs 10:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Schwa / wedge

This

In GAm, realisations of [ʌ] and [ə] are more similar than in RP, and are sometimes viewed as stressed and unstressed variants of a single /ə/ phoneme. (This is reflected in the common American use of uh as a pronunciation spelling for schwa.)

was replaced with this

In RP, realisations of [ʌ] and [ə] are more similar to each other than in GAm; RP [ʌ] is closer to [ɐ].

Since the page really only details phonemic differences (ie that might be reflected in broad transcriptions) rather than phonetic differences, I have deleted the corrected version altogether. Joestynes 20:42, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I think there may be something worth mentioning here. Some Americans seem to perceive the vowel of cut and schwa as allophones of one phoneme, but in an RP context they're usually treated as separate phonemes /ʌ/ and /ə/. For example, the OED 3rd edition transcription scheme [2] uses different symbols for the vowel of strut and the first vowel of another in its "British" transcriptions, but the same symbol /ə/ in its "American" transcriptions. The OED even has a minimal pair: muzz /mʌz/ and one of the pronunciations of Ms /məz/. --JHJ 21:38, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

That was the basis for the original para (which I wrote). My instinct was to revert the edit; however I cross-checked the replacement para against other Wikipedia articles and it seems to check out. It's possible that GAm "allophones" are phonetically more distinct than RP "distinct phonemes"; that would be a statement about phonetic tradition rather than objective reality, but still worth mentioning. I don't believe the new version's info merits inclusion, even if it is accurate. Joestynes 11:08, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm the one who did the recent change but I agree with Joestynes because I had never noticed the distinction between the two until I read about it. Since the article is about the actual pronunciation differences (presumably noticeable differences) and not how dictionaries consider the phonemes, the deletion seems appropriate. AEuSoes1 06:20, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Well how about replacing with something like this:

In GAm, realisations of [ʌ] and [ə] are often viewed as stressed and unstressed variants of a single /ə/ phoneme. (This is reflected in the common American use of uh as a pronunciation spelling for schwa.) RP transcriptions traditionally retain two distinct symbols.

which makes no claim that the underlying phones are more similar in GAm. Joestynes 11:52, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

That seems like a good idea, but I'd suggest dropping the phonetic symbols [ʌ] and [ə], which are a bit confusing here, and using example words instead. After all, the vowels may not be [ʌ] and [ə]; it's just that /ʌ/ and /ə/ are the usual transcriptions of the two RP phonemes.--JHJ 12:17, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't like it. It's taking a pronunciation distinction and changing it to, basically, a spelling one. "uh" is simply the closest thing in GAm spelling that comes to indicating a schwa; whereas in RP, they have "er." It also seems to imply that the two sounds are closer in GAm without stating it.AEuSoes1 20:44, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

However, there is some evidence (e.g. the OED transcriptions) that there is a tendency to regard the strut vowel and schwa as the same phoneme in GAm but not in RP and other British accents.--JHJ 21:05, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

True, but that is not a pronunciation difference; it's a transcription one. OED only shows the ideology of a British editor, grammarian or linguist who noticed the difference or considered them different and I'd hardly consider the view of experts trained to notice the difference between schwa and wedge as indicative of regular speakers' ability to do so.

This can probably go in another article about RP and GAm differences but using only the OED reference to come to the conclusion that we're making seems a bit of a stretch.

I knew a fellow who had trouble telling the difference between scwha and wedge until he was told that schwa only appeared in unstressed syllables. Maybe a non-linguist RP-speaking editor could verify the other half of what we're talking about. AEuSoes1 21:33, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

According to http://www.oed.com/about/oed3-preface/pronunciation.html the OED's American pronunciations are "based on a model devised by Professor William Kretzschmar of the University of Georgia". I'd like to know how standard his analysis is, though, so I'm not suggesting basing anything entirely on the OED pronunciations.--JHJ 21:51, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

First of all, for both RP and GA the stressed vowel is a low mid central vowel, though lower in RP than in GA, that is more accurately transcribed [ɐ]. (In RP it needs to be lower to remain distinct from [ɜ], while in GA these vowels are distinguished by rhoticity, and there is greater leeway in height.)

I (GA speaker) generally hear schwa as being either [ɐ] or [ɪ] (or maybe [ɨ]). I believe the difference is allophonic, being decided by environment, but I understand this difference is phonemic in RP. Perhaps this is part of the reason for the different transcriptions? Either way, if we don't use distinct symbols for obscure vowels, then they will need to be transcribed as two vowels, [ɐ] or [ɪ]. kwami 22:51, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Here's what Wells (1982: 132) has to say about it: "GenAm characteristically has a somewhat backer quality of /ʌ/ than present-day RP, [ʌ+] as against [ɐ]; Scottish and Canadian speech are usually like GenAm in this respect, but southern-hemisphere accents like RP. ... Even in GenAm it may well be considered that stressed [ʌ] and unstressed [ə] are co-allophones of one phoneme." --Angr (t·c) 17:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, and not also is "uh" used in the States as a phonetic representation of the schwa, but also as a word itself, which has the sense of "Let me see..." or "Let me think..." whereas Britons would use "er..." for the same purpose --Fandelasketchup (talk) 11:43, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

superscript

I found some words have strange superscripts such as ballet^AB2, placate_b^B23 and iodine ^A3B23. Only superscripts A1, B1, A2 and B2 are listed before the content. So what do other superscripts mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhao Mu-Yun (talk • contribs) 04:54, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

St.nerol, a regular editor of this article who introduced the notation in this edit will be able to explain. @St.nerol: Dbfirs 07:57, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

I've removed the 3s on the assumption that they were intended to be 2s. If I'm wrong, please explain the 3s. Dbfirs 07:28, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about the long wait. "AB2" was simply a shortening of "A2B2". "B23" meant that there are two American pronunciations, that are both recognized as British variants. (The logic was something like "B23"="British 2nd and 3rd pronunciations".) St.nerol (talk) 16:53, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Oxforddictionaries.com

The website oxforddictionaries.com gives pronunciations for "British and world English". It is thus unsuitable to use as a reference for claims that British English uses the American pronunciation. The full Oxford dictionary distinguishes between British and American pronunciations, so provides a better reference. I'm happy to check any doubtful pronunciations in that tome for anyone who does not have access to it. Dbfirs 21:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Hm, if that's the case it might mean a lot of erroneous "B2"s.

It was not clear to me what "World English" meant. I checked a number of very typical examples of Am/Br differences (e.g. shone, tomato, vase, clerk, herb, wrath etc.), and found that OD "British & World English" doesn't mention the standard American prononciations. My conclusion was that the dictionary doesn't taken American pronunciation into account. Can you give some counterexamples?

St.nerol (talk) 17:10, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

I checked all words where you removed "B2" against OD, and the only one where it lists a pronunciation variant is "projectile". The other "B2":s I don't know where they came from. St.nerol (talk) 17:22, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps I was wrong in blaming oxforddictionaries.com, though it does give a pronunciation option /prə(ʊ)ˈdʒɛktɪl/ which is presumably "World English" because it is not given as an option for British English in the Third Edition of the OED (June 2007 update). Thanks for checking the others. The remaining B2s seem correct, though I haven't checked every one. Dbfirs 19:05, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Poor-pour

"the pour-poor merger is common in RP but not in GAm" I disagree. Americans pronounce words like 'cure' and 'tour' with one syllable, whereas Brits and Aussies pronounce them with two (as in 'cu-er' and 'tu-er'). Some people pronounce words like the American way because of the influence of American TV, but this is not the standard way of pronouncing them and the Queen most certainly does not pronounce them the American way. Mclay1 (talk) 06:35, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Well then I disagree with you. I'm American and I pronounce both cure and tour with two syllables (as cyoo-er [yoo represents the vowel of few and cute here] and too-er [oo represents the vowel in do or too in this case], respectively). I'm not sure exactly what you mean by the "American way" to pronounce those words as there is more than one way to pronounce those words in America. My cousin pronounces tour differently than I do and we grew up in the same place. I also fail to see how cure and tour are even relevant here. If we're talking about poor and pour, I would say that merger is extremely common in the United States. I would even go so far as to say that the vast majority of Americans have it. I don't see the relevance, however, because I merge pour and poor, but they don't sound even close to cure or tour (cure and tour don't even rhyme with one another as I mentioned earlier). Thegryseone (talk) 19:38, 17 May 2009 (UTC)

Well, cure and tour usually have two syllables (each) in Australia, but AFAIK not in Britain.

@Thegryseone,

I gather that, in your speech, (1) cure rhymes with reviewer (which sounds kind of drawn out to me) and (2) the sequence /j/ + /u/ has coalesced into a new phoneme that doesn't rhyme with /u/? I'm [dʒæˑkɫɜmbɚ] and I approve this message. 01:48, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

How do you say eeew (as in eeew gross, not that that's something that middle-aged people commonly say)? That's the sound I use in cure. I'll admit though that the vowel in cure has really confused me lately. I think I have more than one allophone because sure has the NURSE vowel; I'm not one to say shoe-er or shore. On an unrelated note, I like your new narrowly transcribed link to your user page. Thegryseone (talk) 02:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

That's my "EFL/ESL teaching" accent. (By the way, I just saw the discussion about the vowel I transcribe [ɜ].) It might be the case that you are a "transition" speaker, and that the /ur/ phoneme is going the way of the dodo bird, to be replaced by /u.ɚ/, /or/, or /ɚ/ depending on the word. Many such "transition" speakers have /jɚ/ in cure.

Oftentimes, interjections defy phonology. Pronunciations such as yeah /ˈjɛə, ˈjæə/ or baa /ˈbæ/ are inconsistent with the phonological system of General American English. I'm [dʒæˑkɫɜmbɚ] and I approve this message. 03:16, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

To go back to what Mclay1 said originally, if we're talking about the words pour and poor (and pore; so I like parentheses [and semicolons], so what! Shut up about it, seriously.) alone, I would say most Americans pronounce those two the same. Keep in mind that this is the completely biased perspective of a young American. The pronunciation of poor with /ʊr/ strikes me as a very "gramps" pronunciation or at least the pronunciation of people of middle age and above. The pronunciation of whore and the surname Moore with /ʊr/ strike me as geriatric as well, though I don't think that's related, but it's definitely one of the first stereotypes that pops into my mind when I think of elderly speech :). Thegryseone (talk) 04:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I too think that poor as /por/ is very common in present-day American English. In this respect, GenAm is like RP, despite the rhoticity issue. Did whore ever have /hʊr/ as a legitimate pronunciation? Webster's 3rd labels it "euphemistic." I'm [dʒæˑkɫɜmbɚ] and I approve this message. 00:18, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I suppose you're right. The first response on Dictionary.com, which I gesse is that of Dictionary.com itself, says it is "often" pronounced /hʊr/. It doesn't say anything about it being a euphemism, however, though that might explain the frequency of its usage, i.e., a lot of people may not want to say the real thing. The American Heritage Dictionary, however, which is probably better and more reliable, doesn't list /hʊr/ at all. With Moore, however, AHD does list /mʊr/. I actually heard that pronunciation of whore on a comedy sketch on SNL or some show like that. It included grandparents and their grandchildren, I remember. Maybe the elderly are more likely to use the "euphemistic" pronunciation. This goes in line with the stereotype most people seem to have of clean talking old people. I had this old principal named (not called) Mr. Moore a long time ago and he would pronounce his name /mʊr/. Anyway, this is obviously purely anecdotal crap. Thegryseone (talk) 00:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

It's funny, I just asked my friend with a very progressive American accent how she says pour, poor, and pore, and they are all the same to her...probably as pore. To me, pour and poor are the same (high back) and pore is open o. I'm not all too familiar with RP innovations, but I think one merger I'm hearing in a lot of British speakers is the pronunciation of pour and poor as "pore", so actually it makes homophones of pour, poor, pore, and paw. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.130.65 (talk) 06:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I guess the poor-pour merger is similar to the cot-caught one: An on-going phonemic shift of some import in AE. I'm in my 60s and teach English overseas: until reading this discussion, I would have corrected a student who merged them. Having lived abroad so long, I missed these changes.Kdammers (talk) 10:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

The merger is becoming more common in British English, but those of us in the UK who were taught to pronounce poor in the traditional way, as /pʊə/, find it strange and annoying to hear /pɔː/ on the BBC shipping forecasts. Dbfirs 19:20, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

The pronunciation of harass

I am trying to determine which pronunciation of 'harass' is favoured by whom - American vs British, or do both countries allow both variants? I should appreciate any help you could give me.

Charl Meyer (South Africa)

In American English, stress is usually on the second syllable; in British English traditionally on first. That's pretty much it. -- THE GREAT GAVINI {T|C|#} 19:04, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I've heard both ['hærəs] and [hə'ræs] (or [hɑ'ræs]) in native American English speakers. I'd argue that the latter is more common nowadays amongst the younger generation with the former being preferred by older generations, at least in Southern speakers. --Alai 03:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

If you use a new dictionary, the latter is correct. If you inherited a dictionary from an ancestor (not a parent) the former will be more common. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Socrates' Favorite Cocktail (talk • contribs) 08:16, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Check out AHD's usage note. Second-syllable stress does appear to be commoner, however. My pronunciation is kinda like [hə'ɹe(ː)əs]. JackLumber. 15:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

The OED has British: /ˈharəs/ , /həˈras/ ; U.S. /həˈræs/ , /ˈhɛrəs/. Dbfirs 11:56, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Chrysanthemum, hero and handkerchief

NKM1974 and I seem to disagree over the pronunciations of these words. I cannot see the differences claimed between British and American pronunciations. The reference of Slovar-Vocab.com doesn't seem reliable, but perhaps there is an ancient edition of Longman's pronunciation dictionary that is being used? The OED doesn't make the claimed distinction, showing only /s/ for chrysanthemum, and almost the opposite of NKM1974's claim for hero: (/ˈhɪərəʊ/ in British English). Handkerchief is tricky because there is a lot of regional variation in both countries, but both the OED and the AHD suggest that the final vowel can be short or long in both varieties of English. A third opinion would be appreciated. Dbfirs 08:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm not sure if you have the 3rd edition of Longman Pronunciation Dictionary book or software released in 2008. Here are links with data survey.

http://slovar-vocab.com/english/longman-pronunciation-vocab/chrysanthemum-7024918.html http://slovar-vocab.com/english/longman-pronunciation-vocab/handkerchief-7040444.html http://slovar-vocab.com/english/longman-pronunciation-vocab/hero-7041393.html

Here's Oxford Learner's Dictionary: http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com

There's a z on chrysanthemum: http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/chrysanthemum?q=chrysanthemum There's BrE /ɪ/ ; NAmE /i/ for handkerchief: http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/handkerchief?q=handkerchief There's BrE /ˈhɪərəʊ/ ; NAmE /ˈhiːroʊ/ for hero: http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/hero?q=hero

If I see a different phonetics & pronunciations of British English words, I search it on google to see if that word is utilize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NKM1974 (talk • contribs) 09:35, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

But your link to "oxfordlearnersdictionaries" gives the z form for chrysanthemum as secondary for both British and American. The big OED (third edition) doesn't recognise this z form as being current in the UK, though I expect there will be someone somewhere who still uses it. Interestingly, the Macmillan dictionary gives the z form only for American English. The point is that the difference is regional within each country, not one that belongs in this article. Similarly, both versions are given by oxfordlearners (and by the OED) for both countries for handkerchief. (Macmillan gives the short /ɪ/ for both countries, but with a secondary stress on the last syllable in British English.) I agree with your IPA for hero, but it just confirms that the entry you made was incorrect because /ɪə/ is very different from /ɪ/ (and more similar to /iː/). I wonder when the Longmans Dictionary did their survey quoted on that website. It looks to me like something from early last century, but if anyone has access to a library version, it would be interesting to know. The Third Edition had a 2007 survey by J C Wells himself for British English, but it covered only thirty words that were known to be changing in their pronunciation. Why do we have to go through a Russian website? They seem to disagree with Oxford and Cambridge. Apologies if I seem to be argumentative over this. We are both trying to improve the article, and even the expert lexicographers seem to disagree over some differences. Dbfirs 18:03, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

For "coherent" also see the Wiktionary entry to add a fifth (less reliable) source to my four reputable dictionaries. Dbfirs 12:15, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Progress

I think our disagreement over how to pronounce progress arises from the fact that noun and verb are pronounced differently, at least in British English. Should we have separate entries for the two parts of speech? Dbfirs 06:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Pristine

Collins dictionary online ([3]) gives "(ˈprɪstaɪn ; -tiːn)" but the sound file is definitely "prɪsˈtiːn". The Oxford English Dictionary (2007 update), and most other dictionaries that I can find give only the "iːn" ending for British English, though the 1989 Oxford allows "ˈprɪstɪn". Is the pronunciation "priss-tyne" used at all in modern British English? I would have thought that the pondian difference is mainly one of stress. Dbfirs 21:20, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

/archive 1

Request for move:catch

Currently, under "catch" is used as an example of words where the vowel is /æ/ in British English and /eɪ/ in American English. This does have a reference source. However, in the reference source, there are two audios: one American and one British. The American audio pronounces it as /kɛt͡ʃ/, not /keɪt͡ʃ/. I will say that it is a scholarly source, but, because of this, simply I don't think the source uses the standard IPA notation. So, I feel that this also should be move to the cell with "femme fatale." Thank you.74.102.216.186 (talk) 19:19, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

As nobody has an opinion on this one, I will make the change.74.102.216.186 (talk) 04:15, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

The vowel in "catch" varies by region. It is represented in IPA by /æ/ in both British and American English, but is realised differently by region within each country. For example, in northern England and Wales, the vowel is pronounced /a/, and in parts of America the /æ/ sounds like /ɛ/. I don't think this is specific to this word, but applies to many such vowels, so it shouldn't be recorded as a specific word difference. An opinion from someone who understands IPA in America would be appreciated. I don't think it is helpful to try to represent sound files using non-standard symbols as some dictionaries do. Dbfirs 07:48, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I actually happen to understand IPA in America. You say in parts of America, the /æ/ sounds like /ɛ/. This typically happens before a nasal consonant. Some speakers will pronounce /æ/ as /eə/. Hence, some speakers pronounce "then" and "than" both as /ðɛn/. Others, like myself, pronounce the former as /ðɛn/ and the latter as /ðeən/. But, nonetheless, it probably is a variation in American pronunciation, and not a difference in American and British English. Therefore, you are correct, sir/ma'am, that it really shouldn't be in this article. Thank you.74.102.216.186 (talk) 13:50, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Request for removal: Appalachian

Unlike the vowel in "deity," I know that some Americans do use the pronunciation shown, and that it is a perfectly correct pronunciation. However, I know just as well as anyone that the pronunciation of this word in American English is a Northern-Southern difference. Northerners (specifically Northeasterners) tend to say /æ.pə.lei̯.ʃən/, and Southerners tend to say /æ.pə.læ.ʃən/. I would say that it varies in other areas of the country. Any words that vary specifically by region in either Britain or America should not be on the page. We can develop a separate page for differences in Northern American and Southern American pronunciations at a different time. Anyway, I request that "Appalachian" be removed. 74.102.216.186 (talk) 23:53, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I looked the word up on Webster to find that both pronunciation were written down, with the former being preferred. Therefore, I am going to remove the word.74.102.216.186 (talk) 00:04, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Other ambiguities between Oxford and Webster

I found another ambiguity between Oxford and Webster. I myself can explain why such ambiguities occur. Oxford records the British pronunciation and Webster records the American pronunciation. If the two sources do not give the same pronunciation for a word, then the two countries simply pronounce the word differently. The whole point of this article is to discuss in which cases does this occur.

The word I found was leprechaun. The OED has the pronunciation recorded as /lɛ.prə.kɔːn/ and Webster has it recorded as /lɛ.prə.kɒn/. Therefore, I am going to add it as an entry. If anyone wishes to remove it, you reserve the right to do so. However, some users get angry when sourced evidence is be removed. (I learned that the hard way.) Over and out.74.102.216.186 (talk) 17:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

The big OED says " Brit. /ˈlɛprᵻkɔːn/, /ˈlɛprᵻxɔːn/ ; U.S. /ˈlɛprəˌkɔn/, /ˈlɛprəˌkɑn/ ; Irish English /ˈlɛprəkɒːn/, /ˈlɛprəxɒːn/".

Merriam-Webster says "\ˈlep-rə-ˌkän, -ˌkȯn\" for American pronunciation..

There seems to be a lot of variation, but some Pondian distinction, even if it is only in the length of the final vowel. Dbfirs 08:07, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't actually have access to the big OED. I did see both pronunciations listed in Webster. However, typically in Webster, for vowels in either the cot or caught class, the first pronunciation given is the vowel class. (Once, I checked out a few words to make sure.) So, I assumed in American English that "leprechaun" was in the "cot" class. If you wish to remove it, I have no objection.LakeKayak (talk) 23:43, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposed criteria for which words make the page

I have seen a few different questionable data that I have seen on the page in the last few days. Therefore, I propose that each and every word should be verify on Webster and Oxford. Thank you.74.102.216.186 (talk) 00:09, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

No, it should be based & observed on other sources like Dictionary.com, Collins/Cambridge dictionaries, howjsay, the media ie BBC, newspaper ie NYT. Also the obvious, ie (what is pronounced in Britain & not in the States / what is pronounced in the States & not in Britain), etc. (Unsigned comment added by IP:2602:306:ce6a:4dd0:e2:36a5:c93b:e4ba)

Yes, I agree that we should look at the most WP:reliable sources, especially those that use IPA.

2602:306:ce6a:4dd0:f405:c9cb:891f:6bf6, could you please sign your comments using four tildes (~) and not remove signbots correction of your omission per Wikipedia policy. It would be even better if you would sign in before editing. Thank you. Dbfirs 13:40, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Peter Roach, the moderator, will be checking this site soon.

You are removing signatures again. Why do you wish to remain anonymous? What does Peter Roach moderate? He is certainly a respected phonologist (Emeritus Professor of Phonetics at Reading University). I don't know him personally, but I know someone who worked with him at Reading. He certainly contributes to Wikipedia sometimes. Dbfirs 22:27, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

@Dbfirs: I wouldn't assume bad faith here, he probably just forgot to sign. Happens all the time to anons. Mr KEBAB (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

To Mr. KEBAB: I do see your compassion, and I know that all the time anonymous users do forget to sign their posts. (I used to do it all the time. I didn't know how to sign my post.) However, this anonymous one in particular has a history of deleting the signatures by Signbot. Examples are in the history of the talk. But nonetheless, I cannot hold your lack of knowledge against you. Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 20:04, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Well, that's definitely disruptive. Thanks for the correction. Mr KEBAB (talk) 20:37, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Request for removal: program

In American English, unlike what the page currently the "a" is not usually pronounced as /ə/. It is usually pronounced as /eə/. This occurs in American English in all cases with /æ/ would otherwise precede a nasal consonant. Therefore, it is a vowel class that it is being pronounced differently, not an individual word. In such case, it should not be on the article.74.102.216.186 (talk) 02:46, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

The phoneme /æ/ is a compromise in Wikipedia. In the UK it is more often realised as closer to /a/, especially in northern England, and the OED now uses /a/ rather than /æ/. In America the same vowel has a variety of variants including /eə/. Is this what you mean, or are you referring to something different? Words like "massage" are really just a difference of stress. Merriam-Webster and AHD give the /ə/ as an alternative for "program". I've added an "A2" to the entry to indicate that /æ/ (or /eə/) is also common in America. If you wish the remove that entry, I've no objection. Dbfirs 08:29, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I wouldn't say 'especially in Northern England'. [a] is used in most of the UK now, at least among young speakers. Mr KEBAB (talk) 16:48, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the OED has replaced "1950s RP" /æ/ with a plain /a/ for all such vowels in its Third Edition to reflect the change in British English pronunciation. Wikipedia and Wiktionary continue to use /æ/ as a compromise to include American realisations. Dbfirs 21:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

To answer your question, that both is and is not what I meant. Unfortunately, that is the easiest way to explain it. Anyway, I have decided to remove the entry. Thank you.74.102.216.186 (talk) 01:38, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

That's fine with me. What about "commensurate" and "commensurable"? Is there a significant difference between British and American pronunciations? (UK uses both, probably equally.) We should have either both words or neither. Is the /ʃ/ pronunciation much more common in the USA? Dbfirs 08:52, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't hear those words too often. So, I am sorry that I am unable to help you, sir.74.102.216.186 (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

And Webster isn't of much help either in this case. Therefore, it is probably safest not to include either entry. But I will leave that choice up to you.74.102.216.186 (talk) 17:32, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

To Mr KEBAB: I would rather stay on topic. Whether /a/ is or isn't isolated as the pronunciation of /æ/ in Northern England is off topic. However, I do thank you for your participation and input in this discussion.LakeKayak (talk) 20:21, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Adding "sausage" as an entry

On Webster, it reads that "sausage" is pronounced /sɔ.sɪdʒ/. (The audio is not very reliable. Webster appears to be careful as writing the /ɔ/ and /ɒ/ sounds as with separate notations. However, the audios don't always reflect the difference.) However, a few months ago, I was informed by another user that the OED records the word as being pronounced as /sɒ.sɪdʒ/. It seems that Americans pronounce the word one way and British pronounce it another. In such case, the word is worthy of recognition in the article. With such mind, I have added the word as an entry. If anyone wishes to remove it, I would like to hear why you feel the entry should be removed. Thank you.74.102.216.186 (talk) 17:30, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I also went the OED website in order to obtain a reference to British English. I found an acceptable reference which is now added to the article. Thank you.74.102.216.186 (talk) 17:44, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

The big OED says: " Brit. /ˈsɒsɪdʒ/, /ˈsɔːsɪdʒ/ ; U.S. /ˈsɔsɪdʒ/, /ˈsɑsɪdʒ/" but they have not yet updated that entry and I think the pronunciation with the long vowel is probably dying out in the UK. I agree that the pronunciations differ between countries, but is long /ɔː/ the predominant American vowel? (I'm asking because I don't know.) Dbfirs 08:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I am sorry, sir. I fail to understand your question. I have interpreted your question to be asking three possible things. And I would rather answer the right one. So, are you asking if the predominant vowel is long, if it is /ɔ/, or both? Please respond. Thank you. (f.k.a. 74.102.216.186)LakeKayak (talk) 23:38, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Sorry if I wasn't clear. The article currently says that the American pronunciation is /sɔːsɪdʒ/ so the first syllable would be identical to the way we say "sauce" here in the UK, and the same as the American vowel in the other words on the line (atoll, gnocchi, oratory, parasol). I was wondering if this is the main American pronunciation, or do many Americans use the short vowel? Dbfirs 00:43, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, we do tend to pronounce the vowel like in the vowel in "sauce."LakeKayak (talk) 01:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

... as in "cot" or as in "caught", or are they both the same for you? Dbfirs 21:43, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

We pronounce the vowel in "sausage" like the vowel in "caught." I do make a distinction between the vowel in "cot" and "caught".LakeKayak (talk) 23:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

"o" in "procrasinate"

Currently, the article says that the "o" in procrastinate is pronounced as "a" in American English. However, I myself pronounce the vowel as /oʊ/. And I usually hear other people also use that pronunciation. On the contrary, Webster says that both pronunciations are acceptable. Therefore, I am going to add in the superscript "A2" with the reference source. If anybody wishes to undo this edit, or remove the entry, you do reserve the right. Thank you. (the user formerly known as 74.102.216.186).LakeKayak (talk) 03:48, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, the OED gives both pronunciations for American English. It also has an optional (ʊ) for British English "(/prə(ʊ)ˈkrastᵻneɪt/)" so perhaps we should almost have a "B2" too? Dbfirs 22:40, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

In such case, unless the British-American difference is infamous, like either, I wonder if it should be in the article. But for the time being, I would add the superscript "B2" to the entry.LakeKayak (talk) 00:36, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

What's "infamous" about the pronunciation of "either" (other than a song)? Both pronunciations are used in both countries, with regional variations. There might be a slight statistical preference, so I won't remove the entry, but I do question whether we need have entries at all where we have "AB2". Dbfirs 09:01, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

I wasn't suggesting to remove "either," either. It was just an example of one with "AB2" that should not be removed. However, if we both question whether "AB2" entries should be in the article, then probably they shouldn't. Therefore, I am going to remove all of them except "(n)either."LakeKayak (talk) 22:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

status and data

What about the words status and data? I pronounce status as "stay-tuhs" with stress on the first cilible with a long a sound. My friend from Texas however pronounces it as "stah-tuhs" with stress on the first cilible with a short a sound. I also know various people who say "Dah-tuh" (like dadda) instead of data (first cilible like day). or even words such as Pedophile? Those shuold be mentioned. 199.101.61.190 (talk) 11:08, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

I have heard both pronunciations used. However, in America, this is primarily a Northern-Southern difference. Therefore, it really should be on a different page if mentioned at all.LakeKayak (talk) 21:08, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Sources of information

Part of the problem with this article is that so many different sources are cited. Different dictionaries use different symbols and date from different periods, and this can give rise to the appearance of differences that don't actually exist. What is striking in all the pronunciations cited is that no reference appears to have been made to any of the specialist pronunciation dictionaries that concern themselves exclusively with listing pronunciations (recommended and alternative) in British English (RP) and American English (GA). I am, of course, prejudiced, since I edit one of them. You may not want to work with those two accents, but to attempt coverage of all the accents of English (British and American) in a single article would be massively difficult. I have added references to pronunciation dictionaries in the "Further Reading" section. RoachPeter (talk) 18:45, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Okay. Thank you, sir.LakeKayak (talk) 19:12, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. I'll have to send a last-minute letter to Father Christmas! Dbfirs 19:39, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Request for relocation of "comfortable"

Currently, this page says that the "or" is typically pronounced in American English. However, according to Webster, the preferred American pronunciation is either kʌmf.tɚ.bəl or kəmf.tɚ.bəl. (It doesn't seem that Webster makes a distinction between /ə/ and /ʌ/. However, many Americans that do.) Therefore, it seems that the or isn't pronounced in American English; and, on top of that, it seems we have an epenthetic r in our pronunciation. Therefore, this is probably a multiple difference more than a single difference. So, I suggest that this be moved to a different section. Thank you.LakeKayak (talk) 02:10, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

I would just remove the word from the article since the syllable is only sometimes omitted in British English. The OED has only /ˈkʌmfətəb(ə)l/ with no option for omitting the syllable. Dbfirs 09:52, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

In that case, I'll remove it. Thank you, sir.LakeKayak (talk) 18:47, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Purpose of article?

It's really hard to understand the purpose of this article. There is good coverage of differences between US English and most forms of other English, but this is not "American and British English pronunciation differences". There is no such thing as "British English pronunciation" ... in many if not most cases US English pronunciation is closer to RP than RP is to, say, Scottish English (see IPA_chart_for_English_dialects). Everything here can be covered by General American, Received Pronunciation and Differences between General American and Received Pronunciation ... and can be covered without perpetrating falsehoods. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 02:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

As the lede says, differences in pronunciation can mean accent differences or "differences in the pronunciation of individual words in the lexicon". The latter is what this article covers. To take the "tomayto-tomato" difference, Americans use the FACE vowel where Brits use the PALM vowel. Realisation of the relevant vowel varies between different accents within each region; but the lexical variation occurs between regions. jnestorius^(talk) 17:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

For actors, voice actors or other persons who need to learn how to adopt an RP accent, the IPA examples on this page are indispensible. Fold them into Differences between General American and Received Pronunciation if necessary; by all means, correct the "falsehoods" that are present; add citations to bring it up to Wikipedia standards... but please don't get rid of it altogether. This is genuinely useful information, and it would be a pity for it to simply vanish from Wikipedia. 24.239.54.219 (talk) 14:24, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Please don't combine this article with Comparison of General American and Received Pronunciation because the conservative RP referred to in that article is spoken by less than 2% of the British population, and is no longer considered to be synonymous with "BBC English". This article is much more useful for indicating differences between "average American" and "average British" English, or between the English spoken by "non-regional" presenters in the two countries. Dbfirs 10:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

I have argued on the Talk page of 'Comparison of General American and Received Pronunciation' that the two should be merged. Both articles describe the same accents, but deal with the accents in different and complementary ways. There is nothing particularly "conservative" about the RP described in 'American and British pronunciation differences' as far as I can see. Indeed, the whole notion of "conservative RP" is badly misunderstood in the unsatisfactory WP article on the subject. The old figure of "2% of the British population being RP speakers" is, I believe, based on an unscientific guess (which doesn't mean it's wrong, of course). Users of WP would be better served by an amalgamated and improved treatment in a single article. RoachPeter (talk) 17:00, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Untitled

In refactoring this out of American and British English differences, I've added a lot of new individual words and rearranged the material. Most of the additions I made were from Wells, especially words he's marked with an asterisk as being different. I cross-referenced against various dictionaries, and generally where there was disagreement I cut the Gordian knot by just removing the word. No doubt I've added many shiny new mistakes. Joestynes 02:53, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I've removed raspberry, because I'm pretty sure it is in fact a trap/bath word. (I haven't checked this, but it's not easy to check; British dictionaries don't generally show the short vowel pronunciations of BATH words, in spite of how common they are in the UK.) I think we should use phonemic transcriptions in many places, partly because it's what dictionaries (in Britain) generally do, partly because then we don't need to mention irrelevant detail like dark L, and partly because it allows for regional variation a bit better (though not perfectly): for example the short A /æ/ is actually [a] in much of the UK. But I should say that this page looks a lot better than the pronunciation section of American and British English differences used to look.--JHJ 17:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

The trap-bath split page mentions the phonetic context as preceding [f, s, θ, ns, nt, ntʃ, nd, mpl], whereas raspberry has following [z]. Joestynes 11:30, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Some people say it with /s/ (well, I do, anyway). But regardless of that, the vowel variation in raspberry is presumably inherited from that in rasp, which is a straightforward BATH word. Maybe there should be some mention of raspberry (and also Glasgow, which also has BATH-type vowel variation before /z/) on the trap-bath split page, but I don't think it's needed here.--JHJ 12:19, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

I've removed Glasgow since only those who learnt to speak hundreds of miles from that place in the UK would pronounce it with /ɑ:/. Dbfirs 08:51, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Coupe

The article doesn't make this clear, but AME and BE pronounce this totally differently. In AME it's a one syllable word ("Coop") and in BE it's a two syllable word ("Coo-pay"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.175.142.252 (talk) 02:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

I've moved this entry to the multiple differences section. Please check that I have correctly represented American usage. Dbfirs 07:39, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Coupé will be moved in the silent sounded section. Coupe without the acute accent /kuːp/ is related to a dessert dish. In American English, there's no acute accent on coupe (vehicle). /ˈklaɪtərɪs/ is Received Pronunciation & checked old British dictionaries dating before 1940. That phonetic will be reinstated. /ɛkˈspliːtɪv/ will be removed because in Received Pronunciation, the prefix ex- is usually unstressed and weak ɪks, ɪɡz. Aftermath will be moved to the multiple difference section because British English is non-rhotic.

Dbfirs, you seem to be very argumentative & we have nothing in common. You mentioned that there's no difference or it's just regional by tagging ^AB2. If it's Received Pronunciation, there is a difference. People outside of Britain recognized southern English accent from the Home Counties & London (Received Pronunciation, Estuary & Cockney). Northern English accent from the Midlands and further north is unknown outside of Britain & only recognized in the archipelago.

You remove historical context because it's not common to modern Britain. Removing this pre-war word before 1940 /ˈprɪstaɪn/. Also, this phonetic is a pre-war that is pronounced French /ˌkɛstʃəˈnɛə/ in which /w/ is now dominant in postwar Britain. Pre-war words before 1940 will not be remove because it's not relevant to today's Britain, but included for historical purpose.

You don't seem very tech savvy at all. If you need audio pronunciation and IPA phonetics, go to howjsay or Collins Dictionary page. Tim Boyers from howjsay is from East Anglia. The 2nd edition of The Routledge Dictionary of Pronunciation for Current English is now available on Amazon's Kindle.

Someone removing this because there's no example, but there is: BrE (1) /iːn/, AmE (1) /aɪn/ (2) /ɪn/: strychnine^A2. Check the audio & phonetic on Collins Dictionary, howjsay & Wikipedia for strychnine. For someone to say there's no difference between /ruːt/ route and /raʊt/ rout, that's ignorance on your part. Route is a French word ie en route.

If anyone has issues with American or British English, my advice is:

1. Take phonetic lessons, read the whole dictionary & apply those things in life that you've uncovered.

2. Listen & watch old audio/video footage that you can find on the internet that has pre-war pronunciation.

3. Watch documentaries & old movies from the 1930s through the 1970s with an American or British accent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NKM1974 (talk • contribs) 07:29, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

I was just responding to the comments of an anon editor, not being argumentative at all. We differ because I tend to look at the Oxford English Dictionary for guidance on British pronunciation. Of course I know the difference between route and rout. What on earth makes you think that I don't? We are no longer in the 1930s. Dbfirs 09:24, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Dbfirs, I didn't call you ignorant because people in Britain know the difference between route & rout. I'm referring to this IP (74.102.216.186) who mentioned there's no difference between route & rout. Also, someone removing this because there's no example, but there is: BrE (1) /iːn/, AmE (1) /aɪn/ (2) /ɪn/: strychnine^A2.

Although, prewar words are no longer common in Britain. Words before 1940 is used mostly in Commonwealth countries, ie. Canada, Australia, India, etc., because their education & government is tied in the colonial system. NKM1974 (talk) 00:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Laboratory

@Wolfdog: So maybe we shouldn't use the IPAc-en template for that. Help:IPA/English states explicitly that /ər/ stands for full ([ər, r̩]) and compressed ([r]) variants of the sequence. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 14:47, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Kbb2: You know, overall I think I'm beginning to like your suggestion of doing away with the diaphonemic system. Wolfdog (talk) 21:29, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Wolfdog: Actually it wouldn't help with this particular issue, as /ər/ is the correct phonemic interpretation, though we could use the superscript version of ⟨ə⟩ in this position (and maybe some others). Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 21:42, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Kbb2:Let's use the superscript schwa then. I'm no expert on Wikipedia's system, despite using it all the time. Wolfdog (talk) 22:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Wolfdog: You can voice your opinion on Help talk:IPA/English#Superscript ə. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 23:46, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Brooch and proven

The OED has pronunciations Brit./brəʊtʃ/,U.S. /broʊtʃ/, /brutʃ/ for brooch, and for proven: Brit./ˈpruːvən/, /ˈprəʊvən/, U.S. /ˈpruvən/, Scottish /ˈprovən/, /ˈpruvən/. Should we split our entry onto separate lines and show the alternatives? Dbfirs 06:54, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

@Dbfirs: The Scottish pronunciations have the same phonemes as the RP ones, it's just that they're in reverse order. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 06:57, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, it wasn't the Scottish versions I was concerned about. They just use shorter versions of the vowels. I've realised that our IPA system does not make the fine distinctions that the OED does, so perhaps we should just leave the broad approximations. Dbfirs 07:00, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

@Dbfirs: Again, it doesn't matter whether you write the GOAT vowel with /oʊ/, /əʊ/ or /o/. It's an abstract entity, phonemes aren't sounds. Phones are. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 07:15, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Trap-bath split

In the single difference section, we exclude words in which the only difference is the trap-bath split because the split occurs in both countries (though more in England). I suggest that we do the same for multiple differences, so I've removed aftermath. The OED gives essentially the same pronunciation for British English (second option) as for American English. The difference is not really one of American versus British. Dbfirs (talk) 16:08, 11 February 2018‎ (UTC)

• What do you mean that the split occurs in both countries exactly? Wolfdog (talk) 16:34, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

The article says that the split occurs in older Boston English, but perhaps it is not really widespread in America? Dbfirs 16:41, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Correct. It's practically unheard of. It was also sometimes affected as the Transatlantic accent. Wolfdog (talk) 01:43, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure how whether the split exists in the United States is relevant. The BATH/START and CLOTH/LOT mergers are indeed British innovations, though they do not manifest in all parts of Britain, and there are quite a few words affected. But they differ lexically, not (entirely) phonologically, so they are within the scope of this article and the way they're mentioned now is too brief.So perhaps they deserve a dedicated section. Nardog (talk) 02:44, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

I just edited & updated the Miscellaneous pronunciation differences (Single/Multiple section) with too many duplicates & errors. A1/B1/A3/B3 should be A2/B2. If you couldn't label things correctly, don't touch anything. Who added the "R" phonetic in the Multiple difference section? British English is non-rhotic. The user who inserted the "R" phonetic on the multiple difference section of British English must be naïve. You want to make change that leads to faulty error. I don't mean to sound abrasive, but I'm effete with all this incorrect information & label. NKM1974 (talk) 05:10, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

@NKM1974: Please read Help:IPA/English and WP:PRON. Transcriptions enclosed within the IPAc-en template should adhere to Help:IPA/English. Also, it's not entirely correct to say that British English is non-rhotic. The original rhotic pronunciation is preserved in Scotland and parts of England, and these varieties also belong to British English (although Ulster English doesn't, it's a variety of Irish English). Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

British English is non-rhotic next to a consonant, but rhotic next to a vowel. British English is associated to London & Home Counties, ie, Received Pronunciation/Estuary/Cockney. Majority of the world outside of Britain have little or no knowledge of Midland or northern English accent. NKM1974 (talk) 08:09, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

@NKM1974: British English is English as spoken in England, Wales and Scotland (and perhaps Northern Ireland). That's the consensus among scholars. It doesn't matter what the popular perception is. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 10:34, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Subaltern

The IPA recently added to our article contains schwas that are not present in the standard British pronunciation. I consider this to be misleading, but my two different attempts to clarify the IPA representation have been reverted by Nardog who is undoubtedly more expert at IPA than am I, but I wonder if we can come to a less misleading compromise on the IPA representation. I have read the articles linked in Nardog's edit summaries, and they do not apply to this word where the first schwa is usually omitted, and the second one is not a schwar. I agree that there are variations in the British pronunciation. Dbfirs 20:30, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

@Dbfirs: We're transcribing RP but according to Help:IPA/English. This means that we indicate /r/ according to spelling (more or less, some French loanwords are obviously one type of exception). Syllabic consonants are sequences of /ə/ and a consonant as far as phonology is concerned. No English word permits a */blt/ sequence. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 09:44, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

By the link English phonology#Consonants I meant the first note in that section. Our /əl, ən, əm/ represent not a sequence of the sounds [ə] + [l], [n], or [m] but a sequence of phonemes we analyze underlyingly as /ə/ + /l/, /n/, or /m/, which may be realized with a vowel + consonant or with a syllabic consonant [l̩], [n̩], or [m̩], depending on accent/environment.

And the notations linking to Help:IPA/English are diaphonemic – thus /ərn/ represents /ən/ in non-rhotic accents, which in turn may be reduced to [n̩]. So /ˈsʌbəltərn/ is a perfectly sensible (and the only) representation of [ˈsʌbl̩tn̩] so long as we're using the diaphonemic system of Help:IPA/English. Nardog (talk) 09:57, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate that IPAc-en paints with a very broad brush, but I don't see why we can't have a note making a finer distinction. Dbfirs 15:37, 18 May 2019 (UTC)