Latest news with #mispronunciation
Telegraph
16 hours ago
- General
- Telegraph
Criticising mispronunciation is ‘hypocritical snobbery'
People who criticise mispronunciations are often guilty of snobbery towards regional dialects, a top linguist has claimed. In response to a debate among Telegraph readers, Dr Amanda Cole, a linguist at Essex University – and self-avowed 'Essex woman' – said mispronunciation is part of how the English language evolves. Many mispronunciations such as 'an apron' from the middle English 'napron' had become the accepted norm in the English language because they were so prolific, she said in an article for the paper. And she warned that 'linguistic puritans' who attempted to stand on the shore wagging their finger at the 'incoming tide' of changing pronunciation would 'eventually be enveloped'. The debate was sparked by Susie Dent, Countdown 's lexicographer, when she said that she now come to regard the common mispronunciation of mischievous as 'mischiev-i-ous' as acceptable. It sparked a debate where Telegraph writers identified their biggest bugbears of mispronunciation such as the letter h being pronounced 'haitch', 'expresso' for espresso and 'hyberbowl' for hyperbole. Dr Cole said part of the backlash was tied up with 'accent prejudice' where people 'nitpicked' over the ways people from different backgrounds spoke, such as Essex men and women who dropped their 'ts' in water, so it became 'wor-arrrrr' or turned proper into 'propaaa'. 'As a linguist but also a proud Essex girl (or, better put, woman) I take objection. Our accents reflect where we are from and who we are,' she said. 'In particular, in the UK, accents are closely linked to social class. Those with the strongest regional accents tend to be working class. Accent prejudice is a smokescreen for broader societal prejudices particularly class snobbery and middle-class gatekeeping dressed up as a light to protect and serve the English language. 'Many may cry, 'but the spelling! There is a t in water for a reason!' but there is a certain hypocrisy at play. These people also tend to be those who break out in an angry sweat at the pronunciation of hyperbole as 'hyperbowl'. 'There is a famously loose relationship between English spelling and pronunciation. I call for an end to the prevailing thinking that the English language is being used and abused but instead for a greater understanding that language changes over time and naturally varies between people from different backgrounds.' Dr Cole's research has revealed how the King's English and Cockney have all but disappeared among young people as three new accents have emerged. Voice analysis found the traditional two accents had been overtaken by standard southern British English, as articulated by Ellie Goulding; estuary English, as spoken by Adele; and multicultural London English, as voiced by Stormzy. 'In this country the current thinking on the English language is that there is an ancient stone tablet atop a mountain on which the divine pronunciation of each and every English word is etched. Deviation from this text is sacrilege or at least wilful traitorship to our fine land and the language we share,' said Dr Cole. 'In reality, the English we speak is like a snapshot of the sea: it will never look the same at any two points even if it is recognisably the same body of water. 'There are swells, tides and sometimes transient ripples on the surface. Linguistic puritans may stand on the shore wagging their finger at the incoming tide but will eventually be enveloped. The last of the nadder-sayers undoubtedly sounded like a stubborn fool and perhaps the same will one day be true of 'aitch' for h in British English.' The English language is always in a state of change By Dr Amanda Cole Last month, Telegraph writers and editors wrote about the 'mispronunciations' that most peeve them such as the letter h being pronounced 'haitch', 'expresso' for espresso and 'hyberbowl' for hyperbole. But are 'haitch', 'expresso' and 'hyperbowl' wrong or are they just alternative pronunciations? How many people must pronounce a word a certain way and for how long before we accept the new pronunciation as correct? The English we speak today includes many pronunciations that would have horrified or mystified speakers from previous times. Prior to the 15th century, vowels were pronounced very differently to present times, meaning that, for example, words such as bite and name would once have sounded more like 'beet' and 'nahm'. In fact, English has changed so dramatically that an Icelandic speaker might have a better chance of understanding Old English than a modern-day monolingual English speaker. At times, the English language has changed because of mispronunciations so prolific that they became the accepted norm. The word apron actually comes from the Middle English napron. Over time people turned 'a napron' into 'an apron', resulting in the word we know today. In the same way, nadder became adder and oche became notch. It is also little wonder that cows, which follows the regular English pattern for plurals, has won out against kine for more than one cow. In the same way I would not be surprised if yous, a plural form of you which is used in many dialects of English, one day became widely accepted. The English language has always been in a state of change, and so too there have always been those who bemoan such change. In 1440, friar and poet Osbern Bokenam wrote with dismay that the English language had been corrupted by Norman French after the arrival of William the Conqueror – something that we now consider to be foundational to modern-day English. In perfect irony, he expressed his concerns using words with French or Latin origins such as famylyar (now, of course, written 'familiar'), demonstrating the futility in policing language. Linguists aim to describe and not prescribe language. We consider the English language to be defined by how people use it, not a set of ideals for how we feel it should be used. Most lexicographers also take the same approach. For example, although it really grates on linguistic pedants, most dictionaries now include figurative definitions of literally ('I laughed so hard I literally died') because there is a sizeable body of evidence that many people use the word in this way and have done for a long time – even literary greats such as Charles Dickens, James Joyce and Charlotte Brontë. You may think I am pushing linguistic wokery – a term I just made up that would certainly have been uninterpretable for English speakers born a hundred years ago, let alone in times of Old English. Indeed, a prominent newspaper columnist once called me a proponent of linguistic anarchy. But I do believe that there are, dare I say it – take a breath – incorrect pronunciations. I won't forget the time my Italian friend pronounced the r in iron (as in: I, Ron, do solemnly swear…). I instinctively corrected her pronunciation – for which she was glad – and another linguist in earshot gently chided me for prescribing how a word should be pronounced. There are, of course, rules and collective understandings that govern the English language and I am in no way challenging this. But I do call for a wider awareness of how language works. In this country, the current thinking on the English language is that there is an ancient stone tablet atop a mountain – although, surely, it should rightfully be homed in southern England where apparently exemplary English is spoken, so perhaps it is just atop a sizeable hill in the Chilterns – on which the divine pronunciation of each and every English word is etched. Deviation from this text is sacrilege or at least wilful traitorship to our fine land and the language we share. In reality, the English we speak is like a snapshot of the sea: it will never look the same at any two points even if it is recognisably the same body of water. There are swells, tides and sometimes transient ripples on the surface. Linguistic puritans may stand on the shore wagging their finger at the incoming tide but will eventually be enveloped. The last of the nadder-sayers undoubtedly sounded like a stubborn fool and perhaps the same will one day be true of 'aitch' for h in British English. Having said that, I do think it is okay and only natural to have an opinion on language. I, for one, openly dislike being called a 'girl' – something women, even those deep into adulthood, commonly experience while the equivalent is rare for men. But the motivation behind any commentary on language is important. Calling women 'girls' is literally infantilising but 'haitch', 'expresso' and 'hyperbowl' are pretty harmless and any criticism seems to come from a place of lofty linguistic idealism. Much nitpicking on language devalues regional dialects. In the original Telegraph article, aim was taken at the Essex accent in which, apparently, proper becomes 'propaaa' and water is 'wor-arrrrr'. As a linguist but also a proud Essex girl (or, better put, woman) I take objection. Our accents reflect where we are from and who we are. In particular, in the UK, accents are closely linked to social class. Those with the strongest regional accents tend to be working class. Accent prejudice is a smokescreen for broader societal prejudices particularly class snobbery and middle-class gatekeeping dressed up as a light to protect and serve the English language. Many may cry, 'but the spelling! There is a t in water for a reason!' but there is a certain hypocrisy at play. These people also tend to be those who break out in an angry sweat at the pronunciation of hyperbole as 'hyperbowl'. There is a famously loose relationship between English spelling and pronunciation. I call for an end to the prevailing thinking that the English language is being used and abused but instead for a greater understanding that language changes over time and naturally varies between people from different backgrounds.
BBC News
23-06-2025
- General
- BBC News
Northern corrects wrong pronunciation of Wylam
A rail firm has re-recorded how the name of a village is pronounced on its trains. Northern Rail said feedback had prompted it to review how Wylam, in Northumberland, was pronounced by its voiceover the past two months, the village had occasionally been pronounced as 'Will-em' instead of 'Why-lam', according to Maisie James - from Wylam. Northern said it had made the change last week. Ms James said she and her friend Izzy Flynn had noticed the incorrect pattern on the way back from Newcastle a few months ago. "Where does the 'em' come from?" said Ms James. "I think 'Why-lam' makes more sense."She said a few people had mentioned the mispronunciation to her. Northern said the previous announcement had only played on certain trains, so not every passenger had heard it. "It's a bit of a small place not a lot of news the name on the train change is interesting," Ms James said. The re-recording follows backlash faced by ScotRail for using artificial intelligence for some of its train said it did not use artificial intelligence for its voiceovers. Fellow Northern passengers said they had regularly heard mispronunciations of Wylam, as well as nearby villages such as Prudhoe on local trains in the past. "It's not terribly important is it as long as the train comes on time," said Rob Doughty. "As long as that happens, I don't mind what they say." Follow BBC North East on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram.
Daily Mail
26-05-2025
- General
- Daily Mail
The commonly mispronounced words that infuriate Brits... so, are YOU saying them correctly?
In a country famed for its love of queuing and tea, mispronunciation is a breach of etiquette known to ruffle feathers. Britons have taken to Reddit 's r/AskUK forum to share the linguistic blunders that drive them to distraction. 'Which words do people say incorrectly that really bother you, British edition?,' one user asked. The responses ranged from phonetic mistakes to spelling blunders, with some regional snobbery thrown in. Among the most irksome offenders is the mistake of saying 'pacific' when the person actually means 'specific.' One user quipped: 'Nothing Pacific comes to mind,' highlighting the issue in an amusing way. Others bemoaned saying 'incinerating' in place of 'insinuating,' prompting more than a few grumbles from users with the same language dislike. And then there's the seemingly American phrase 'I could care less.' One commenter vented: 'They're saying the literal opposite of what they mean!' Others on Reddit were particularly scathing of that example, arguing that it completely undermines the speaker's intended indifference. The pronunciation of 'ask' as 'arks' also drew criticism, though not without sparking a broader cultural debate. One user grumbled that the variation made them think of 'toddler pronunciation', only to be swiftly countered by another pointing out that 'arks' has roots in Caribbean English dialects. 'Don't abandon your heritage because some people are up their own a**e about "proper" English,' one person wrote, defending the linguistic variations. Other grievances leaned toward the typographic rather than the spoken. 'Could of,' 'should of,' and 'would of' came under fire for their grammatical inaccuracy. The difference between 'lose' and 'loose' similarly had tempers flaring, with one person noting: 'My wife's a stickler for this one! It's horribly widespread and irritates me no end. 'In a similar vein, "litterly" seems to be usurping "literally" as the preferred spelling.' 'Can I get a shot of expresso?' one user wrote, mocking the common mispronunciation of 'espresso.' Spelling seemed to strike the most sensitive nerves, with people mentioning their annoyance at others for mistaking 'weary' for 'wary,' or 'brake' for 'break'. One person complained about the use of 'defiantly' when they mean 'definitely' and 'then' when they mean 'than'.
