The state of British English pronunciation

British English pronunciations range along a cline from the most regionally marked to that accent generally known as Received Pronunciation (RP), that is at least within England where it is essentially region-neutral. The multiplicity of accents in the British Isles stems in part from social structures, resulting in placement on the cline depending on speakers’ needs and on the pressures exerted upon them to conform to some group norm. In larger measure, however, the variety of accents is born of the sheer length of time, some sixteen centuries, over which the language has developed in the islands. This “time depth” has led to greater fragmentation of speech-forms than that which has yet occurred in other places to which English has subsequently migrated: different influences have been exerted on the language and local allegiances have built up, to the extent that variety has become inevitable and is greatly cherished as a signal of regional and social identity.

This is not to say that RP is little regarded. Many British people both admire the accent and are pleased to see it having international status. However, comparatively few people speak RP, even that variety of it that is quite unmarked for privilege (see below on variation within the RP accent). Estimates vary on RP use in England. Wells (1982: 118) puts the figure at 10% “[e]ven with the more generous definitions [of what constitutes the accent]”, while Romaine (2000: 20): put the figure at 5% at most. Such figures are purely guesstimates in fact, since no objective research into the matter has been carried out, and if all varieties of RP are counted together even Wells’ figure might be rather low. Nevertheless, most people are readily identifiable to a place or region, which they would not be were they only RP speakers, and many people who have access to RP as one style of pronunciation do have access to more regionally-identifiable pronunciations too, which they use at need naturally and unconsciously to accommodate to more localized speaker situations. So the picture is complicated as regards the kinds of pronunciations that are to be heard in the British Isles. On the one hand there is a quite regionless, and now fairly classless, accent, RP. There is a multiplicity of regionally and still more locally espoused pronunciations, which are used by the majority of people all or most of the time. Most speakers roam, with greater or lesser ease, between accents at or approaching RP and accents that are very readily identifiable non-RP, which are sometimes regional to a very marked degree.

There is a long tradition of describing and analysing RP, beginning with Daniel Jones in the very early twentieth century (Jones 1909, 1917) and moving into the present day with a variety of materials, including many directed at the English-teaching and -learning community. RP models are also set out in pronouncing dictionaries of different styles and with varying perspectives on how the model is to be described (see, for example, Jones 2011; Olausson and Sangster 2006; Upton, Kretzschmar, and Konopka 2001; Wells 2008). Likewise, there exists a wealth of authoritative descriptions and analyses of regional and social British accent variations. Many of these are monographs dealing with the pronunciations to be found in particular regions of Britain. Stuart-Smith (2003) is an excellent example. Others are in the form of overviews of accent variety more generally. They might be written for the scholarly community. Wells (1982) is a model here. Alternatively they might be aimed at instructing the early student. Hughes, Trudgill, and Watt (2005) and Trudgill (1999) are good examples. Longer, more analytical and discursive treatment based on large research data are also available, some of this being available online. A most notable collection is to be found on the Accents and Dialects site of the British Library (http://sounds.bl.uk/Accents-and-dialects). At the historical level we might remark the many publications resulting from the Survey of English Dialects (Orton et al. 1962–1971), which are used to inform most commentaries, and the Linguistic Survey of Scotland (Mather and Speitel 1975–1986). These English and Scottish surveys have continuing relevance in the British sections of Schneider et al. (2004), where their findings emerge alongside more recent research to inform our understanding of regional pronunciation distributions. This work, being a compendium of very recent research by leading scholars of regional accents in the British Isles, is recommended as an ultimate authority. Its scholarship, also available in Kortmann and Upton (2008), furnishes in amplified form that which is digested here.¹

A model English accent: Received Pronunciation

Locating regional accents

Major markers of place

/r/

The most significant pointer to broad regionality applying within the British Isles is that of rhoticity, the pronouncing of /r/ following a vowel, where <r> occurs in a word when written. (Rhoticity is signalled in English spellings that were fixed before many English accents became nonrhotic, this happening comparatively recently, with local speech even close to London evidencing the feature until the middle of the twentieth century (Orton et al. 1962–1971).) Rhoticity is a worldwide phenomenon, being, for example, a feature that predominates in the English pronunciations of North America, and is more common than is often supposed within the British Isles. It is the norm in Ireland, Scotland (though apparently receding in some urban areas, notably Glasgow), and in parts of Wales (in the south-west of the country and by transference from their Welsh in the English of Welsh speakers). Within England it is found in the West Country, southern Lancashire, and (as essentially a feature of older people’s speech) in the far north-east, north of Newcastle upon Tyne. Rhoticity has an effect on many preceding sounds: commonly in Scottish English there is no diphthong in such as word as here and sure, these being pronounced [hir], [ʃur].

Whether associated with rhoticity or not, realizations of /r/ are variable throughout the British Isles. Within Ireland an essential difference is between southern [ɹ] and northern [ɻ], though with a spreading of an unrelated [ɻ] outwards from the capital city Dublin in the south as well. The reverse of this is true of England, where [ɻ] is south-western and [ɹ] is more usual elswehere. The north-east England occasional feature is the “Northumberland Burr”, [ʁ]. In Wales, [ɾ] is especially brought from Welsh by Welsh-speaking speakers when they are using English. Scottish /r/ ranges from post-alveolar to retroflex or a tap.

/əː/ NURSE

Further to an absence of centring diphthongization in Scotland (as described under rhoticity), many Scottish English speakers do not have [ə] in their inventories, substituting another vowel instead at need. As a result we might expect nurse itself to be rendered [nɛrs] or [nʌrs]; in the absence of [ə], the English hesitancy form [əːː] is quite typically [eːː] in Scotland. Indicative of (especially south) Welsh English is [œː]~[øː], giving [bœːd~bøːd] bird, [tœːn~tøːn] turn. There is merging of NURSE with NORTH on [ɔː] in the speech of some older, especially rhotic, speakers in north-east England, but [øː] is to be heard from some of the youngest speakers.

/a/~/ɑː/ BATH

Variation in the BATH vowel before following /s/, /f/, or /ϴ/ is, with STRUT /ʊ/~/ʌ/ variation (below), one of two features that are especially prominent characteristics of a north–south division within England. As indicated in the RP discussion for this feature, the principal variability in the vernacular is between [a] in the north and [ɑː] in the south, with the Midlands split: the isogloss separating the two variants runs roughly due eastwards from the Wash (the large indentation on the English east coast north of East Anglia), through Birmingham, to the Welsh border. The [a] region in fact extends to this line from the far north of Scotland. As mentioned, so firmly fixed is this distinction that even the dictates of RP do not strongly challenge regional allegiance for northern RP speakers. Historically, earlier country-wide BATH [a] first became lengthened in the south to [aː], and this is still heard outside the south-east. The north–south distinction in England is thus essentially one of length, north/short and south/long, with vowel quality in southern regions a lesser issue: essentially [aː] is indicative of the south-west and East Anglia, [ɑː] of the south-east. Southern England’s (and “southern” RP”s) [ɑː] is a later development of this; [aː] is characteristic of Wales and of Southern Ireland, where it contrasts with Northern Irish [ɑ].

/ʊ/~/ʌ/ STRUT

The principal distinction for STRUT within the dialects of England specifically is between /ʌ/ (as in RP), found in southernmost areas of the country, and the more historically grounded /ʊ/ of the North and Midlands. This, like the BATH distinction above, is used by very many people to identify speakers as either northern or southern English. However, the isogloss separating the variants does not coincide with that for the BATH variation running straight across the Midlands. Rather, it dips southwards at its mid-point to reach the Thames Valley west of London: given that the BATH isogloss takes a more northerly track, running straight west-to-east across the middle of the country, it would be quite wrong to think that there is a clear “north–south divide” in pronunciation in England founded on BATH and STRUT (or any other variables). Also, unlike the /a/-/ɑː/ north–south distinction referred to in the discussion of RP, the use of STRUT /ʊ/ is the subject of more critical public remark, perhaps because, rather than it being a mere phonetic difference, it signals the absence of an entire phoneme, /ʌ/, from a northern speaker’s phonemic inventory. Most likely as a consequence of this there exists an intermediate STRUT sound, [ɤ], dubbed a “fudge” by Chambers and Trudgill (1998: 110; see also Upton 1995: 385–394) since it occurs between the two alternatives in articulation, and hence acoustically. This fudge is found widely, especially though not exclusively at the interface between areas of strong [ʊ] allegiance (the North) and those favouring [ʌ] (the south-east especially). [ʌ] tends to be centralized particularly in Wales and Ireland, while [ɔ] is a feature of the accents of the Channel Islands and Orkney and Shetland.

/eː/~/eɪ/ FACE

Dubbed “long mid diphthonging” by Wells (1982: 210–211), the fracture of the long monophthong to a diphthong here at FACE, and also at GOAT (below), is a historical process that has been variously applied in the British Isles. Along with GOAT among diphthongal vowels, and especially BATH and STRUT among monophthongs, FACE is particularly distinguished by a north–south split, in this case (and with GOAT) involving a monophthongal north from the North of England northwards through Scotland, and in Wales and Ireland, contrasting with a diphthongal Midlands and southern England. So [eː] is typical in the North of England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales; /eɪ/ is to be expected from the English Midlands southwards, with [ɛɪ]~[ʌɪ]~[æɪ] realizations also found there. One notable exception to a largely monophthongal North is historical [ɪə] in north-east England, now as a somewhat recessive feature.

/oː/~/oʊ/ GOAT

The distribution of long monopthong versus diphthong is found here as is found for the FACE vowel. Accents of the South and Midlands of England, in the west extending as far north as Liverpool, are characterized generally by diphthongs, the most significant ones other than frequent [oʊ] being [ʌʊ] in the south-east, [ɔʊ] in the south-west, and [ʌʊ~aʊ] in the Midlands. In East Anglia there is variability in GOAT, between [ʌʊ] and [ʊu], according to etymology. See Wells (1982: 337) for an explanation of this.

In contrast to Southern and Midland English diphthonging, the monophthong [oː] is quite characteristic of the accents of Northern England, Scotland, Ireland, and Wales. Basic monophthong-diphthong GOAT variation, like that for FACE, is thus used by many listeners to place a speaker geographically. As noted in the section on RP above, trad-RP [oʊ] seems to be resurgent, a fact that might well be linked to its presence in some regional accents in England and Wales, and to some extent in accents outside these regions.

A social development in the North, spreading especially as a feature of the speech of younger middle class from the north-east and the east coast city of Hull is “GOAT-fronting” to [θ:]. A recessive feature of note is the North-east England traditional [ʊə], paralleling [ɪə] in FACE.

/h-/

It is often thought that “h-dropping” or “h-deletion”, resulting in [aʊs] house, [apn] happen, is a universal feature of non-RP in Britain, but this is not the case. Whilst it is widespread in Wales, it is unusual in Scotland and Ireland, and although it is frequent in large areas of England it is not usual in the rural areas of East Anglia, or in the north-east north of Newcastle. Tied to matters of orthography as it is, the dropping of the initial [h-] tends to be socially stigmatized, rendering it the subject of as much sociolinguistic as it is regional-distributional debate (see, for example, Mugglestone 2003: 95ff).

A longstanding spelling signaling a pronunciation that is now regionally associated is <wh->, representing [ʍ-]. Whilst this is found in somewhat mannered forms of RP, it is especially associated with pronunciations local to Ireland, Scotland, and the Scottish–English borderland. In Ireland the pronunciation chimes well with a similar sound in the Irish language.

/aʊ/ MOUTH

A pronunciation especially to be expected in Scotland, but also extending southwards into north-east England, is [uː] for MOUTH. As is the case with many other regionally significant features, this feature is of very considerable antiquity, and, like PRICE [iː], was the norm for English before the onset of the Great Vowel Shift of the late Middle Ages (Smith 1996: 86-111). Although it is not as ubiquitous as it once was in general use, especially to the south of the Scottish border, it retains special currency in north-east England as a marker of local identity. Newcastle United football club, for example, is frequently referred to as The Toon (i.e., “The Town”, [ðə tuːn]), this being used as a signal of local allegiance by many people who would nevertheless regularly use MOUTH [aʊ].

Forms of /l/

Helpful distinctiveness here is between “clear” or “thin” [l] and “dark” or “thick” [ɫ]. There is a trend from clear to dark as one moves south through England, with full vocalization to [ʊ] being found in the south-east around London. Quite the opposite trend occurs in Wales, with the thin variant in the south, the thick variant being found in the north, as it is in Scotland.

Fine tuning regional differences

/ʌɪ/ PRICE

The RP diphthong [ʌɪ] is shared with local accents widely in Scotland, while the trad-RP [aɪ] is also found in Orkney and Shetland, Northern (often with a lengthened onset) and Midland England, Wales, and Southern Ireland. Higher onsets for the diphthong, giving [æɪ]~[ɛɪ], can be characteristic of rural Irish accents. Low-back onsets are also widely heard, as [ɑɪ] in Southern England and the Channel Islands, East Anglia, and in Ireland, especially in Dublin, and as [ɒɪ] in the West Country and West Midlands of England, and London (Cockney).

Originally the norm in the PRICE set was [iː]. This, like MOUTH [uː] above, a form dating from before the time of the medieval Great Vowel Shift, has become lexicalized, especially in the Yorkshire region of northern England. Here especially it operates restrictedly but significantly in a small set of words, most notably right and night, to signal local affiliation.

Representations of <-ng>

A feature now exhibiting quite restricted distribution is “velar nasal plus”, the insertion of the alveolar stop [g] following [ŋ]. This results in long being pronounced [lɒŋg], thing [ϴɪŋg]; singing, which is in many accents [ˈsɪŋɪŋ], becomes with this feature [ˈsɪŋgɪŋ] or even [ˈsɪŋgɪŋg]. Formerly widespread amongst English speakers, velar nasal plus is now a quite reliable indicator that a speaker comes from the north-west Midland region of England, and to be located somewhere between Birmingham and southern Lancashire/Yorkshire.

Like absence of [h-], [-n] in words with <-ing>, such as coming, is a socially stigmatized feature of pronunciation, and so is the subject of sociolinguistic study. It does not manifest geographical distribution, however, being found widely across the whole of the British Isles.

Distinctive treatment of stops

Like velar nasal plus a feature of the north-west Midlands, but restricted to its extreme northern edge, is Liverpool affrication of the voiceless stops /p/, /t/, and /k/, these becoming respectively [ts], [pf], and [kχ], and in final position sometimes realized as fricatives [ф, s, χ]. Seemingly as a consequence of this affrication, glottaling of /t/ to [ʔ], which is to be found in almost all British accents, is less usual in Liverpool than elsewhere.

Unlike the widespread /t/-glottaling, however, glottaling of /p/ and /k/ is particularly a feature of north-east England, this being increasingly heard from younger speakers to replace the glottalization (pre-glottaling) forms [ʔt, ʔp, ʔk], which were formerly ubiquitous and which are now typically heard from more elderly northern England speakers.

/ɒ/ LOT

The major difference from an RP-like variant is [ɔ] in Scotland (including the Northern Isles), in Wales, and in the West Midlands. It is also a feature of “fashionable” speech in Dublin, where it contrasts with [a] in more colloquial speech found there and in rural areas in the west of the country; [ɑ] is also heard in Southern Ireland, and in south-west England and East Anglia.

/ɒ/ CLOTH

The lengthened form [ɔː] found in trad-RP is also a feature in the accent of older speakers in East Anglia. As with LOT, [ɑ] can be heard especially in Southern Ireland, the West Country, and East Anglia.

/ʊ/ FOOT

Accents in Scotland and Ireland tend towards a tense close central rounded [ʉ] here, sometimes advanced to a close front rounded [Y]. [Y] is also a feature of the English West Country. Long-standing stigmatization of Northern English STRUT [ʊ], especially imposed on this area from without, can result in realization of FOOT as [ʌ] through hypercorrection.

/uː/ GOOSE

[uː] is ubiquitous here in regional accents as in RP, with an advanced form [ʉː] frequently heard too (increasingly in emerging forms of RP as regionally). An on-glide on [u] is especially frequent in the West Midlands, giving [^əu(ː)], with shorter diphthongs heard in the north of England, East Anglia, and south-east England, [ʊu]. Especially older speakers in the West Country might exhibit [Yː], with [Y] heard in urban Scots.

/iː/ FLEECE

Rather than this being universally a long monophthong, there is a tendency for there to be a short diphthong, [ɪi], here, with wider diphthongs based on [əɪ] found especially in England. As with GOOSE, on-gliding is particularly notable in the West Midlands, giving [^əiː].

/a/ TRAP

As in RP, [æ] is also being replaced by [a] in regional southern English accents, though it is still regularly heard there, as it is in Ireland, East Anglia and the East Midlands, and the Channel Islands; [a] is the norm elsewhere, often in a retracted form in urban Scotland.

/ɑː/ PALM, START

RP-like [ɑː] is found in south-east England and the Channel Islands, and in northern England alongside [ɒː] (also in the West Midlands) and [aː]. This [aː], incidentally the immediate ancestor of RP [ɑː], is the norm in south-west England and in Wales.

Most variation relating to START coincides with that for PALM. However, while PALM tends to be short [a] in Scotland, there exists a rule, the “Scottish Vowel Length Rule”, which states that Scottish vowels are long before fricatives, /r/, or at boundaries: this results in the Scottish [a] being lengthened to [aː] in the rhotic environment of START, which is sometimes retracted from low front or raised to [ɛː].

/ɔː/ NORTH, FORCE, THOUGHT

The most striking regional feature for NORTH and FORCE is the [ʊə] of north-east England, a historical feature that is declining in use but is characteristic of the most localized speech, speech that is sometimes rhoticized on [ʁ].

Otherwise distinctive for NORTH are [oː] in Scotland and this or [ɒː] in Northern England. In Ireland the range [ɔː~ɒː~ɑː] is found for NORTH. FORCE distinctions are to be heard in Ireland, where [oː~ɔː] are usual, with [ɒː] a Dublin feature.

THOUGHT exhibits a wide range of realizations. Principal exceptions to [ɔː] are the [ɔ] found in Scotland, [ɒː~aː] in northern England, and [oː~oʊ~ɔə] in the south-east of England. Irish speakers have a range of mainly back vowels, [ɔː~ɒː~ɑː], although [aː] is found in Dublin.

/ɪə/ NEAR

Nonrhotic accents of Britain, essentially those of England outside the south-west, mainly exhibit centring diphthongs with a high front onset at [ɪ] like RP, or tense [i]. West Midland accents might have [eə~ɛə]. Rhoticity brings with it a monophthongal realization on [i]. Monopthongal [eː]~[ɛː] can be found in nonrhotic East Anglia, creating a NEAR/SQUARE merger.

/ɛː/ SQUARE

The [ɛː~ɛə] of RP/trad-RP is also usual in nonrhotic accents (i.e., in most of England), though [ɜː] is characteristic of an area of the northern edge of the West Midlands centered upon Liverpool. Rhotic areas tend to have their rhoticity based on [e(ː)] or [ɛ(ː)], the latter typical of the West Country especially.

/ʊə/ CURE

The monophthongization that gives [ɔː] is increasingly the norm in RP and is found in Northern and Midland English regional accents also, although [ʊə] is most frequent in all the nonrhotic areas. The rhoticity characteristic of Scotland, Ireland, and south-west England is typically on [u(ː)]. Very telling of a Welsh English accent is a tendency to a disyllabic [uwə] or [ɪuwə].

/ɔɪ/ CHOICE

[ɔɪ] can be expected in all regions of the British Isles, though the glide tends to be somewhat lower in Scotland, at [ɔe]. Other low-back onsets producing [ɒɪ]~[ɑɪ] can be considered somewhat characteristic of the Irish Republic, the English North, and the West Midlands, where [oɪ] is also found; this [oɪ] also occurs in Dublin and south-east England. Raised onsets can also be heard in East Anglia, with [ʊɪ].

/ɪ/ KIT

Beyond [ɪ], which occurs in all varieties and is usual except in the islands to the north of Scotland (Orkney and Shetland), where there is a distinct tendency towards retraction and lowering, the main characteristic marker of regionality is tense [i]. This is a particular feature of the West Midlands, and is also to be heard in East Anglia.

/ɛ/ DRESS

Raising from the typical RP vowel to [e] is especially a feature of south-east England, and is also found in East Anglia, the Channel Islands, Orkney and Shetland, and the cities of Scotland. Lowering to [æ] is very readily to be heard in Northern Ireland.

Unstressed vowels

/i/ happY: While [i], generally with some element of lengthening, is particularly widespread, [ɪ~e~ɛ] are traditionally found in the North of England, [ɪ~e] in Ireland, and [e] in Scotland.

lettER: [ə] is generally found irrespective of the presence or absence of rhoticity. Rhotic Scotland also has [ɪ~ʌ]. Nonrhotic Wales can have [ʌ], and the Channel Islands [œ].

horsES: [ə], alongside [ɪ], is characteristic of northern England, and is usual in East Anglia and Ireland.

commA: Alternatives to the generally widespread [ə] here tend to involve lowering to [ɐ] in Shetland, Ireland (notably Dublin) and Northern England, and [ʌ] in Scotland and Wales.

Northern English speakers exhibit a tendency to give full value to vowels in unaccented syllables, so that, for example, condition might be rendered as [kɒnˈdɪʃn].

/ϴ/ and /ð/

Very distinctive of Southern Ireland is the use of alveolar stops where most British English accents have the equivalent stops: hence /t/ for /ϴ/ and /d/ for /ð/.

Some regional suprasegmentals

The present shortage of phonological research data beyond the segmental renders the making of detailed regional distinctions impossible. It is, however, possible to make some general observations in this area, using data from the contributors to Kortmann and Upton (2008).

Scottish intonation study has observed a high-rising pattern for statements and questions in Glasgow and a falling one in Edinburgh and elsewhere. The Glasgow phenomenon might be influenced by Northern Irish speech. Distinct from a high-rising pattern is a level high-rise intonation terminal that has been detected in north-east England. The South Wales valleys have attracted attention because of notable variation in pitch movement, with possible influence from Welsh, and this has been likened to a similar, though of course unconnected, feature in Orkney (though not apparently Shetland) English. East Anglia is notable for intonational movement from low to high levels during the asking of yes–no questions especially.

Salient in north-east England is a tendency to level stress or heavier second-element stress in compounds, so that the city of Newcastle (upon Tyne) is pronounced by many inhabitants [njʊˈkasl] (as opposed to [ˈnjuːkasl]). A similar feature of regular stressing in Channel Islands English seems likely to be explained by historical and continuing French influence. There is a tendency towards stress-shifting to long final vowels in polysyllabic verbs in Irish English, as in testify [tɛstɪˈfaɪ]. The lengthening of stressed vowels and the loss rather than reduction of unstressed vowels is a feature of East Anglian prosody, lending the variety a distinctive rhythm: have you got a light? [hæːjə gɑʔ lɐɪʔ]. Disyllabic words in Scotland show some tendency to have a short-long pattern of rhythm.

Conclusion

It has been asserted that variability is the inevitable state of accents. We cannot identify a set of sounds that can be easily allocated to one model of accent or to one particular territory. In consequence, even such a seemingly obvious institution as RP warrants discussion as regards variation. In its BATH-distinction discussed above, this supposedly regionless variety exhibits at least a small amount of location-based distinction. There also exists a range of tolerances between the most conservative trad-RP and the most progressive (or speculative) features, among which we should identify especially variants in the TRAP, PRICE, and SQUARE vowels. No one form of this “model” accent is “better” or “correct”. Rather, its varieties are a decided sign of the vibrancy of the language of which it is representative.

Further to this theme of striking variability, it is impossible to identify a distinctive set of pronunciations that, together, ties a population uniquely to a place. It is the contention here that, in a very complex situation such as that which has arisen in the British Isles, where accents have had opportunity and cause to fragment over time, different variables have evolved uniquely in terms of their geographical distribution. It is indeed quite often possible for a listener to place a speaker as regards their region of origin, and also to detect in their speech other regional features to which they have been exposed and by which they have been influenced. However, it will be particular variants, used to realize just a few salient variables, that the listener will most often rely on when forming their judgments. A speaker will be placed as coming from Scotland, Ireland, or certain parts of England (the West Country, the lower north-west, the north-east) by the presence in their accent of post-vocalic /r/. The type of /r/ – fricative, retroflex, uvular – will determine matters more narrowly on this one feature alone.

It is not on a single feature that people are located, of course, but on an amalgam of those around which speakers cluster. Nevertheless, the more features that are aggregated the looser the community bonds become. A speaker from the central part of the English Midlands around Birmingham is likely to share “velar nasal plus” with a speaker from its Liverpool-centred northern edge. However, they are most unlikely to display any tendency to that stop-affrication that is so characteristic of Liverpudlian speech: rather, they will in some considerable numbers at least use BATH [ɑː], tying them firmly to their neighbors further south. Most significantly, there is no identifiable point between Birmingham and Liverpool where the affrication feature is or is not solidly entrenched. Rather, its espousal as an accent feature will vary according to a complex of historical and present-day social factors, which affect each of the speakers across the north-west Midlands differently.

We have, then, in this one small example from within England, an important lesson, that accents, and indeed dialects, blur into one another.² We can place people roughly by their use of certain major accent identifiers. We can then spot pointers to smaller regions. But even speakers firmly rooted in one spot will not share all variants in the same proportions, and in societies that are increasingly mobile the combination of possible variants to which people have access multiplies. The detective work of narrowing down a speaker’s origin in the British Isles is enthralling – just as long as one does not get frustrated when this proves elusive.

REFERENCES

1. Chambers, J.K. and Peter Trudgill. 1998. Dialectology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Cruttenden, Alan. 2014. Gimson's Pronunciation of English, 8th edition, London: Routledge.
3. Davis, L.M. and Houck, C.L. 1995. What determines a dialect area? Evidence from the Linguistic Atlas of the Upper Midwest. American Speech 70(4): 371–386.
4. Davis, L.M., Houck, C.L., and Upton, C. 1997. The question of dialect boundaries: the SED and the American atlases. In: Issues and Methods in Dialectology, A.R. Thomas (ed.), 271–283, Bangor: University of Wales Bangor.
5. Hughes, A., Trudgill, P., and Watt, D. 2005. English Accents and Dialects: An Introduction to Social and Regional Varieties of English in the British Isles, 4th edition, London: Hodder Arnold.
6. Jones. D. 1909. The Pronunciation of English, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Jones, D.. 1917. An English Pronouncing Dictionary, London: Dent.
8. Jones, D. 1969. An Outline of English Phonetics, Cambridge: Heffer.
9. Jones, D. 2011. Cambridge English Pronouncing Dictionary, 18th edition, P. Roach, J. Setter, and J. Esling (eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10. Kortmann, B. and Upton, C. (eds.). 2008. Varieties of English 1: The British Isles, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
11. Mather, J.Y. and Speitel, H.H. 1975–1986. The Lnguistic Atlas of Scotland, 3 volumes, London: Croom Helm.
12. Olausson, L. and Sangster, C. 2006. Oxford BBC Guide to Pronunciation, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
13. Orton, H., Halliday, W.J., Barry, M.V., Tilling, P.M., and Wakelin, M.F. (eds.). 1962–1971. The Survey of English Dialects, Introduction and 4 volumes, each of 3 parts, Leeds: E.J. Arnold. (Reprinted London: Routledge, 1998.)
14. Ramsaran, S. 1990. RP: fact and fiction. In: Studies in the Pronunciation of English: A Commemorative Volume in Honour of A.C. Gimson, S. Ramsaran, 178–190, London: Routledge.
15. Romaine, S. 2000. Language in Society: An Introduction to Sociolinguistics, 2nd edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Schneider, E., Kortmann, B., Burridge, K., Mesthrie, R., and Upton, C. (eds.). 2004. A Handbook of Varieties of English: A Multimedia Reference Tool, 2 volumes plus CD-ROM, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
17. Smith, J. 1996. An Historical Study of English: Function, Form and Change, London: Routledge.
18. Stuart-Smith, J. 2003. The phonology of modern urban Scots. In: The Edinburgh Companion to Scots, J. Corbett, J.D. McClure, and J. Stuart-Smith (eds.), 110–137, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
19. Trudgill, P. 1999. The Dialects of England, 2nd edition, London: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
20. Upton, C. 1995. Mixing and fudging in Midland and southern dialects of England. In: Studies in General and English Phonetics: Essays in Honour of Professor J.D. O’Connor, J.W. Lewis (ed), 385–394, London: Routledge.
21. Upton, C. 2004. Received pronunciation. In: Schneider et al. 2004, 217–230 and also in Kortmann and Upton 2008, 237–252.
22. Upton, C. 2012. An evolving standard British English pronunciation model. In: Standards of English: Codified Varieties around the World, R. Hickey (ed.), 55–71, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Upton, C., Kretzschmar Jr., W.A., and Konopka, R. 2001. The Oxford Dictionary of Pronunciation for Current English, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
24. Wells, J.C. 1982. Accents of English, 3 volumes, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Wells, J.C. 2008. Longman Pronunciation Dictionary, 3rd edition, London: Longman.