This article'slead sectionmay be too short to adequatelysummarize the key points. Please consider expanding the lead toprovide an accessible overview of all important aspects of the article.(January 2020)

Theclose andmid-heightfrontvowels ofEnglish (vowels ofi ande type) have undergone a variety of changes over time and often varyby dialect.

Middle English had a long close front vowel/iː/, and two long mid front vowels: theclose-mid/eː/ and theopen-mid/ɛː/. The three vowels generally correspond to the modern spellings⟨i⟩,⟨ee⟩ and⟨ea⟩ respectively, butother spellings are also possible. The spellings that became established inEarly Modern English are mostly still used today, but the qualities of the sounds have changed significantly.

The/iː/ and/eː/ generally corresponded to similarOld English vowels, and/ɛː/ came from Old English/æː/ or/æːɑ̯/. For other possible histories, seeEnglish historical vowel correspondences. In particular, the long vowels sometimes arose from short vowels by Middle Englishopen syllable lengthening or other processes. For example,team comes from an originally-long Old English vowel, andeat comes from an originally-short vowel that underwent lengthening. The distinction between both groups of words is still preserved in a few dialects, as is noted in the following section.

Middle English/ɛː/ was shortened in certain words. Both long and short forms of such words often existed alongside each other during Middle English. In Modern English, the short form has generally become standard, but the spelling⟨ea⟩ reflects the formerly-longer pronunciation.^[1] The words that were affected include several ending ind, such asbread,head,spread, and various others, includingbreath,weather, andthreat. For example,bread was/brɛːd/ in earlier Middle English but came to be shortened and to be rhymed withbed.

During theGreat Vowel Shift, the normal outcome of/iː/ was adiphthong, which developed into Modern English/aɪ/, as inmine andfind. Meanwhile,/eː/ became/iː/, as infeed, and/ɛː/ of words likemeat became/eː/, which later merged with/iː/ in nearly all dialects, as is described in the following section.

Themeet–meat merger or theFLEECE merger is themerger of theEarly Modern English vowel/eː/ (as inmeat) into the vowel/iː/ (as inmeet).^[2][3] The merger was complete in standard accents of English by about 1700.^[4]

As noted in the previous section, the Early Modern/New English (ENE) vowel/eː/ developed fromMiddle English/ɛː/ via theGreat Vowel Shift, and ENE/iː/ was usually the result of Middle English/eː/ (the effect in both cases was araising of the vowel). The merger saw ENE/eː/ raised further to become identical to/iː/ and so Middle English/ɛː/ and/eː/ have become/iː/ in standard Modern English, andmeat andmeet are nowhomophones. The merger did not affect the words in which/ɛː/ had undergone shortening (see section above), and a handful of other words (such asbreak,steak,great) also escaped the merger in the standard accents and so acquired the same vowel asbrake,stake,grate. Hence, the wordsmeat,threat (which was shortened), andgreat now have three different vowels although all three words once rhymed.

The merger results in theFLEECElexical set, as defined byJohn Wells. Words in the set that had ENE/iː/ (Middle English/eː/) are mostly spelled⟨ee⟩ (meet,green, etc.), with a single⟨e⟩ in monosyllables (be,me) or followed by a single consonant and a vowel letter (these,Peter), sometimes⟨ie⟩ or⟨ei⟩ (believe,ceiling), or irregularly (key,people). Most of those that had ENE/eː/ (Middle English/ɛː/) are spelled⟨ea⟩ (meat,team,eat, etc.), but some borrowed words have a single⟨e⟩ (legal,decent,complete),⟨ei⟩, or otherwise (receive,seize,phoenix,quay). There are also some loanwords in which/iː/ is spelled⟨i⟩ (police,machine,ski), most of which entered the language later.^[5]

There are still some dialects in theBritish Isles that do not have the merger. Some speakers inNorthern England have/iː/ or/əɪ/ in the first group of words (those that had ENE/iː/, likemeet) but/ɪə/ in the second group (those that had ENE/eː/, likemeat). InStaffordshire, the distinction might rather be between/ɛi/ in the first group and/iː/ in the second group. In some (particularly rural) varieties ofIrish English, the first group has/i/, and the second preserves/eː/. A similar contrast has been reported in parts ofSouthern andWestern England, but it is now rarely encountered there.^[6]

In someYorkshire dialects, an additional distinction may be preserved within themeat set. Words that originally had long vowels, such asteam andcream (which come from Old Englishtēam and Old Frenchcreme), may have/ɪə/, and those that had an original short vowel, which underwent open syllable lengthening in Middle English (see previous section), likeeat andmeat (from Old Englishetan andmete), have a sound resembling/ɛɪ/, similar to the sound that is heard in some dialects in words likeeight andweight thatlost a velar fricative.^[3]

In Alexander's book (2001)^[2] about the traditionalSheffield dialect, the spelling "eigh" is used for the vowel ofeat andmeat, but "eea" is used for the vowel ofteam andcream. However, a 1999 survey in Sheffield found the/ɛɪ/ pronunciation to be almost extinct there.^[7]

In certain accents, when theFLEECE vowel was followed by/r/, it acquired alaxer pronunciation. InGeneral American, words likenear andbeer now have the sequence/ir/, andnearer rhymes withmirror (themirror–nearer merger). InReceived Pronunciation, a diphthong/ɪə/ has developed (and bynon-rhoticity, the/r/ is generally lost unless there is another vowel after it) and sobeer andnear are/bɪə/ and/nɪə/, andnearer (with/ɪə/) remains distinct frommirror (with/ɪ/). Several pronunciations are found in other accents, but outside North America, thenearer–mirror opposition is always preserved. For example, some conservative accents in Northern England have the sequence/iːə/ in words likenear, with the schwa disappearing before a pronounced/r/, as inserious.^[8]

Another development is that bisyllabic/iːə/ may becomesmoothed to the diphthong[ɪə] (with the change being phonemic in non-rhotic dialects, so/ɪə/) in certain words, which leads to pronunciations like[ˈvɪəkəl],[ˈθɪətə] and[aɪˈdɪə] forvehicle,theatre/theater andidea, respectively. That is not restricted to any variety of English. It happens in bothBritish English and (less noticeably or often)American English as well as other varieties although it is far more common for Britons. The words that have[ɪə] may vary depending on dialect. Dialects that have the smoothing usually also have the diphthong[ɪə] in words likebeer,deer, andfear, and the smoothing causesidea,Korea, etc. to rhyme with those words.^[9]

InGeordie, theFLEECE vowel undergoes an allophonic split, with the monophthong[iː] being used in morphologically-closed syllables (as infreeze[fɹiːz]) and the diphthong[ei] being used in morphologically-open syllables not only word-finally (as infree[fɹei]) but also word-internally at the end of amorpheme (as infrees[fɹeiz]).^[10][11]

Most dialects of English turn/iː/ into a diphthong, and the monophthongal[iː] is infree variation with the diphthongal[ɪi~əi] (with the former diphthong being the same as Geordie[ei], the only difference lying in the transcription^{[citation needed]}), particularly word-internally. However, diphthongs are more common word-finally.

Compare theidentical development of the close backGOOSE vowel.

Middle English short/i/ has developed into alaxnear-close near-front unrounded vowel,/ɪ/, in Modern English, as found in words likekit. (Similarly,short /u/ has become /ʊ/.) According to Roger Lass, the laxing occurred in the 17th century, but other linguists have suggested that it took place potentially much earlier.^[12]

The shortmid vowels have also undergone lowering and so the continuation of Middle English/e/ (as in words likedress) now has a quality closer to[ɛ] in most accents. Again, however, it is not clear whether the vowel already had a lower value in Middle English.^[13]

Thepin–pen merger is a conditionalmerger of/ɪ/ and/ɛ/ before thenasal consonants[m],[n], and[ŋ].^{[14][15][16][17][18]} The merged vowel is usually closer to[ɪ] than to[ɛ]. Examples of homophones resulting from the merger includepin–pen,kin–ken andhim–hem. The merger is widespread inSouthern American English and is also found in many speakers in the Midland region immediately north of the South and in areas settled by migrants fromOklahoma andTexas who settled in theWestern United States during theDust Bowl. It is also a characteristic of muchAfrican-American Vernacular English.

Thepin–pen merger is one of the most widely recognized features of Southern speech. A study^[16] of the written responses ofAmerican Civil War veterans fromTennessee, together with data from theLinguistic Atlas of the Gulf States and theLinguistic Atlas of the Middle South Atlantic States, shows that the prevalence of the merger was very low up to 1860 but then rose steeply to 90% in the mid-20th century. There is now very little variation throughout the South in general except thatSavannah,Austin,Miami, andNew Orleans are excluded from the merger.^[18] The area of consistent merger includes southernVirginia and most of the South Midland and extends westward to include much of Texas. The northern limit of the merged area shows a number of irregular curves. Central and southernIndiana is dominated by the merger, but there is very little evidence of it inOhio, and northernKentucky shows a solid area of distinction aroundLouisville.

Outside the South, most speakers ofNorth American English maintain a clear distinction in perception and production. However, in the West, there is sporadic representation of merged speakers inWashington,Idaho,Kansas,Nebraska, andColorado. However, the most striking concentration of merged speakers in the west is aroundBakersfield, California, a pattern that may reflect the trajectory of migrant workers from theOzarks westward.

The raising of/ɛ/ to/ɪ/ was formerly widespread inIrish English and was not limited to positions before nasals. Apparently, it came to be restricted to those positions in the late 19th and the early 20th centuries. Thepin–pen merger is now commonly found only in Southern andSouth-West Irish English.^[19][20]

A complete merger of/ɪ/ and/ɛ/, not restricted to positions before nasals (and so termedkit–dress merger), is found in many speakers ofNewfoundland English. The pronunciation in words likebit andbet is[ɪ], but before/r/, in words likebeer andbear, it is[ɛ].^[21] The merger is common in Irish-settled parts of Newfoundland and is thought to be a relic of the former Irish pronunciation.^[22]

Thekit–bit split is asplit of standard English/ɪ/ (theKIT vowel) that occurs inSouth African English. The two distinct sounds are:

• A standard[ɪ], or [i] in broader accents, which is used before or after avelar consonant (lick, big, sing;kiss,kit,gift), after/h/ (hit), word-initially (inn), generally before/ʃ/ (fish), and by some speakers before/tʃ,dʒ/ (ditch, bridge). It is found only in stressed syllables (in the first syllable ofchicken but not the second).
• Acentralized vowel[ɪ̈], or[ə] in broader accents, which is used in other positions (limb, dinner, limited, bit).

Differentphonemic analyses of those vowels are possible. In one view,[ɪ] and[ɪ̈] are incomplementary distribution and should therefore still be regarded asallophones of one phoneme. Wells, however, suggests that the non-rhyming of words likekit andbit, which is particularly marked in the broader accents, makes it more satisfactory to consider[ɪ̈] to constitute a different phoneme from[ɪ~i], and[ɪ̈] and[ə] can be regarded as comprising a single phoneme except for speakers who maintain the contrast in weak syllables. There is also the issue of the weak vowel merger in most non-conservative speakers, which means thatrabbit/ˈræbət/ (conservative/ˈræbɪt/) rhymes withabbott/ˈæbət/.^[25] The weak vowel is consistently written ⟨ə⟩ in South African English dialectology, regardless of its precise quality.

Thethank–think merger is the lowering of/ɪ/ to/æ/ before the velar nasal/ŋ/ that can be found in the speech of speakers ofAfrican American Vernacular English,Appalachian English, and (rarely)Southern American English. For speakers with the lowering,think andthank,sing andsang, etc. can sound alike.^[26] It is reflected in the colloquial variant spellingthang ofthing.

Theweak vowel merger is the loss of contrast between/ə/ (schwa) and unstressed/ɪ/, which occurs in certain dialects of English: notably many Southern Hemisphere, North American, Irish, and 21st-century (but not older) standard Southern British accents. In speakers with this merger, the wordsabbot andrabbit rhyme, andLennon andLenin are pronounced identically, as areaddition andedition. However, it is possible among these merged speakers (such asGeneral American) that a distinction is still maintained in certain contexts, such as in the pronunciation ofRosa's versusroses, because of the morpheme break inRosa's. (Speakers without the merger generally have[ɪ] in the final syllables ofrabbit,Lenin,roses and the first syllable ofedition that is distinct from the schwa[ə] heard in the corresponding syllables ofabbot,Lennon,Rosa's andaddition.) If an accent with the merger is alsonon-rhotic, then for examplechatted andchattered will be homophones. The merger also affects theweak forms of some words and causes unstressedit, for instance, to be pronounced with a schwa, so thatdig it would rhyme withbigot.^[27]

The merger is very common inSouthern Hemisphere accents. Most speakers ofAustralian English (as well as recent Southern England English)^[28] replace weak/ɪ/ with schwa, but in-ing, the pronunciation is frequently[ɪ]. If there is a following/k/, as inpaddock ornomadic, some speakers maintain the contrast, but some who have the merger use[ɪ] as the merged vowel. InNew Zealand English, the merger is complete, and indeed,/ɪ/ is very centralized even in stressed syllables and so it is usually regarded as the same phoneme as/ə/ although in-ing, it is closer to [i]. InSouth African English, most speakers have the merger, but in more conservative accents, the contrast may be retained (as[ɪ̈] vs.[ə]. Also, akit split exists: see above.^[29]

The merger is also commonly found inAmerican andCanadian English, but the realisation of the merged vowel varies according to syllable type, with[ə] appearing in word-final or open-syllable word-initial positions (such asdrama orcilantro), but[ɪ~ɨ] often appears in other positions (abbot andexhaust). In traditionalSouthern American English, the merger is generally not present, and/ɪ/ is also heard in some words that have schwa inRP, such assalad. The lack of the merger is also a traditional feature ofNew England English. InCaribbean English, schwa is often not used at all, and unreduced vowels are preferred, but if there is a schwa,/ɪ/ remains distinct from it.^[30]

In traditional RP, the contrast between/ə/ and weak/ɪ/ is maintained, but that may be declining among modern standard speakers of southern England, who increasingly prefer a merger, specifically with the realisation[ə].^[28] In RP, the phone[ɨ̞], apart from being a frequent allophone of/ʊ/ (as infoot[fɨ̞ʔt]) in younger speakers, appears only as an allophone of/ɪ/, which is often centralized when it occurs as a weak vowel, and never as an allophone of/ə/. Therefore,[ˈlɛnɨ̞n] can stand for only "Lenin", not "Lennon", which has a lower vowel:[ˈlɛnən]. However, speakers may not always clearly perceive that difference, as/ə/ is sometimes raised to[ɘ] in contact with alveolar consonants (such as the alveolar nasals in "Lennon"[ˈlɛnɘn]). Furthermore,[ɨ̞] never participates in syllabic consonant formation and so G-dropping in words such asfishing never yields a syllabic nasal *[ˈfɪʃn̩] or a sounded mid schwa *[ˈfɪʃən], with the most casual RP forms being[ˈfɪʃɪn,-ɨ̞n]. Both[ˈfɪʃən] and especially[ˈfɪʃn̩] were considered to be strongly non-standard in England as late as 1982. They are characteristic ofCockney, which otherwise does not feature the weak vowel merger, but/ɪ/ can be centralized to[ɨ̞] as in RP and so[ˈfɪʃɪn] and[ˈfɪʃɨ̞n] are distinct possibilities in Cockney. In other accents of theBritish Isles, the contrast between/ə/ and weak/ɪ/ may be variable. InIrish English, the merger is almost universal.^[31][32]

The merger is not complete inScottish English, whose speakers typically distinguishexcept fromaccept, but the latter can be phonemicized with an unstressedSTRUT:/ʌkˈsɛpt/ (as can the word-final schwa incomma/ˈkɔmʌ/) and the former with/ə/:/əkˈsɛpt/. In other environments,KIT andCOMMA are mostly merged to a quality around[ə], often even when stressed (Wells transcribes the merged vowel with ⟨ɪ⟩. There, ⟨ə⟩ is used for the sake of consistency and accuracy) and when before/r/, as infir/fər/ andletter/ˈlɛtər/ (but notfern/fɛrn/ andfur/fʌr/: seenurse mergers). TheHAPPY vowel is/e/:/ˈhape/.^[33]

Even in accents that do not have the merger, there may be certain words in which traditional/ɪ/ is replaced by/ə/ by many speakers (both sounds may then be considered to be infree variation). In RP,/ə/ is now often heard in place of/ɪ/ in endings such as-ace (as inpalace);-ate (as insenate);-less,-let, for the⟨i⟩ in-ily;-ity,-ible; and in initial weakbe-,de-,re-, ande-.^[34]

Final/əl/, and also/ən/ and/əm/, are commonly realized assyllabic consonants. In accents without the merger, the use of/ɪ/, rather than/ə/, prevents the formation of syllabic consonants. Hence in RP, for example, the second syllable ofBarton is pronounced as a syllabic[n̩], but that ofMartin is[ɪn]. Many non-rhotic speakers also pronouncepattern with[n̩], which is accordingly homophonous withPatton.

Particularly in American linguistic tradition, the unmerged weak[ɪ]-type vowel is often transcribed with the barredi ⟨ɨ⟩, theIPA symbol for theclose central unrounded vowel.^[35] Another symbol sometimes used is ⟨ᵻ⟩, the non-IPA symbol for anear-close central unrounded vowel. In the third edition of theOED, that symbol is used in the transcription of words (of the types listed above) that have free variation between/ɪ/ and/ə/ in RP.

A phonetic shift ofKIT, the vowel/ɪ/, towardsschwa, the vowel[ə] (and potentially even aphonemic shift, merging with the word-internal variety of schwa ingallop, which is deliberately not calledCOMMA here since word-final and sometimes also word-initialCOMMA can be analysed asSTRUT: see above), occurs in someInland Northern American English (the areas in which the final stage of the Northern Cities Vowel Shift has been completed),New Zealand English,Scottish English and partially alsoSouth African English (seekit–bit split). In non-rhotic varieties with the shift, it also encompasses the unstressed syllable ofletters with the stressed variant of/ɪ/ being realized with a schwa-like quality[ə]. As a result, the vowels inkit/kət/,lid/ləd/ andmiss/məs/ belong to the same phoneme as the unstressed vowel inbalance/ˈbæləns/.^[37][38]

It typically cooccurs with the weak vowel merger, but inScotland, the weak vowel merger is not complete: see above.^[39][40]

There are no homophonous pairs apart from those caused by the weak vowel merger, but a centralKIT tends to sound likeSTRUT to speakers of other dialects and so Australians accuse New Zealanders of saying "fush and chups", instead of "fish and chips", which in an Australian accent sounds close to "feesh and cheeps". That is not accurate, as theSTRUT vowel is always more open than the centralKIT. In other words, there is nostrut–comma merger, but a kit–strut merger is possible in someGlaswegian speech in Scotland.^[41][42] That means that varieties of English with the merger effectively contrast two stressable unrounded schwas, which is very similar to the contrast between/ɨ/ and/ə/ inRomanian, as in the minimal pairrâu/rɨw/ 'river' vs.rău/rəw/ 'bad'.

Most dialects with the phenomenon featurehappy tensing and sopretty is best analysed as/ˈprətiː/ in those accents. In Scotland, theHAPPY vowel is commonly a close-mid[e], which is identified phonemically asFACE:/ˈprəte/.

The termkit–comma merger is appropriate in the case of the dialects in which the quality ofSTRUT is far removed from[ɐ] (the word-final allophone of/ə/), such as Inland Northern American English, but can be a misleading name in the case of other accents.

Happy tensing is a process whereby a final unstressedi-type vowel becomestense[i] rather than lax[ɪ], today found in most dialects of English worldwide. That affects the final vowels of words such ashappy,city,hurry,taxi,movie,Charlie,coffee,money andChelsea. It may also apply in inflected forms of such words containing an additional final consonant sound, such ascities,Charlie's andhurried. It can also affect words such asme,he andshe when they are used asclitics, as inshow me,would he?^[43]

Until the 17th century, words likehappy could end with the vowel ofmy (originally[iː], but it was diphthongised in theGreat Vowel Shift), which alternated with a shorti sound. (Many words spelt-ee,-ea,-ey once had the vowel ofday; there is still alternation between that vowel and thehappy vowel in words such asSunday andMonday.)^[44] It is not entirely clear when the vowel underwent the transition. The fact that tensing is uniformly present inSouth African English,Australian English andNew Zealand English lends support to the idea that it may have already been present in southern British English already in the early 19th century. However, it is not mentioned bydescriptivephoneticians until the early 20th century and even then at first only inAmerican English. The British phoneticianJack Windsor Lewis^[45] believed that the vowel moved from[i] to[ɪ] in Britain in the second quarter of the 19th century before it reverted to[i] in non-conservative British accents towards the last quarter of the 20th century.

The laxer[ɪ] pronunciation is also found in someSouthern American English, in much of northern England and in Jamaica. InScottish English, an[e] sound, similar to the Scottish realization of the vowel ofday, may be used. It is also still found among some older speakers of ConservativeRP. The tense [i] variant, however, is now established in as the norm in Modern RP and General American, and is also the usual form in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, in southern England and in some northern English regions (such asMerseyside,Hull andthe entire North East).^[46][47]

The lax and tense variants of thehappy vowel may be identified with the phonemes/ɪ/ and/iː/ respectively. They may also be considered to represent aneutralization between the two phonemes, but for speakers with the tense variant, there is the possibility of contrast in such pairs astaxis andtaxes (seeEnglish phonology – vowels in unstressed syllables).Roach (2009) andWells (2008) consider the tensing to be a neutralization between/ɪ/ and/iː/.^[48][49]Cruttenden (2014) regards the tense variant in modern RP as still an allophone of/ɪ/ on the basis that it is shorter and more resistant to diphthongization than is/iː/.^[50]Lindsey (2019) regards the phenomenon to be a mere substitution of/iː/ for/ɪ/.^[51]

Most modern British dictionaries represent thehappy vowel with the symbol ⟨i⟩ (distinct from both ⟨ɪ⟩ and ⟨iː⟩). That notation was first introduced in theLongman Dictionary of Contemporary English (1978) by its pronunciation editor, Gordon Walsh, and it was later taken up byRoach (1983), who extended it to ⟨u⟩ representing the weak vowel found word-medially insituation etc., and by some other dictionaries, includingJohn C. Wells'sLongman Pronunciation Dictionary (1990).^[52] In 2012, Wells wrote that the notation "seemed like a good idea at the time, but it clearly confuses a lot of people".^[53]Lindsey (2019) criticizes the notation for causing "widespread belief in a specific 'happY vowel'" that "never existed".^[51]

Old English had the short vowel/y/ and the long vowel/yː/, which were spelled orthographically with⟨y⟩. They contrasted with the short vowel/i/ and the long vowel/iː/, which were spelled orthographically with⟨i⟩. By Middle English, the two vowels/y/ and/yː/ merged with/i/ and/iː/ and left only the short–long pair/i/–/iː/. Modern spelling therefore uses both⟨y⟩ and⟨i⟩ for the modern KIT and PRICE vowels. Modern spelling with⟨i⟩ or⟨y⟩ is not an indicator of the Old English distinction between the four sounds, as spelling has been revised after the merger occurred. For example, Modern Englishbridge derives from Old Englishbryċġ, while Modern Englishscythe derives from Old Englishsīþe. The name of the letter⟨y⟩ has acquired an initial[w] sound in it to keep it distinct from the name of the letter⟨i⟩.^{[citation needed]}

Themitt–meet merger is a phenomenon occurring inMalaysian English andSingaporean English in which the phonemes/iː/ and/ɪ/ are both pronounced/i/. As a result, pairs likemitt andmeet,bit andbeat, andbid andbead are homophones.^[54]

Themet–mat merger is a phenomenon occurring inMalaysian English,Singaporean English andHong Kong English in which the phonemes/ɛ/ and/æ/ are both pronounced/ɛ/. For some speakers, it occurs only before voiceless consonants, and pairs likemet,mat,bet,bat are homophones, butbed,bad ormed,mad are kept distinct. For others, it occurs in all positions.^[54]

Themet–mate merger is a phenomenon occurring for some speakers ofZulu English in which the phonemes/eɪ/ and/ɛ/ are both pronounced/ɛ/. As a result, the wordsmet andmate are homophonous as/mɛt/.^[55]

• Phonological history of English
• Phonological history of English vowels

• Ashby, Michael; Ashby, Patricia; Baldwin, John; Holmes, Frederika; House, Jill; Maidment, John (1994)."Broad transcription in phonetic training".Speech, Hearing and Language: Work in Progress (8):33–40.
• Bauer, Laurie; Warren, Paul; Bardsley, Dianne; Kennedy, Marianna; Major, George (2007)."New Zealand English".Journal of the International Phonetic Association.37 (1):97–102.doi:10.1017/S0025100306002830.
• Cruttenden, Alan (2014).Gimson's Pronunciation of English (8th ed.). Routledge.ISBN 9781444183092.
• Kortmann, Bernd; Schneider, Edgar W., eds. (2004).A Handbook of Varieties of English: CD-ROM. Walter de Gruyter.ISBN 3110175320.
• Lindsey, Geoff (2019).English After RP: Standard British Pronunciation Today. Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN 978-3-030-04356-8.
• Roach, Peter (1983).English Phonetics and Phonology: A Practical Course. Cambridge University Press.ISBN 0-521-28252-7.
• Roach, Peter (2009).English Phonetics and Phonology: A Practical Course (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press.ISBN 978-0-521-71740-3.
• Wells, John C. (1982).Accents of English. Vol. 1: An Introduction (pp. i–xx, 1–278), Vol. 2: The British Isles (pp. i–xx, 279–466), Vol. 3: Beyond the British Isles (pp. i–xx, 467–674). Cambridge University Press.doi:10.1017/CBO9780511611759, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511611766.ISBN 0-52129719-2 , 0-52128540-2 , 0-52128541-0 .
• Wells, John C. (2008).Longman Pronunciation Dictionary (3rd ed.). Longman.ISBN 978-1-4058-8118-0.

• English phonology
• History of the English language
• Splits and mergers in English phonology

• CS1 errors: ISBN date
• Pages with plain IPA
• CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown
• Articles with short description
• Short description is different from Wikidata
• Wikipedia introduction cleanup from January 2020
• All pages needing cleanup
• Articles covered by WikiProject Wikify from January 2020
• All articles covered by WikiProject Wikify
• Use dmy dates from November 2020
• All articles with unsourced statements
• Articles with unsourced statements from January 2024
• Articles containing Old English (ca. 450-1100)-language text
• Articles with unsourced statements from February 2017