Phonological history of English close back vowels#Development of /juː/

The Old English vowels included a pair of short and long close back vowels, {{IPA|/u/}} and {{IPA|/uː/}}, both written {{angbr|u}} (the longer vowel is often distinguished as {{angbr|ū}} in modern editions of Old English texts). There was also a pair of back vowels of mid-height, {{IPA|/o/}} and {{IPA|/oː/}}, both of which were written {{angbr|o}} (the longer vowel is often {{angbr|ō}} in modern editions).

The same four vowels existed in the Middle English system. The short vowels were still written {{angbr|u}} and {{angbr|o}}, but long {{IPA|/uː/}} came to be spelt as {{angbr|ou}}, and {{IPA|/oː/}} as {{angbr|oo}}. Generally, the Middle English vowels descended from the corresponding Old English ones, but there were certain alternative developments.

The Middle English open syllable lengthening caused short {{IPA|/o/}} to be mostly lengthened to {{IPA|/ɔː/}} (an opener back vowel) in open syllables, a development that can be seen in words like nose. During the Great Vowel Shift, Middle English long {{IPA|/oː/}} was raised to {{IPA|/uː/}} in words like moon; Middle English long {{IPA|/uː/}} was diphthongised, becoming the present-day {{IPA|/aʊ/}}, as in mouse; and Middle English {{IPA|/ɔː/}} of nose was raised and later diphthongized, leading to present-day {{IPA|/oʊ ~ əʊ/}}.

At some point, short {{IPA|/u/}} developed into a lax, near-close near-back rounded vowel, {{IPA|/ʊ/}}, as found in words like put. (Similarly, phonological history of English close front vowels#Lowering.) According to Roger Lass, the laxing occurred in the 17th century, but other linguists have suggested that it may have taken place much earlier.{{cite journal|last1=Stockwell|first1=Robert|last2=Minkova|first2=Donka|title=Interpreting the Old and Middle English close vowels|journal=Language Sciences|date=May 2002|volume=24|issue=3–4|pages=447–57|doi=10.1016/S0388-0001(01)00043-2}} The short {{IPA|/o/}} remaining in words like lot has also been lowered and, in some accents, unrounded (see open back vowels).

In a handful of words, some of which are very common, the vowel {{IPA|/uː/}} was shortened to {{IPA|/ʊ/}}. In a few of those words, notably blood and flood, the shortening happened early enough that the resulting {{IPA|/ʊ/}} underwent the "foot–strut split" (see next section) and are now pronounced with {{IPA|/ʌ/}}. Other words that underwent shortening later consistently have {{IPA|/ʊ/}}, such as good and foot. Still other words, such as roof, hoof, and root, are variable, with some speakers preferring {{IPA|/uː/}} and others preferring {{IPA|/ʊ/}} in such words, such as in Texan English. For some speakers in Northern England, words ending in -ook that have undergone shortening to {{IPA|/ʊ/}} elsewhere, such as book and cook, still have the long {{IPA|/uː/}} vowel.

File:Foot-strut split.svg

The {{sc2|FOOT}}–{{sc2|STRUT}} split is the split of Middle English short {{IPA|/u/}} into two distinct phonemes: {{IPA|/ʊ/}} (as in foot) and {{IPA|/ʌ/}} (as in strut). The split occurs in most varieties of English, the most notable exceptions being most of Northern England and the English Midlands and some varieties of Hiberno-English.{{sfnp|Wells|1982|pp=132, 196–199; 351–353}} In Welsh English, the split is also absent in parts of North Wales under influence from Merseyside and Cheshire accents{{cite book |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=tPwYt3gVbu4C&q=welsh+vowels&pg=PA138 |title=English in Wales: Diversity, Conflict, and Change |via=Google Books |access-date=14 April 2020 |isbn=978-1-85359-031-3 |last1=Coupland |first1=Nikolas |last2=Thomas |first2=Alan Richard |year=1990 }} and in the south of Pembrokeshire, where English overtook Welsh long before that occurred in the rest of Wales.{{cite news |url= https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/pembrokeshire-wales-little-england-history-1-6016252 |last=Trudgill |first=Peter |work=The New European |location= London |title=Wales's very own little England |date=27 April 2019 |access-date=31 March 2020}}

The origin of the split is the unrounding of {{IPA|/ʊ/}} in Early Modern English, resulting in the phoneme {{IPA|/ʌ/}}. Usually, unrounding to {{IPA|/ʌ/}} did not occur if {{IPA|/ʊ/}} was preceded by a labial consonant, such as {{IPA|/p/}}, {{IPA|/f/}}, {{IPA|/b/}}, or was followed by {{IPA|/l/}}, {{IPA|/ʃ/}}, or {{IPA|/tʃ/}}, leaving the modern {{IPA|/ʊ/}}. Because of the inconsistency of the split, put and putt became a minimal pair that were distinguished as {{IPAc-en|p|ʊ|t}} and {{IPAc-en|p|ʌ|t}}. The first clear description of the split dates from 1644.{{cite book|last=Lass|first=Roger|author-link=Roger Lass|title=The Cambridge History of the English Language|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=CCvMbntWth8C|year=2000|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-26476-1|pages=88–90}}

In non-splitting accents, cut and put rhyme, putt and put are homophonous as {{IPAc-en|p|ʊ|t}}, and pudding and budding rhyme. However, luck and look may not necessarily be homophones since many accents in the area concerned have look as {{IPAc-en|l|uː|k}}, with the vowel of goose.

The absence of the split is a less common feature of educated Northern English speech than the absence of the trap–bath split. The absence of the foot–strut split is sometimes stigmatized,{{sfnp|Wells|1982|p=354}} and speakers of non-splitting accents may try to introduce it into their speech, which sometimes results in hypercorrection such as by pronouncing butcher {{IPAc-en|ˈ|b|ʌ|tʃ|ər}}.{{cite journal|last1=Kettemann|first1=Bernhard|title=P. Trudgill, ed., Sociolinguistic Patterns in British English|journal=English World-Wide|date=1980|volume=1|issue=1|page=86|doi=10.1075/eww.1.1.13ket}}

In Birmingham and the Black Country, the realisation of the {{sc2|FOOT}} and {{sc2|STRUT}} vowels is somewhat like a neutralisation between Northern and Southern dialects. {{sc2|FOOT}} may be pronounced with a Close-mid back unrounded vowel, and {{sc2|STRUT}} may be pronounced with a Close-mid back rounded vowel. However, both may also be pronounced with a phonetically intermediate {{IPA|/ɤ/}}{{cite book |last1=Clark |first1=Urszula |title=Cover of West Midlands English: Birmingham and the Black Country West Midlands English: Birmingham and the Black Country |date=2013 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3366/j.ctt5hh397}} which is also present further north in Tyneside.{{sfnp|Beal|2004|pp=121–122}} There is also variation in some non-splitting dialects, as while most words use {{IPA|/ʊ/}}, some words such as none, one, once, nothing, tongue and among(st) may instead be pronounced with Open back rounded vowel in dialects such as parts of Yorkshire.{{sfnp|Petyt|1985|pp=94, 201}}

The name {{sc2|FOOT}}–{{sc2|STRUT}} split refers to the lexical sets introduced by {{Harvcoltxt|Wells|1982}} and identifies the vowel phonemes in the words. From a historical point of view, however, the name is inappropriate because the word foot did not have short {{IPA|/ʊ/}} when the split happened, but it underwent shortening only later.

In modern standard varieties of English, such as Received Pronunciation (RP) and General American (GA), the {{sc2|FOOT}} vowel {{IPA|/ʊ/}} is a relatively uncommon phoneme. It occurs most regularly in words in -ook (like book, cook, hook etc.). It is also spelt -oo- in foot, good, hood, soot, stood, wood, wool, and -oul- in could, should, would. Otherwise, it is spelt -u- (but -o- after w-); such words include bull, bush, butcher, cushion, full, pudding, pull, push, puss, put, sugar, wolf, woman. More frequent use is found in recent borrowings though sometimes in alternation with {{sc2|STRUT}} (as in Muslim) or {{sc2|GOOSE}} (as in Buddha).

The {{sc2|STRUT}}–{{sc2|COMMA}} merger or the {{sc2|STRUT}}–schwa merger is a merger of {{IPA|/ʌ/}} with {{IPA|/ə/}} that occurs in Welsh English, some higher-prestige Northern England English and some General American. The merger causes minimal pairs such as unorthodoxy {{IPAc-en|ʌ|n|ˈ|ɔːr|θ|ə|d|ɒ|k|s|i}} and an orthodoxy {{IPAc-en|ə|n|ˈ|ɔːr|θ|ə|d|ɒ|k|s|i}} to be merged.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025|reason=Please list a source claiming that "Unorthodoxy" and "An Orthodoxy" would become homophones in merging dialects. As a speaker with said merger, those two phrases do still sound different, but it seems plausible that for some speakers they would indeed be the same.}} The phonetic quality of the merged vowel depends on the accent. For instance, merging General American accents have {{IPAblink|ʌ}} as the stressed variant and {{IPAblink|ɐ}} as the word-final variant. Elsewhere, the vowel surfaces as {{IPAblink|ə}} or even {{IPAblink|ɪ̈}} (GA features the weak vowel merger). That can cause words such as hubbub ({{IPAc-en|ˈ|h|ʌ|b|ʌ|b}} in RP) to have two different vowels ({{IPA|[ˈhʌbəb]}}) even though both syllables contain the same phoneme in both merging and non-merging accents. On the other hand, some areas like Birmingham in England and much of Wales have no noticeable difference between the stressed and the unstressed allophones, and at least the non-final variant of the merged vowel is consistently realized as the mid and central {{IPAblink|ə}} (rather than open-mid).{{sfnp|Wells|1982|pp=132, 380–381, 480}}{{sfnp|Wells|2008|p=xxi}}{{cite web|url=http://phonetic-blog.blogspot.com/2009/09/n-n.html|title=John Wells's phonetic blog: {{IPA|ən əˈnʌðə θɪŋ|cat=no}}|last=Wells|first=John C.|date=21 September 2009|website=John Wells's phonetic blog|access-date=15 March 2019}}

The merged vowel is typically written with {{angbr IPA|ə}} regardless of its phonetic realization. That largely matches an older canonical phonetic range of the IPA symbol {{angbr IPA|ə}}, which used to be described as covering a vast central area from near-close {{IPAblink|ɪ̈}} to near-open {{IPAblink|ɐ}}.{{sfnp|International Phonetic Association|2010|pp=306–307}}

Because in unmerged accents, {{IPA|/ə/}} appears only in unstressed syllables, the merger occurs only in unstressed syllables. Word-finally, there is no contrast between the vowels in any accent of English (in Middle English, {{IPA|/u/}}, the vowel from which {{IPA|/ʌ/}} was split, could not occur in that position), and the vowel that occurs in that position approaches {{IPAblink|ɐ}} (the main allophone of {{sc2|STRUT}} in many accents). However, there is some dialectal variation, with varieties such as broad Cockney using variants that are strikingly more open than in other dialects. The vowel is usually identified as belonging to the {{IPA|/ə/}} phoneme even in accents without the {{IPA|/ʌ–ə/}} merger, but native speakers may perceive the phonemic makeup of words such as comma to be {{IPA|/ˈkɒmʌ/}}, rather than {{IPA|/ˈkɒmə/}}.{{sfnp|Wells|1982|pp=305, 405, 606}}{{sfnp|Bauer|Warren|Bardsley|Kennedy|2007|p=101}} The open variety of {{IPA|/ə/}} occurs even in some Northern English dialects (such as Geordie), none of which has undergone the foot–strut split, but in Geordie, it can be generalised to other positions and so not only comma but also commas may be pronounced with {{IPAblink|ɐ}} in the second syllable, which is rare in other accents.{{sfnp|Watt|Allen|2003|p=269}} In contemporary Standard Southern British English, the final {{IPA|/ə/}} is often mid {{IPAblink|ə}}, rather than open {{IPAblink|ɐ}}.{{cite web|url=https://www.englishspeechservices.com/blog/strut-for-dummies/|title=english speech services {{!}} STRUT for Dummies|last=Lindsey|first=Geoff|date=24 February 2012|website=english speech services|access-date=15 March 2019}}

All speakers of General American neutralise {{IPA|/ʌ/}}, {{IPA|/ə/}} and {{IPA|/ɜː/}} (the {{sc2|NURSE}} vowel) before {{IPA|/r/}}, which results in an r-colored vowel {{IPA|[ɚ]}}. GA lacks a truly contrastive {{IPA|/ɜː/}} phoneme (furry, hurry, letters and transfer (n.), which are distinguished in RP as {{IPA|/ɜː/}}, {{IPA|/ʌ/}}, {{IPA|/ə/}} and {{IPA|/ɜː/}}, all have the same r-colored {{IPA|[ɚ]}} in GA), and the symbol is used only to facilitate comparisons with other accents.{{sfnp|Wells|1982|pp=480–481}} See hurry–furry merger for more information.

Some other minimal pairs apart from unorthodoxy–an orthodoxy include unequal {{IPAc-en|ʌ|n|ˈ|iː|k|w|əl}} vs. an equal {{IPAc-en|ə|n|ˈ|iː|k|w|əl}} and a large untidy room {{IPAc-en|ə|_|ˈ|l|ɑːr|dʒ|_|ʌ|n|ˈ|t|aɪ|d|i|_|ˈ|r|uː|m}} vs. a large and tidy room {{IPAc-en|ə|_|ˈ|l|ɑːr|dʒ|_|ə|n|ˈ|t|aɪ|d|i|_|ˈ|r|uː|m}}. However, there are few minimal pairs like that, and their use as such has been criticised by scholars such as Geoff Lindsey because the members of such minimal pairs are structurally different. Even so, pairs of words belonging to the same lexical category exist as well such as append {{IPAc-en|@|"|p|E|n|d}} vs up-end {{IPAc-en|V|p|"||E|n|d}} and aneath {{IPAc-en|@|"|n|i:|T}} vs uneath {{IPAc-en|V|n|"|i:|T}}. There also are words for which RP always used {{IPA|/ʌ/}} in the unstressed syllable, such as pick-up {{IPAc-en|ˈ|p|ɪ|k|ʌ|p}}, goosebumps {{IPAc-en|ˈ|g|

uː|s|b|ʌ|m|p|s}} or sawbuck {{IPAc-en|ˈ|s|ɔː|b|ʌ|k}}, that have merging accents use the same {{IPA|/ə/}} as the second vowel of balance. In RP, there is a consistent difference in vowel height; the unstressed vowel in the first three words is a near-open {{IPAblink|ɐ}} (traditionally written with {{angbr IPA|ʌ}}) but in balance, it is a mid {{IPAblink|ə}}.{{Cite book|title=The Chambers Dictionary|publisher=Chambers|year=2003|isbn=0-550-10105-5|edition=9th}}

{{Main|Phonological history of English consonant clusters # Y-cluster reductions}}

Earlier Middle English distinguished the close front rounded vowel {{IPA|/yː/}} (occurring in loanwords from Anglo-Norman like duke) and the diphthongs {{IPA|/iw/}} (occurring in words like new), {{IPA|/ew/}} (occurring in words like few)http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/pronunciation/, http://facweb.furman.edu/~wrogers/phonemes/phone/me/mvowel.htm and {{IPA|/ɛw/}} (occurring in words like dew).

By Late Middle English, {{IPA|/yː/}}, {{IPA|/ew/}}, and {{IPA|/iw/}} all merged as {{IPA|/ɪw/}}. In Early Modern English, {{IPA|/ɛw/}} merged into {{IPA|/ɪw/}} as well.

{{IPA|/ɪw/}} has remained as such in some Welsh, some northern English and a few American accents. Thus, those varieties of Welsh English keep threw {{IPA|/θrɪw/}} distinct from through {{IPA|/θruː/}}. In most accents, however, the falling diphthong {{IPA|/ɪw/}} turned into a rising diphthong, which became the sequence {{IPA|/juː/}}. The change had taken place in London by the late 1800s. Depending on the preceding consonant and on the dialect, it either remained as {{IPA|/juː/}} or developed into {{IPA|/uː/}} by the processes of yod-dropping or yod-coalescence.{{sfnp|Wells|1982|p=206}} That has caused the standard pronunciations of duke {{IPA|/d(j)uːk/}} (or {{IPA|/dʒuːk/}}), new {{IPA|/n(j)uː/}}, few {{IPA|/fjuː/}} and rude {{IPA|/ruːd/}}.

The {{sc2|FOOT}}–{{sc2|GOOSE}} merger is a phenomenon in Scottish English, Northern Irish English, Malaysian English, and Singapore English,[http://www.waseda.jp/ocw/AsianStudies/9A-77WorldEnglishSpring2005/LectureNotes/03_HKE_TonyH/HKE_unit3.pdf HKE_unit3.pdf]{{full citation|date=March 2021}} in which the modern English phonemes {{IPA|/ʊ/}} and {{IPA|/uː/}} have merged into a single phoneme. As a result, word pairs like look and Luke, pull and pool, full and fool are homophones, and pairs like good and food and foot and boot rhyme.

The history of the merger dates back to two Middle English phonemes: the long vowel {{IPA|/oː/}} (which shoot traces back to) and the short vowel {{IPA|/u/}} (which put traces back to). As a result of the Great Vowel Shift, {{IPA|/oː/}} raised to {{IPA|/uː/}}, which continues to be the pronunciation of shoot today. Meanwhile, the Middle English {{IPA|/u/}} later adjusted to {{IPA|/ʊ/}}, as put is pronounced today. However, the {{IPA|/uː/}} of shoot next underwent a phonemic split in which some words retained {{IPA|/uː/}} (like mood) while the vowel of other words shortened to {{IPA|/ʊ/}} (like good). Therefore, the two processes ({{IPA|/oː/}}→{{IPA|/uː/}}→{{IPA|/ʊ/}} and {{IPA|/u/}}→{{IPA|/ʊ/}}) resulted in a merger of the vowels in certain words, like good and put, to {{IPA|/ʊ/}}, which is now typical of how all English dialects pronounce those two words. (See the table in the section "{{sc2|FOOT}}–{{sc2|STRUT}} split" above for more information about these early shifts.){{refn|group=note|name=Foot-goose|The {{sc2|FOOT}}–{{sc2|GOOSE}} merger, in fact, occurs only in dialects that have already undergone the {{sc2|FOOT}}–{{sc2|STRUT}} split.}} The final step, however, was for certain English dialects under the influence of foreign languages (the Scots language influencing Scottish English, for example){{cn|date=March 2021}} to merge the newly united {{IPA|/ʊ/}} vowel with the {{IPA|/uː/}} vowel (of mood and shoot): the {{sc2|FOOT}}–{{sc2|GOOSE}} merger. Again, this is not an internally motivated phonemic merger but the appliance of different languages' vowel systems to English lexical incidence.Macafee 2004: 74{{full citation|date=March 2021}} The quality of this final merged vowel is usually {{IPA|[ʉ~y~ʏ]}} in Scotland and Northern Ireland but {{IPA|[u]}} in Singapore.{{sfnp|Wells|1982|p=?}}

The full–fool merger is a conditioned merger of the same two vowels specifically before {{IPA|/l/}}, which causes pairs like pull/pool and full/fool to be homophones; it appears in many other dialects of English and is particularly gaining attention in several American English varieties.

In Geordie, the {{sc2|GOOSE}} vowel undergoes an allophonic split, with the monophthong {{IPA|[{{IPAplink|uː}} ~ {{IPAplink|ʉː}}]}} being used in morphologically-closed syllables (as in bruise {{IPA|[bɹuːz ~ bɹʉːz]}}) and the diphthong {{IPA|[ɵʊ]}} being used in morphologically-open syllables word-finally (as in brew {{IPA|[bɹɵʊ]}}) but also word-internally at the end of a morpheme (as in brews {{IPA|[bɹɵʊz]}}).{{sfnp|Watt|Allen|2003|p=269}}{{sfnp|Wells|1982|p=375}}

Most dialects of English turn {{IPA|/uː/}} into a diphthong, and the monophthongal {{IPA|[{{IPAplink|uː}} ~ {{IPAplink|ʉː}} ~ {{IPAplink|ɨː}}]}} is in free variation with the diphthongal {{IPA|[ʊu ~ ʊ̈ʉ ~ əʉ ~ ɪ̈ɨ]}}, particularly word-internally. Word-finally, diphthongs are more usual. Compare the Phonological history of English close front vowels#Other changes.

The change of {{IPA|/uː.ɪ/}} to {{IPA|[ʊɪ]}} is a process that occurs in many varieties of British English in which bisyllabic {{IPA|/uː.ɪ/}} has become the diphthong {{IPA|[ʊɪ]}} in certain words. As a result, "ruin" is pronounced as monosyllabic {{IPA|[ˈɹʊɪn]}} and "fluid" is pronounced {{IPA|[ˈflʊɪd]}}.{{sfnp|Wells|1982|p=240}}

• Phonological history of English
• Phonological history of English vowels
• Phonological history of English consonants
• {{Section link|Phonological history of English consonant clusters#Yod-dropping}}

{{Reflist|group=note}}

{{reflist}}

{{refbegin|30em}}

• {{Citation

|last1=Bauer

|first1=Laurie

|last2=Warren

|first2=Paul

|last3=Bardsley

|first3=Dianne

|last4=Kennedy

|first4=Marianna

|last5=Major

|first5=George

|title=New Zealand English

|journal=Journal of the International Phonetic Association

|year=2007

|volume=37

|issue=1

|pages=97–102

|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282778721

|doi=10.1017/S0025100306002830

|doi-access=free

}}

• {{citation

|last=Beal

|first=Joan

|editor-last=Schneider

|editor-first=Edgar W.

|editor2-last=Burridge

|editor2-first=Kate

|editor3-last=Kortmann

|editor3-first=Bernd

|editor4-last=Mesthrie

|editor4-first=Rajend

|editor5-last=Upton

|editor5-first=Clive

|year=2004

|title=A handbook of varieties of English

|chapter=English dialects in the North of England: phonology

|volume=1: Phonology

|publisher=Mouton de Gruyter

|pages=113–133

|isbn=3-11-017532-0

}}

• {{Citation

|author=International Phonetic Association

|year=2010

|orig-year=1949

|title=The Principles of the International Phonetic Association

|journal=Journal of the International Phonetic Association

|volume=40

|issue=3

|pages=299–358

|doi=10.1017/S0025100311000089

|hdl=2027/wu.89001200120

|s2cid=232345365

|url=http://archive.org/details/principlesofinte00inteuoft

|hdl-access=free

}}

• {{citation

|last=Petyt

|first=Keith M.

|author-link=K. M. Petyt

|year=1985

|title='Dialect' and 'Accent' in Industrial West Yorkshire

|publisher=John Benjamins Publishing Company

|isbn=9027279497

|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0skjSvKRQb4C

}}

• {{Citation

|last1=Watt

|first1=Dominic

|last2=Allen

|first2=William

|year=2003

|title=Tyneside English

|journal=Journal of the International Phonetic Association

|volume=33

|issue=2

|pages=267–271

|doi=10.1017/S0025100303001397

|doi-access=free

}}

• {{Accents of English}}
• {{Citation

|last=Wells

|first=John C.

|year=2008

|title=Longman Pronunciation Dictionary

|edition=3rd

|publisher=Longman

|isbn=978-1-4058-8118-0

}}

{{refend}}

{{History of English}}

Category:Splits and mergers in English phonology