Skip to main content

American's Guide To Pronouncing British Place Names

By
You all know there's some minor (though understandable) differences between British and American spelling. For example, we have 'colour' for 'color', 'favour' for 'favor' and 'harbour' for 'habor'. We have 'centre' for 'center', 'fibre' for 'fiber' and 'litre' for 'liter'. And so on.

These don't usually cause us any problems, especially since they are normally pronounced the same (although with differences in accent, which is an entirely different subject!). But, British spelling idiosyncrasies go far beyond these simple examples, and never more so than in our emotive and quaint place names. British place name spelling is about as intuitive as the 'many worlds' interpretation of quantum mechanics - for the non-scientists among you, that means 'not at all'. Actually, it's not the spelling that's odd (they usually retain a perfectly logical spelling based on their original meaning), it's the way that Brits pronounce them that's strange. It's something very peculiar to the Brits and causes no end of confusion and frustration (on both sides of the Atlantic).

Now, I understand that if you've never heard a place name pronounced it's easy to get it wrong. I've made the mistake myself many times by pronouncing British-derived place names in the US as if I were still in ol' blighty! But it is perhaps more difficult for the American to get the pronunciation right when in the UK. I mean, how would you pronounce 'Woolfardisworthy'? It's actually pronounced 'WULL-zer-ree' or sometimes 'WULL-zee'. How weird is that? Now, I'm a very forgiving person, but not everyone is! So, in the hope that I can help prevent you sounding foolish (or maybe get you understood where you otherwise wouldn't) here's my quick and dirty guide to British place name pronunciation for my American cousins.

One of the basic rules of British place name pronunciation is 'laziness'. Rather than being precise, Brits tend to squash words into as few syllables as possible, often replacing long vowels with short ones, and cutting out any extraneous sounds. London isn't really pronounced 'LUN-dun' but 'LUN-dn'. Accent the first syllable and just suggest the second! And definitely don't pronounced it 'LAN-dan' - that's how Cockneys (Londoners) pronounce it but it's almost impossible for Americans to get this right and you'll just sound like Dick van Dyke on a really bad day. Note the other important rule in the above examples - (usually) only the first syllable is stressed or 'accented'. So, Manchester is 'MAN-chester'.

So, let's look at some examples of laziness which will get you closer to the actual British pronunciation. In modern British usage the word 'shire' does indeed rhyme with 'hire'. But it never does when it's part of a shire (or 'county') name. The 'ire' is pronounced like the 'u' in 'up', shortened so as to be just suggested. Thus, Berkshire is not 'burk-shire' but 'BARK-shuh'. Similarly, Hertfordshire is 'HART-fud-shuh' and Derbyshire is 'DAR-bih-shuh' (notice all those county names pronounce the 'er' as 'ar'). And by association Hertford is 'HART-fud' and Derby is 'DAR-bee'.

The place name ending 'mouth' (usually denoting the mouth of a river) is pronounced 'muth'. Hence Plymouth is 'PLIM-muth', Portsmouth is 'PORTS-muth' and Bournemouth is 'BORN-muth'. But watch out, there are one or two exceptions. Tynemouth is pronounced as it's spelt - 'TINE-mouth'.

And then there is the dreaded 'ough' letter combination which in British English can be pronounced in many different ways (or not at all) - just think about these words; 'tough', 'through', 'though', 'thought', 'thorough' and 'trough'! It can also represent the 'ch' sound found in the Scottish word 'loch'. Let's take a few examples of its use in place names.

The Old English word 'burg' or 'burh' meant a castle and survives in place names in a number of forms, including 'burg', 'burgh', 'bury' and 'borough'. Apart from 'bury', these are normally pronounced 'buh-ruh'. Try pronouncing the letters phonetically, like kids do when learning the alphabet. Say 'b' and then 'r' and you've just about got it. It doesn't sound like 'burrow', 'borrow' or (heaven forbid!) 'berg'. So, Edinburgh is 'EDN-buh-ruh' - accent the 'e', then merely suggest the rest. Other places pronounced the same way are Peterborough ('PEE-ta-buh-ruh') and Scarborough ('SCAR-buh-ruh').

Things are a bit more complicated with other occurrences of 'ough'. You will often just have to learn which pronunciation to use (even Brits get some of them wrong), although as a native Brit it often (though strangely) seems intuitive to us which one is correct. Hence, Loughborough is 'LUFF-buh-ruh', Loughton is 'LOW-tun', Brough is 'BRUFF', Broughton is 'BRAW-tun' and Slough rhymes with 'cow'. But watch out for Marlborough which has two syllables ('MARL-bruh'). I said it was weird!

The Old English word 'caester' (originally from the Latin 'castrum') meant a fortified town. It survives as 'chester', 'cester' and 'caistor'. The first is easily pronounced, as in Manchester ('MAN-chester'). The second, which is normally a suffix, is often shortened to one syllable, as in Leicester ('LESS-ter'), Gloucester ('GLOSS-ter'), Worcester ('WUSS-ter'). Hence, we then have Leicestershire ('LESS-ter-shuh'), Gloucestershire ('GLOSS-ter-shuh') and Worcestershire ('WUSS-ter-shuh'). Of course, there's always an exception to the rule, so Cirencester is pronounced 'SIREN-sess-ter'. A similar dropping of syllables happens with the old word for a monastic church, 'minster'. Hence Leominster is 'LEM-ster' and Beaminster is 'BEM-ster'.

There are many derivatives of the place name suffixes 'wick' or 'wich', which can mean a village, a farm or a salt producing area. In almost all cases the 'w' is unpronounced. Hence Norwich is 'NOH-rich' (or more correctly 'NOH-ridge'), Harwich is 'HAH-rich', Warwick is 'WOH-rick', Berwick is 'BEH-rick', Alnwick is 'AN-ick', Postwick is 'POZZ-ick'  and Keswick is 'KEZZ-ick'. Again, there are exceptions. Thus Nantwich is 'NANT-witch' and Hawick is 'HOYK'.

So, the rule of thumb is to be lazy and shorten everything. All in all, if the vowellar sound in a syllable can be shortened, it will be. Thus 'ham' is pronounced 'um', 'sham' is 'shum', 'ton' is 'tun', 'don' is 'dun' and so on. 'bury' is often shortened to 'BREE' and the 'h' in 'ham' is often dropped after 'ing', hence Whittingham is 'WITT-ing-gum' and Bellingham is 'BELL-in-jum'. And don't forget to accent ONLY the first syllable.

I realise this advice will only get you so far. There are thousands of place names that are pronounced completely illogically. Here's a few examples; Reading ('RED-ing'), Belvoir ('BEE-ver'), Fowey ('FOY'), Southwell ('SUTH-ull'), Oswaldtwistle ('OZZ-ull-twizz-ull'), Wymondham ('WIND-um'), Cholmondeley ('CHUM-lee'),  Groby ('GREW-bee'), Godmanchester ('GUM-ster'), Keighley ('KEETH-lee'), Eyam ('EEM'), Barnoldswick ('BAR-lick'), Edensor ('EN-zer') and Happisburgh ('HAZE-bruh').

Of course, the UK also includes Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We won't even go there since even the native English haven't a clue how to pronounce Celtic place names (by which I mean Welsh, Scots Gaelic and Cornish). So, if you're an American in Wales, Scotland, Ireland or Cornwall, just point at the map and grunt. You'll be fine!


Comments

  1. Unknown16 December 2014 at 17:23

    Torpenhow = Truh-PEN-y
    Ulgham = UFF-um

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous16 December 2014 at 17:33

    All very nicely put. I say this as an American who lived in London SW 1 for five years

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Feel free to argue with this post...

Popular posts from this blog

Victorian Christmas Ghost Stories

By
An engraving by R. Graves entitled 'The Ghost Story', circa 1870. In his first full-length novel, The Pickwick Papers (1836-1837), Charles Dickens gave us a peculiarly Victorian view of the Christmas tradition. The host of a Yuletide gathering, Mr. Wardle of Dingley Dell, informs his guests that “Everybody sits down with us on Christmas Eve, as you see them now — servants and all; and here we wait, until the clock strikes twelve, to usher Christmas in, and beguile the time with forfeits and old stories”. So begins a long association of the traditional ghost story with Christmas-time; a tradition that has largely died out, but one that should be revived. Of course, the tradition of telling spooky stories at Christmas is much older than Dickens. It was already well-established in the early nineteenth century. In Old Christmas (from The Sketch Book of Geoffrey Crayon, Gent ., 1819), Washington Irving describes a busy Yuletide fireside with the parson “dealing forth strange a
9 comments
Read more

The Fastest Things In The Universe

By
Gravitational waves can't actually be seen as in this simulation. When gazing at the night sky from here on Earth, it’s easy to picture the Universe as calm and unhurried. But in reality, out there in space, things move fast – really fast. Putting aside particle accelerators and the like, the fastest-moving man-made object was the Helios 2 spacecraft launched in the 1970s. It reached a top speed of 68.75 km/s (153,800 mph) on its mission to the Sun. But this was just a leisurely stroll compared to the fastest things in the Cosmos. So, where do we find the real speed freaks of the Universe? Here’s a run-down of the top five. 1. Expansion of the Universe Speed: Greater than the speed of light! The Universe is expanding. But the Universe isn’t filling up ‘empty space’ as it expands because it is ‘space’ itself which is expanding. Although the laws of physics say that two objects can’t move faster than light speed with respect to each other, there is no such restricti
8 comments
Read more

Who Was Ghost Story Writer "Mary E. Penn"?

By
The identity of Mary E. Penn, a late-Victorian author of ghosts stories and crime and mystery tales, is a complete enigma. Scholars of the macabre have been unable to discern any details of her person, origin or character (assuming she was indeed female). We only know that from the 1870s to the 1890s this author published a number of stories in periodicals, most commonly in The Argosy (Ellen Wood’s monthly publication). Some of her early contributions were anonymous (later attributed to Penn in The Wellesley Index to Victorian Periodicals ) and her name only appears from 1878 onwards. Her first story, At Ravenholme Junction , was published anonymously in The Argosy in December 1876, but was later ascribed to Penn on stylistic grounds by eminent supernatural fiction scholar Richard Dalby. Her other ghostly tales were Snatched from the Brink ( The Argosy , June 1878), How Georgette Kept Tryst ( The Argosy , October 1879), Desmond’s Model ( The Argosy , December 1879), Old Vanderhav
1 comment
Read more

Black Holes 101

By
Artist's impression of a black hole. With new blockbuster movie Interstellar now in cinemas, there's a flurry of interest in black holes and wormholes. Theoretical physicist Kip Thorne was a scientific consultant for the production and insisted that the depiction should stay within legitimate boundaries. Apart from the odd bit of artistic license, of course! Black holes are scary, right? They suck in everything in their path. They devour whole planets, stars even, ripping them apart like mere wisps of smoke. They condemn anything that confronts them to an unknowable oblivion. It’s the stuff of nightmare, or at least a bad disaster movie. But I think black holes get a bad press. They are misunderstood, misrepresented. The truth is they are fascinating creatures, if confusing, and not a little bit weird. So, relax for a moment while I give you my quick and dirty guide to black holes. The Black Hole 101, if you like. Let’s start with a simple definition of a black hole
Post a Comment
Read more

The Anglo-Saxon/Latin Rule, Again!

By
It's one of those rules we're often told as writers. Don't write in Latin, write in Anglo-Saxon! This so-called 'rule' has been around quite a while. In Politics & The English Language (1946) George Orwell wrote "bad writers... are nearly always haunted by the notion that Latin or Greek words are grander than Saxon ones". But, what does this mean? Do we have to check the etymology of every word we scribble down in our manuscript books, weeding out the obnoxious foreigners and replacing them with good, solid, stalwart Germanic conciseness? Or does it mean we should write in an archaic style and pepper our prose with lovely words such as erstwhile , forsooth and threap ? Are we banned from using words such as obfuscate , perambulate, egregious and impecunious ? Well, let's think about this for a moment, with a couple of examples. Here's the opening line of Edward Bulwer-Lytton's book Paul Clifford ; It wa s a dark and stormy nig
Post a Comment
Read more

Flat Earth Fallacy

By
I'm an accepting kind of person. I generally allow people to think what they want, believe what they want and (pretty much) say what they want, within reason. But occasionally an opinion is so far-fetched, insulting or incorrect that it debases human intelligence (all human intelligence, not just mine). And then I feel I must speak up. One such 'opinion' is the belief in a 'flat' Earth. Although this topic has a substantial history (see for example Christine Garwood's Flat Earth: The History of an Infamous Idea ), it has so far not been publicly contested in any great depth. Even Phil Plait, author of the ever-popular  Bad Astronomy Blog , declined to give such a preposterous proposition any real air-time. And I don't blame him. It really is the most absurd idea. But it should be denounced, for any number of reasons. The basic premise of the 'flat-Earth' protagonists is that ancient cultures were right, the Earth is flat , a circular disk bo
10 comments
Read more

Does Today's Music All Sound The Same?

By
What's wrong Simon? Is this music too interesting? Recently, whilst out shopping, my young son asked "why is all the music in these shops exactly the same?" He had a point. Every neon-illuminated consumer-hovel of fashion we visited was pumping out the same insidious four-to-the-floor musical effluent. There was no variation in rhythm, tempo, timbre or anything else. Absolute tedium. You've heard it said over and over again: "all today's music sounds the same!" It's something that your parents probably say about the music you listen to. Or you say about the music other people listen to. It was probably also something your grandparents said about the music your parents were into. But who is right? Are any of them right? Does today's music really all sound the same? Or is it just generational crankiness? If you're on the ball, you'll already know that the music industry doesn't have your best interests at heart when deciding w
3 comments
Read more

The Date Of Christmas

By
I've said this many times before, but astronomy effects our daily lives in ways of which we're often unaware. For example, you may be surprised to find that the date of Christmas is almost certainly down to our ancient forebears' astronomical endeavours. Imagine you’re a prehistoric farmer. You would have little understanding of what we today call science. But you would almost certainly know a lot about the motion of the Sun, Moon, stars and planets around the sky. In fact, these motions would be very important to you. Why? Because they mark the passage of the seasons and the seasons dictate what sustenance is available to humankind. Your survival depends on them. If you want your crops to grow, your livestock to survive, your hunt to be a success, you need a good knowledge of where you are in the yearly cycle of life. And it is the skies which give you that knowledge. So, here's the science bit (as people annoyingly say!). In the morning, the Sun rises in the
2 comments
Read more

Are Indie Authors Destroying The Market?

By
You're probably aware that we are drowning in an ocean of mediocrity. Yes, I know, there's mediocrity all around us; the TV, the music business, in fact everywhere you care to look. But I'm talking about mediocrity in 'literature', as if that term actually means something these days. Once upon a time, not so long ago, 'literature' was a respectable part of the art world. Authors were mysterious intellectuals, removed from society, tortured souls poring over their foolscap notepads with quill in hand. They were just names, often widely-known ones, like A-list celebrities with no public face, controversy or paparazzi. The authors' agents, dark figures sifting through their ever-growing slush pile of tales, held sway over a global industry from behind locked doors. The authors' publishers were equally elusive, a forbidden realm for those with literary aspirations, with the ability to put their clients names right into the homes of the reading public
14 comments
Read more