This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Languages C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. BBC C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Tasks for WikiProject BBC: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary) Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments) Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles Other : *Restructure the category Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments) Reassess BBC following improvements to article. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. England C‑class High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. British Empire This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Empire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of British Empire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.British EmpireWikipedia:WikiProject British EmpireTemplate:WikiProject British EmpireBritish Empire ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Commonwealth This article is within the scope of WikiProject Commonwealth, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Commonwealth of Nations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CommonwealthWikipedia:WikiProject CommonwealthTemplate:WikiProject CommonwealthCommonwealth Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. English Language C‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Language, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the English language on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.English LanguageWikipedia:WikiProject English LanguageTemplate:WikiProject English LanguageEnglish Language C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Archives

September 2005-November 2007

This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

Three names have recently been added to the section 'Notable speakers' (Cleese, Dimbleby, Blair). The other names listed are presented as having been identified by John Wells as RP speakers, but no such reference has been given for the new ones. I think it would be a bad idea if this list were to start being added to with names that are not supported.I will remove these names unless they are given citations. RoachPeter (talk) 09:57, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree - especially since Tony Blair is cited as an example of an Estuary English speaker. -- Q Chris (talk) 13:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I find the inclusion of the British Royal family rather startling, not to say confusing: HM, Prince Charles and Prince William all sound different. And Andrew sounds different from Charles.

Or is it meant to be a sort of time-lapse thing?

Paul Magnussen (talk) 17:11, 19 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The idea of BBC pronunciation is, to say the least, absurd. Anyone who listens to Lyse Doucet cannot relate her vocal cadence with that of Mary Smalls. Zeyna Baddawy and the economics correspondent Andrew Harding have different accents. And, for listeners to the flagship 'Sportsworld', Alan Green does not sound like anything like his more 'standard' co-commentators Russel Fuller, Martin Foukes, Lee James or Mike Costello. James Coomarasamy is different from Andrew Harding. So, which is the BBC pronunciation? I prefer Messrs James and Costello for their clear diction and refined rhythm.

I would note that the sports section (as with items such as gardening or children's entertainment) has never been the sole preserve of RP speakers, even in the days when the BBC had a much smaller range of accents broadcast. Epa101 (talk) 13:15, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the idea of having a list of Notable Speakers of RP is good, and it is essential that every person listed there is referenced, I am unhappy that all those listed are rtefeenced to John Wells, particularly as all seven individuals listed are male. Do any women speak RP apart from members of the British Royal Family? Mike Spathaky (talk) 09:49, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lyse Doucet is Canadian, I think; she speaks General American. Zeinab Badawi is an RP speaker, Philippa Thomas too. Rothorpe (talk) 12:54, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to the recent addition of Emma Watson as an RP speaker, but her name has been added to a list supposedly put forward by John Wells. The Emma Watson proposal doesn't come from him. RoachPeter (talk) 17:53, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree on the reference. Another possible female addition could be Diana Athill. There is a reference here, albeit from a rather poorly-written article. Epa101 (talk) 13:25, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't we add a table which shows the difference in vowel realization between Contemporary RP and Traditional RP the way Upton (2004, see https://books.google.it/books?id=EeXI43AwwiEC&pg=PA241&dq=received+pronunciation+upton&hl=it&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjX7IaU-JvSAhVCvBQKHSXmAKoQ6AEIVzAI#v=onepage&q&f=false) and Pearce (2007) do, using lexical sets? This would allow for a better representation of the current state of the accent and the former standard. Meyerbeer 91 (talk) 10:27, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The position of ʌ in the open-central-short position of the vowel table is puzzling: in the IPA, ʌ represents the open-mid back unrounded vowel, the unrounded counterpart of ɔ, while the open-central unrounded vowel is a. Shouldn't "ʌ" be in the mid-back-short cell of the table, between "ɜː" and "ɔː"? Or is the position of ʌ in the open-central cell a phonemic device, with what is usually transcribed as ʌ and corresponding to an open back vowel in other accents being an open central vowel in RP? If this is the case, should this be mentioned in prose near the table, along the lines of "While the vowel in strut is traditionally transcribed as ʌ, phonologically it is closer to a near-open central unrounded vowel ɐ; see § Alternative notation"? 128.214.138.172 (talk) 12:07, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Received Pronunciation#Historical variation. Mr KEBAB (talk) 12:24, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How do you feel about replacing /eə/ and /æ/ with /ɛː/ and /a/ in Received Pronunciation? Plenty of sources use that transcription, IMO it's quite important to say that /eə/ is much more commonly monophthongal, even in phonemic transcriptions. Mr KEBAB (talk) 06:16, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the most authoritative of the sources that Wikipedia uses here is the OED? From this link it seems that the OED uses your transcriptions above, plus using /ɛ/ for what we now have as /e/, /ʌɪ/ for what we now have as /aɪ/ and /əː/ for what we now have as /ɜː/. Do we have any reason not to change those? I'm not so well read on the sources so I'm not sure what other sources say. Cheers.--Officer781 (talk) 14:49, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not responding for a month, I did my research and only /ɛː/ and /a/ are uncontroversial symbols that are used by more than one source. AFAIK the rest is used only by the OED, which I don't think is the most authoritative as far as pronunciation is concerned, just one of the most authoritative ones. See [1] and [2]. Mr KEBAB (talk) 21:19, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The links you have linked above actually argue against any changes to the standard scheme. Do you have sources arguing for only the two changes as you have proposed? Either way I think it is good if we can include more Wikipedia users in this discussion.--Officer781 (talk) 09:15, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Officer781: The 8th edition of Gimson's Pronunciation of English, which is more recent than those two. Mr KEBAB (talk) 11:31, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pinging more users per Officer's request: @Nardog, Wolfdog, Erutuon, Aeusoes1, RoachPeter, and J. 'mach' wust:. Mr KEBAB (talk) 12:39, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a google books link here in case anyone needs it: [3].--Officer781 (talk) 17:39, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think they should stay as they are, until multiple major lexical and pronouncing dictionaries follow suit. The phonemes for RP not only illustrate RP as one dialect but also serve as reference points for comparison in descriptions of other varieties and phonological history of English, so we should be circumspect about them. Especially I'd be inclined against changing /eə/, since /eə, ɪə, ʊə/ are often treated as a group of centering diphthongs when discussing phonology.

If anything, /ʌ/ and /ɔː/ are the symbols no longer representative of modern RP articulation yet kept for convenience sake, so to change /æ, eə/ but not those would be a bit inconsistent IMHO. Nardog (talk) 16:51, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]