Talk:Linking and intrusive R

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconLinguistics: Phonetics C‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics 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.
CThis 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.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Phonetics Task Force.

Linking R vs. Intrusive R[edit]

This article is incorrect. Linking R and Intrusive R are quite different. The former is considered correct in all non-rhotic English dialects, the latter is considered an error. The example given is an example of intrusive R, an example of linking R would be "where is" /we@r Iz/ whereas "where" alone would be pronouned /we@/. — Hippietrail 00:24, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

What is "considered" correct or incorrect is irrelevant. Not all nonrhotic accents have linking R, and not all accents that have linking R have intrusive R. --Angr/tɔk mi 16:42, 28 July 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

this is a general encylopedia not a graduate text can you people learn that ????[edit]

if you think I am exagerating or being cruel or harsh, well, read this and ask yourself: who is writing for the average person ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

wikipedia is a encylopedia for the average person what on earth is wrong with you people when the intro reads quote Linking R and intrusive R are sandhi or linking phenomena[1] involving the appearance of the rhotic consonant (which normally corresponds to the letter ⟨r⟩) between two consecutive morphemes unquote

god almiighty, it is hard but you linguists are worse then the math people — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:24, 8 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pawler Abdul[edit]

Heh... It used to kill me how one of my NY college buddies would say "Pawler Abdul" (Paula Abdul).

The intrusive 'r' it is, I guess. :)

Roodog2k 19:31, 19 August 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I thought I could pass on the opportunity to add a stupid comment about Linking and intrusive R being of the same form as Jack Black and Tenacious D but if this comment about Pawler Abdul has been here for five years maybe it's okay Minitrue (talk) 19:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I personally would understand better with a list of examples (like Pawler Abdul). I put a few up but more would be good. 14:01, 18 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Such as the squaRsh and waRsh. Those drive me nuts. Being from the midwest I have a "general American" accent and can't pronounce things with the intruding R to save my life lol. Breezy hwesta 16:07, 31 December 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More examples in other languages[edit]

Other examples of linking consonants are the euphonic -t- and l' in some French expressions.

Also, many languages insert a glide at the beginning of words which start with a vowel, to break up hiatuses. FilipeS

Not sure I understand what you're referring to (in French). Zigzig20s 12:52, 13 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For example:

A-t-il donc un frère ?
C'est ce que l'on dit.

These are linking consonants. FilipeS 19:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well those are similar to the intrusive and linking r aren't they? Mmmm.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:26, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, linking r is just a particular type of linking consonant. The French call the phenomenon of linking consonants ‘liaison’. ‘Intrusive r’ refers to linking r when it is anti-etymological. The French call anti-etymological linking ‘fausse liaison’.
Note that a-t-il and l’on are not anti-etymological. There are also some anti-etymological linkings which are no longer considered ‘fausse liaison’ because they have become standard. For example, vas-y and je suis un. In the same way, it is now the norm amongst speakers of standard English to say ‘Africa_and Asia’ with a linking r, ‘hello_and welcome’ with a linking w, and ‘Sophie_is here’ with linking y. — Chameleon 02:27, 10 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I have reduced the lists of examples. The general concept is quite clearly explained in the text with a couple of examples of intrusive and linking R. No point in listing endless examples. I have reduced the list to recordings etc, where the example relates to a published (?) source. OK? Snalwibma 13:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm fine with that. I just thought that since the intrusive r section had a sub-section with examples, so should the linking r section...It just would make it easier to read I think - although I agree that the text is fairly straightforward. Zigzig20s 13:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm surprised by the finding that intrusive r happens less when adjacent to proper names. As a (rhotic) American listening to BBC, I notice that BBC announcers with English accents usually say "Indiarand China," and, in the year after 9/11, consistently covered the search for "Muller Omah" (Mullah Omar). —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, it still happens, though it's apparently less frequent. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 17:10, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Just a thought. In the example of intrusive R, a line in the Oasis song Champagne Supernova is said to be pronounced as "supernova-r-in the sky" but if you've ever heard it before, he doesn't come anywhere close to pronouncing the last vowel in "Supernova" at all. This should be rewritten as "superno-ver-in the sky" because that's how he sings it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:07, 31 October 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Summary in Plain English[edit]

If an introduction were included using plain english without any linguistic terms or symbols, which explained both linking and intrusive r clearly and simply, it would put the rest of the article in context and be very informative.

Also, explaining things like Non-rhotic and specific dialects for specific areas would be helpful. I have seen that in the central and southern parts of the US, r is added in a word when there is an a in the word, even when it is followed by a constant. Sometimes this happens in Boston, too. Other times, it is the r at the end of a word with an A, when next word leads with a vowel. I noticed Cat Deeley on So You Think You Can Dance, did this a lot.

An discussion on whether this is considered proper or uneducated or colloquial would be interesting and helpful. I was surprised to here and announcer on a national tv program use the r that way. It sounded ignorant to me.

I don't understand the explination for when an R is inserted in the middle of a word. For example, the page says if the next word does not begin with a vowel, the R in here would not be pronounced. But what about words that contain an 'A' and an r is inserted, such as wash, even if the next letter is not a vowel. Also, where is it that here is pronounced he; I have never heard that and would be interested in knowing.

Usually this all follows an "a" in a word, not any vowel. Wash, Linda, idea, etc. Does it exist with words other than A? Alpinebixby 18:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Alpinebixby (talkcontribs) 18:49, 29 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I’ve often noticed that ‘here’ sounds a bit like the word ‘he’ in a Boston accent because of the way they pronounce the schwa more like the HIT-vowel than the CUT-vowel. They famously say ‘Hahvid yahd’ after all (it sounds more like ‘hee-i’ but talking quickly it can come out like the word ‘he’)Overlordnat1 (talk) 19:45, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rhotic Accents[edit]

Why don't rhotic accents have an intrusive and/or linking R? This article never explains that. (talk) 06:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rhotic accents effectively do have something similar to a linking R, since they pronounce all historical/orthographic Rs at the end of words, regardless of whether they are followed by a vowel or not. Rhotic accents don't have intrusive R because they distinguish between words that end in historical/orthographic R and those that do not. For example, "cheater" and "cheetah" are pronounced differently in rhotic accents. In place of intrusive R, rhotic accents may use either a hiatus or a glottal stop. Grover cleveland (talk) 08:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

List of examples[edit]

This was removed on the grounds that it constitutes original research. I have some sympathy with that view, but I think it's an over-zealous interpretation of WP:OR. Is simple reporting of an observable fact "original research"? I think the problem is not that the article contains a list of examples, but that it's too long a list. I'd be strongly in favour of cutting it down to two or three items. But I think to delete it altogether is unhelpful, making the article harder to understand. SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 11:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The problem with cutting it down to a few examples is that it will just attract endless additions over time. In fact, that's exactly what's happened to this article; see how the list originated: [1]. If there has to be a list, it shouldn't include specific examples from films and songs, etc. It just needs a few simple examples of a word preceding another word beginning with a vowel ("vodka and tonic" for example). Oli Filth(talk|contribs) 13:05, 11 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree, and maybe that is the answer. I can see some benefit in pointing to specific examples in well-known songs etc, but it certainly attracts a lot of dross. Yes, the best solution is probably to give just a few general phrases, not specific quotes, and ruthlessly delete all song lyrics and film quotes. At one time I seem to recall "law(r) and orde(r)" as one of the examples in the article, where (from the point of view of a rhotic speaker) one unnecessary R is inserted and the one that should be there is silent! I rather like that example. SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 15:37, 11 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've noticed that the main body already alludes to a few example inline. If we pick the best examples and work them into the main body, it would be an ideal opportunity to eliminate the crufty list, and retain the required examples. I'd rather leave the editing of the main body text to someone who knows the subject area better than I do (which is not a lot!); can you do this? Oli Filth(talk|contribs) 15:47, 11 April 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Back asswards[edit]

Is it just me or is this article backwards?

Each paragreph starts by talking about non-rhotic accents then goes on to say what means.

Shouldn't it start by telling the reader what the linking or intrusive R mean. The whole non-rhotic bit can be discussed at the end since (according to the page on rhotic accents) non-rhotic is about whether linking R is used in one particular word.

I'm going to rewrite this in a more logical sequence but as I am not familiar with the technical terms it would probably be good if someone checked. filceolaire (talk) 09:13, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree that there is a bit of a tendency this way! So go ahead... I guess the basic structure of the lead should be "linking R" and "intrusive R" describe two cases where an R is pronounced in a dialect/accent of English in which R is not normally pronounced (such dialects are called "non-rhotic"). SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 09:18, 23 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

origin of intrusive R[edit]

"Intrusive R arose historically as hypercorrection of linking R in non-rhotic dialects, so it too does not occur in rhotic dialects." - Does this mean a hypercorrect extension of linking R into inappropriate environments? If so, it might be better worded; the phrase "hypercorrection of X" implies a misguided attempt to avoid X, rather than an overuse of it. Lfh (talk) 14:38, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


A minority of Americans add an R to wash and Washington so they come out warsh and Warshington. Is this the same as an intrusive R? If so, should it be added to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:52, 24 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No: it's a separate phenomenon. Intrusive R only occurs at the end of word (or occasionally at the end of a morpheme). Grover cleveland (talk) 01:26, 25 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have seen that phenomenon also called intrusive r (and I don't know what other term is used for it also called "Internal r-epenthesis" a redlink for now). For example, from "Attitudes toward regional pronunciation" in the Journal of English Linguistics by Frazer (1987):

"The intrusive /r/ received the most negative ratings of any variant in the group, which supports the anecdotal evidence I have obtained that this feature is stigmatized. It was for years put into the speech of comic characters supposed to be ignorant and illiterate (Mickey Mouse's friend Goofy is the most famous example)... Still, I have heard 'Warshington' in the speech of Presidents Nixon and Reagan, as well as 1984 candidate Mondale." (p. 94).

Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 22:45, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I heard it was a case of migrating r. You see, the Rs got kicked out of Boston (ca', pa'k, Ha'va'd, sha'k) and parts of New York, so they resettled in Oklahoma and Arkansas (warsh, Warshington). DBlomgren (talk) 12:42, 16 May 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually, they went farther (father) west: I grew up in Southern California, never was in either Oklahoma or Arkansas until well after high school, and I put the "r" in both squash and wash, unless I really think about it. But other than than I always pronounce an "r" and don't add one were it isn't. Wschart (talk) 20:59, 26 November 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In one way, it is an "intrusive" r. It is added in speech even though it is not present in the spelling of the word. However, it is "Intrusive R." This is not a linking phenomenon. That's all I have to say. (talk) 01:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have one more thing to add. Mickey Mouse's friend Goofy technically uses what is known as the hypercorrection intrusive r. It is a result of shifting from non-rhoticity to rhoticity. To explain this, I will use the words "fear" and "idea" In a non-rhotic accent, it is pronounced /fiə/ and /aɪ.diə/ In shifting to rhoticity, the pronunciation is shifted to /fiɚ/. However, in the process, "idea" can be sometimes hypercorrected to /aɪ.diɚ/. Over and out. (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Poor Appalachian Scotch-Irish heritage people in the South throw intrusive R's around mercilessly. "Sheiler, I'm gonna do the warsh, and then fix you a tuner fish sandwich". (talk) 16:30, 3 December 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Hi Grover,

You deleted

Although considered correct for Received Pronunciation, linking R rarely occurs today apart from very formal situations. In normal conversation, RP and many other non-rhotic dialects of English actually have intrusive R.

with the comment that it is not true. However, in the next section Wells says the same thing: that RP no longer has linking R. Or am I missing something? — kwami (talk) 15:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wells says that RP has both linking R and intrusive R. Grover cleveland (talk) 04:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
He says the distinction is only historical and orthographic, which means it is not phonemic. Since linking R is phonemic, and intrusive R is not, there is no longer linking R. — kwami (talk) 05:16, 10 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think that's consistent with what Wells said. After all, if linking R were phonemic and intrusive R were not phonemic (in RP), then that in itself would be a distinction between linking R and intrusive R that was not "historical or orthographic", would it not? The question of whether linking/intrusive R is phonemic or non-phonemic in RP is an interesting one: one can imagine various answers to it: but it is certain that in RP-like accents there can not be a distinction of phonemicity between them. Grover cleveland (talk) 17:08, 10 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In varieties that exhibit intrusive r, there is no synchronic difference between the two grammatically. However, because intrusive r is stigmatized, speakers make a sociolinguistic distinction so that "linking r" is r-epenthesis that reflects history and orthography while "intrusive r" is r-epenthesis that reflects neither. Varieties that don't feature the latter definitely have an underlying phonemic distinction between cheetah and cheater, even if it's neutralized in certain contexts. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 16:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent changes[edit]

I've altered the article to remove references of "orthographic" or "historical" r. I've also changed most instances of /r/ to [r] since it's a lot more controversial to assert that this is phoneme insertion rather than phone-insertion. The edits I've made thus make the distinction between linking and intrusive r more clear, though I haven't provided additional sourcing. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 06:52, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your improvements. I made a minor fix to make it clear that there is no phonemic distinction between pairs such as "cheater"/"cheetah" in RP-like dialects. We can't say that cheater ends with phonemic /r/ and cheetah doesn't: Wells explicitly contradicts this claim. One could claim that both end in /r/ or (more likely) that neither does. To avoid this controversy I've removed mention of phonemic /r/. Grover cleveland (talk) 17:45, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Okay, your edits have re-added the confusion that I was trying to address. When it's linking-R only, there is a phonemic contrast. When it's intrusive-r, there isn't (or arguing for a phonemic distinction between cheetah and cheater is more abstract). — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 21:31, 13 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Intrusive R in rhotic dialects[edit]

I changed it so it said "Rhotic dialects do not USUALLY feature intrusive R", or words to that effect. I also pointed out that two characters in 24 had used it occasionally - Edgar Stiles and Jack Bauer, who are both rhotic. Edgar said "the data-r-is" more than once, and Jack said something like "the eye dear is" once. Obviously, it doesn't happen often, but the fact that it happens at all means that the statement about it not occurring is incorrect. Someone reverted my changes, so I posted a message on his talk page.

The problem as I see it is this - I don't know how to adequately reference the TV show 24, and I stated that in my edit summary. I would like some help, please, from someone who knows how to do it. My observation is that intrusive R is very rare indeed in rhotic speech, but it DOES occur occasionally. Therefore, it is incorrect to state (blanket) that it does not occur at all, and the word USUALLY should be inserted. How to reference this, I am not sure, but I tried and my edit was reverted with nothing but a simple comment that I should use a proper reference (which I'd already said I didn't know how to do). Thanks; here's hoping someone can help here. (talk) 20:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unfortunately, the two main problems with using television shows as sources for dialectology (this is the problem that I indicated when I said "use proper sources", not the citation format) is that what you see on television is subjective (for example, Edgar seems to speak a non-rhotic dialect to me) and it is anecdotal (we shouldn't assume that what a character does is typical of a certain group. Perhaps the actor speaks a different dialect and slipped up). The meaning behind the statement "Rhotic dialects do not feature intrusive R" is that it's not a regular feature of such varieties. We shouldn't count slipups as featuring intrusive R. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 20:42, 8 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose you could say that Edgar is semi-rhotic. He pronounces Rs in stressed vowels in the middle of words, like "birds", but leaves them out in unstressed syllables sometimes, such as at the ends of words ending in the "er" sound. Is that called semi-rhotic or something? He still pronounces some of his Rs, so he's not non-rhotic. Also, Jack Bauer is definitely always rhotic, yet I've heard him use the intrusive R on at least two separate occasions. I remember one occasion was in Season 3, but I'm afraid my memory isn't any more specific than that. He was in a car; that's all I can remember. (talk) 23:16, 9 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh yeah, also Kiefer Sutherland uses the same accent on 24 as he does in interviews etc. so I'm assuming that's his normal accent; he's not trying to imitate a different accent so a slip-up of that type is not what happened here. (talk) 23:30, 9 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We still can't use 24. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 00:17, 10 March 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with that this needs further investigation. I live in Devon, where older and/or working class speakers have a strongly rhotic accent, and "linking r" is definitely used. For example, "Emma is here" would be "Emmer is here". Gordonofcartoon (talk) 11:36, 8 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Note that [aɪˈdiɚ] is a one-off lexical variant—and rhotic speakers are just as likely to use it at the end of a phrase. — ˈzɪzɨvə (talk) 17:05, 28 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New England[edit]

New England accents (especially South Bostonian and other coastal Massachusetts areas) are non-rhotic, and prominently feature both linking and intrusive R. Sometimes both Rs are even emphasized, either for parody, effect, local pride, or a quirk of a particular town/neighborhood's variation. (A particular exception to non-rhoticity in New England is the Boston Brahmin accent, which is akin to RP for New England, but today extinct.)

Unfortunately the only reference I know of offhand for this phenomenon (other than me being a native speaker of it) in the New England accent is the amateurish, but otherwise well-regarded site Wicked Good Guide To Boston English. - Keith D. Tyler 08:53, 3 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That’s an interesting link. Do people really add an ‘h’ to he beginning of ‘underwear’? That’s the sort of phenomenon attributed to the Artful Dodger by Dickens, you’ll also hear it in the West Indies but I didn’t realise it survived in other modern dialects. As for the ‘r’ being a ‘v’(‘Tevesa has bvains’), is this just an attempt to represent the sort of guttural ‘r’ found in East Ireland accents (and possibly also found in Boston)? Overlordnat1 (talk) 10:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

in German[edit]

Besides the oral phenomenon not reflected in orthography, some cases have became grammatical in German, viz. darin ("there inside", from da+in), daraus ("there outside", from da+aus), etc.-- (talk) 21:25, 29 July 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The word "da" was originally "dar", which still exists as a byform (cf. darlegen). So this isn't really an example of it. However some German dialects do have an intrusive R used to link words. For example in Colognian you say "Häss de-r-et jefunge?" ("Did you find it?"), where the "r" has no etymological basis, but is simply used to avoid the hiatus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could intrusive r occur in a rhotic dialect?[edit]

To start, I have an example. One time, when I was in North Carolina, I happened to catch somebody say "I don't have an idea" as "I don't have an i-dear." Note that in North Carolina, from my experience down there, the speech is rather rhotic. So, is this an example of intrusive r, or is this solely an example of epenthesis of r? Although I can guess the answer to be the latter, it is still worth a discussion. Thank you. (talk) 02:14, 2 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Never mind. I saw the correct term used on a different article. This is called hypercorrection. Meaning as a result of shifting from non-rhotic to rhotic, some cases, where an r was not present, gained a r. (talk) 01:43, 8 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Linking and intrusive R. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:00, 16 May 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Longman Pronunciation Dicitonary reads "There are also non-standard American English forms wɔːrʃ, wɑːrʃ ". What's this intrusive sound due to? --Backinstadiums (talk) 10:34, 18 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Intrusive R and glottal stops[edit]

The most extreme example of intrusive R’s is when he letter ‘r’ is used in place of a glottalised ‘t’, for example when Cilla Black said ‘lorra lorra laffs’ for ‘lot of, lot of laughs’ on Blind Date, when people say ‘gerroff’ for ‘get off’ and when ‘folks from t’South Yorkshire’ say ‘gerrin’ berra’ for ‘getting better’ even though they actually don’t often glottalise t’s in that part of the country! Also when the final syllable of certain words like ‘follow’, ‘window’ and ‘potato’ is shortened to a schwa and followed by a vowel or dropped ‘h’ this can be rendered as an intrusive R (for example some people say ‘follurim’ for ‘follow him’, though I personally use an intrusive W and say ‘folluwim’). All this can and ideally should be mentioned.Overlordnat1 (talk) 19:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suspect the first thing you mention is unrelated to intrusive R; it's a version of t-flapping, not inserting r between two vowels. AJD (talk) 15:30, 25 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I’m not convinced it’s the same phenomenon, for reasons I’ve laid out in (In short: ‘r’ and tapped/flapped ‘r’ are not the same). Overlordnat1 (talk) 11:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I’ve just improved on this article by providing a decent source explaining the phenomenon of intrusive r following a reduced schwa. It’s obviously a real thing as I just watched the film Villain on NetFlix and the central cockney gangster character , played by the famous actor Craig Fairbrass, says it’s gotta[r]appen, I wanna[r]old ‘im and also exhibits a slightly different type of intrusive R when he says yerrI for yeah I. It’s also a fact that people from Northern England, who sometimes say gi’ it and wi’ im for give it and with him sometimes say girrit and wirrim. It’s also a fact that the Scouse comedian John Bishop regularly uses an intrusive R even when following a reduced schwa. Overlordnat1 (talk) 00:40, 26 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

England and vowel-terminated syllables[edit]

There seems to be a tendency for many people from England to add an "r" sound to the end of vowel-terminated syllables, even when followed by consonant-started syllables. When this is pointed out to them they deny that they are doing this.

The most notable example is the name of the Dr. Who adversaries: The Daleks. It seems to be invariably pronounced "Darleks". It was only years later that I found the correct spelling on the internet.

Since Dr. Who programs are readily available, you may listen for yourself. [Try the 4th Doctor (Tom Baker).]


p.s.: For many years I invariably said "warsh", which was the way I was hearing people say it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:04, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Intrusive R and ambiguity[edit]

Linking and intrusive R's can cause ambiguity between an r-colored vowel and a word starting with an r which is another word without the r. For example, in a non-rhotic dialect with intrusive r the phrases "Australia aids New Zealand" and "Australia raids New Zealand" sound the same, a phrase can mean foreign aid or an act of foreign agression from the Land Down Under to the Kiwis. 2804:14D:8084:9D40:BD3C:76B2:4569:D959 (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Among the examples of intrusive R, the article cites 'in the song "Beauty and a Beat" by Justin Bieber featuring Nicki Minaj: "Eye out for Selena-r"'

Frankly, I think her pronunciation there is more of a deliberate joke and also a bit misleading when it comes to real intrusive-R dialects. In a normal dialect with intrusive R, the R would have been dropped in this position. Minaj rhymes 'ether', 'weiner' and 'Selena-r' at the end of her lines, pronouncing all three words with an /r/, while a dialect with intrusive R would have pronounced no R in any of these words, since they aren't followed by a vowel. As far as I can see, a pronunciation like Selena-r before a pause is only conceivable as hypercorrection resulting from a dialect/idiolect transitioning from non-rhotic to rhotic pronunciation, but I don't think that's very common at all and should at any rate be distinguished from the normal intrusive-R dialect. (talk) 06:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We should probably have a section in this article discussing intrusive r’s when used by rhotic speakers. In the comments above yours in this talk section the fact that some people say ‘warsh’ is discussed and one comment even links to a paper in a linguistics journal that uses the term ‘intrusive r’ to describe this. There are also people who say ‘that’s a good idear’ who also say ‘the idea is’ or ‘the idear is’ but not ‘the idea ris’. Appalachians are heavily rhotic and they do this, as well as saying ‘heathern’ instead of ‘heathen’ to refer to a naughty child, so it doesn’t just arise in hyper corrections by non-rhotic speakers as suggested elsewhere here. Overlordnat1 (talk) 14:12, 3 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]