As we know, the English language doesn't have the /x/ phoneme anymore (at least in an everyday kind of context*) and the sound seems to have been dropped in many words, such as in light or eight.

However, consider the following words: laugh, tough, rough and cough. It strikes me as very odd that what was once a /x/ would turn into /f/; it seems much more likely to me that it would have shifted to /h/, /ʃ/ or even /g/ — but definitely not to a fricative at the front.

My question is: Has it been attested that /x/ shifted to /f/ in certain situations ? Is there an explanation for this phenomenon?

laugh is lachen in both German and Dutch with a /x/-like sound; rough is ruig in Dutch and ruuch in Swiss German (both with /x/). So there is some relation between /x/ and /f/, but it perplexes me.

(On an irrelevant note, I also notice that shaft is Schacht in German, but the whole ft vs. cht at the end of words seems to be more complicated and possibly independent from the /f/ in the words I mentioned in the second paragraph. There are some Dutch-German pairs where they systematically differ: {kracht, Kraft}, {lucht, Luft}, {stichting, Stiftung}. This is odd, too, but not in the scope of this question — or of this site for that matter.)

* disregarding all annoyed teenagers who use "ugh" excessively ;)

  • 1
    @RoryAlsop rough comes from Old English ruh which was pronounced /ruːx/. Can't find definitive evidence for laugh or cough. The word had hh in Old English and gh in Middle English from what I looked up. I don't know how they're pronounced, though. I just know the words I mentioned have cognates with /x/ and there seems to be some pattern.
    – ljacqu
    Commented Jul 18, 2014 at 14:14
  • 1
    EtymOnline.com confirms that laugh had a "hard -gh- sound" (as they call it) as well.
    – ljacqu
    Commented Jul 18, 2014 at 14:22
  • 3
    /x/ to /f/ is a shift from velar to labial which requires very little practical change (start with a continuous /x/ sound and bring the lower lip closer to your upper teeth). this has some more info (note that in some languages/cases the shift goes the other way round)
    – msam
    Commented Jul 18, 2014 at 14:51
  • 2
    Native speakers of different languages hear different phonemes as close to each other. For example, a German speaker once asked me why English-speaking people replace /x/ with /k/ (consider loch and Bach), since they sound nothing like each other. The best answer I could give him was that they sounded similar to English speakers, which didn't satisfy him at all. Presumably, /f/ was the closest-sounding phoneme to /x/ for English speakers when this change happened in Middle English. Commented Jul 18, 2014 at 15:05
  • 4
    Och, I think it's just sassenachs who've lost their /x/ Commented Jul 18, 2014 at 16:12

3 Answers 3


Not really answering "why" but here is "how":

This is called labial-velar shift and occurs in many other instances. Both /x/ and /f/ are fricatives and the change required to go from the velar /x/ to the labial /f/ or the other way round is pretty small (to make an /f/ start with an /x/ and touch lower lip to the upper teeth for, alternatively make an /f/ and open your mouth, you should end up with an /x/ ).

old english/old high german ruh -> english rough / german rau(this changed in a different manner in the case of german)

old english/old high german hlahhan -> english laugh / german lachen

it can also occur the other way round:

old high german luft -> dutch lucht

Much more detailed information can be found in this paper (as well as, I'm sure, other sources)

  • Interestingly, in Swiss German we still say ruuch for High German rau (English rough).
    – ljacqu
    Commented Jul 19, 2014 at 5:23

In most words where /x/ changed to /f/ in English, the sound came after a round vowel. We can therefore describe the change as labialization: the influence of another sound pronounced with the lips caused the fricative /x/ to change into a fricative pronounced with the lips.

In all of the words you list with /f/, laugh, tough, rough and cough, you'll notice the word is spelled with the letter "u" before the "gh" digraph. This is not a coincidence. During the Middle English period, the /x/ sound caused a preceding vowel to develop a "high vowel" sound after it, either [i̯] or [u̯], and this is reflected in the spelling – you'll almost always see the letter "i" or "u" before a "gh" that represents historical /x/. (These were not full syllables, but glides.) Which glide was inserted depended on the preceding vowel. After the front vowel /e/, an [i̯] was inserted. For /i/, it seems the vowel was simply lengthened. After the vowel /a/, a [u̯] was inserted. After /o/ and /u/, it seems that [u̯] was inserted; however, there were complicated vowel shifts in these words that I still don't understand, so it's possible that in some cases the vowel developed to a long monophthong /uː/. In any case, the resulting vowel or diphthong ended in a rounded component.

After this process of glide insertion, the glides were later eliminated in various ways. In most cases, they merged with the preceding vowel, and the /x/ was later lost. This is what happened in words like "caught." But in other cases, the glide merged with the following /x/ instead. The [u̯] glide can be classified as a labial sound, made with the lips, and it imparted this lability to the fricative /x/, resulting in a labiodental fricative /f/.

It's believed that an intermediate step in this process was the shifting of the labial glide from before the fricative /x/ to simultaneously with it, or even after it.

In the development of English [f] from earlier round vowels followed by [x], a crucial step was evidently a shift such as [ʷx] > [xʷ], in which labialization is realigned with the end of the fricative.

Origins of Sound Change: Approaches to Phonologization, by Alan C. L. Yu, 2013

There is independent evidence that the glide disappeared in words where /x/ became /f/: words like "laugh" and "draught" have the "short a" sound rather than the usual sound associated with the digraph "au."

There is at least one word in Standard English where /x/ developed to /f/ in a different environment: "dwarf," from Old English dweorg, dweorh. Here the /x/ was after /r/, rather than after a diphthong ending in [u̯] or a rounded vowel such as /uː/. It's unclear why this happened; from what I can see, the regular development would be something like dwarrow (compare to barrow from Old English beorg, beorh; or marrow from Old English mearg, mærh). Interestingly, the Oxford English Dictionary actually does take the position that the /f/ in dwarf is regular; the entry for that word compares it to parallel pronunciations of /bɑrf/ (barf, bargh) for barrow and /bʊrf/, /brʊf/ for borough. As far as I know, though, those pronunciations are only used in a minority of dialects.

So how to explain /f/ in words like these? It's possible that the preceding /r/ counted as a labializing environment, but it's hard to tell. Alternately, the general tendency towards labial-velar shift that msam mentions may have contributed to pronunciations with /f/ even in some non-labial environments.


Both /f/ and /x/ on occasion become /h/ though sound changes. Speaker A, being a little sloppy, pronounced "toux" with a final /h/. Speaker B, who did not ever say /x/ as /h/ himself, heard this "touh" and thought to himself, how sloppy! That guy must have been trying to say "touf" and turned the /f/ into /h/, but I shall be more careful than he is, and say it "touf", like it should be.

Well, it's just a theory.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.