I've always heard it pronounced /bɒld/ (rhymes with scald, for those of you who don't know IPA), however the dictionary and some of my friends say /bɔ:ld/ (rhymes with mauled). I'm British, by the way. Any insights? Please say where you're from with your answer.

  • 2
    mauled, bald, scald all have the same vowel (as in mauled) where I come from (US Upper Midwest by way of US East Coast). If I'm interpreting the IPA correctly, you're saying "bald" rhymes with "dolled" in your neck of the woods.
    – Hellion
    Jan 28, 2016 at 21:16
  • 3
    There are British speakers who don't rhyme bald and skald? I regularly learn something new from this site. (Of course, Brits will probably be equally surprised that there are Americans who don't rhyme cog and log.) Jan 28, 2016 at 21:19
  • 1
    @PeterShor Which parts of the US? Which one do they pronounce "weird" (i.e. not rhyming with hog, slog, bog, dog, etc).
    – Dan Bron
    Jan 28, 2016 at 21:25
  • 2
    With an 'o' as in dog: halt, vault, false, golf, doll, dolled. With 'or' as in torn: walk, sort
    – Renoized
    Jan 28, 2016 at 22:37
  • 1
    @sumelic: no. rolled has the same sound as bold. Short 'o' sound. As in cold, fold etc. Bowled has the longer vowel.
    – Charl E
    Jan 29, 2016 at 0:18

1 Answer 1


The pronunciation of "bald" as /bɔ:ld/ is older. What seems to have happened historically for some speakers of British English is phonemic shortening of the sound /ɔ:/ to /ɒ/ in some cases when it comes before a consonant cluster /lC/ (where C stands for any consonant). This change, and the resulting variation in pronunciation, is described in the following post on John Wells's phonetic blog: scolding water. Here is the relevant paragraph:

It is well known that words like salt can have either ɔː or ɒ. Although I have continued to prioritize ɔː in LPD I have to confess that the most recent poll I did on salt showed a sharp trend of change over time in the direction of ɒ. The youngest age group voted 71% for the LOT vowel. Only 34% of my own age group voted that way, which accounts for my bias in favour of THOUGHT in this and similar words (i.e. words in which the vowel is followed by l and a voiceless consonant — alter, false, fault, waltz etc.). Where the consonant after the lateral is voiced I believe there is less variation. Nevertheless I recall that my mother pronounced scald as skɒld, which was odd because she had the expected ɔː in bald, alder etc. (Why, even as a child, did I think her pronunciation of scald was odd?)

I also found this Livejournal post about it: scolding slurry, which suggests that it is connected to the loss of the LOT-CLOTH split in most modern forms of standard British English. Apparently, another environment where shortening occured was in words like austere (listed as having the CLOTH vowel /ɒ/ by the British Library). This shortening is further discussed in this article by Piotr Gąsiorowski: The History of [ɔː]: Is There Regular Orthographically Conditioned Sound Change?; Gąsiorowski mentions a few more words with exceptional /ɒ/ such as sausage, laurel and cauliflower. I'm not sure if any American dialects that maintain a distinction between the vowels of COT and CAUGHT show the effects of such shortening in salt and related words; it seems to be mainly a British phenomenon.

It appears that your dialect shows shortening of /ɔ:l/ before voiced consonants as well, such as /d/. But this does not apply before the secondary cluster /ld/ formed when verbs that end in /ɔ:l/ are followed by the past suffix /d/. (There are attested sound changes with conditions like this in some other dialects of English, such as the Scottish vowel length rule or the distinction between words like freeze/frees and bruise/brews in Geordie.)

So for you not only halt, vault, false, alternative /hɒlt/ /vɒlt/ /fɒls/ /ɒlt.../, but also bald, scald /bɒld/ /scɒld/ have the same vowel as golf, doll, dolled /gɒlf/ /dɒl/ /dɒld/. But walk, maul, mauled /wɔ:k/ /mɔ:l/ /mɔ:ld/ have the same /ɔ:/ as torn, sort: they were not shortened because the first one lacks a pronounced /l/, the second one lacks a consonant after the /l/, and the third one has a consonant cluster only across morpheme boundaries.

The Oxford English dictionary (OED) lists alternative pronunciations with /ɒl/ instead of /ɔ:l/ for halt, vault, false, fault; but not for bald and scald. This fits with what Wells says about most speakers only having shortening before clusters of l + a voiceless consonant. However, there also seems to be some word-by-word variation, as in the case of Wells's mother.

Unfortunately, there's not a huge amount of evidence for the outcome of words with /ɔ:l/ followed by a voiced consonant, because I can't find any other common words that end with auld/ald. But here are some test words with this sound in the middle of a word; I'd be interested in knowing how you (or any other British English speakers) pronounce them:

  • cauldron (OED only lists /ɔ:l/)
  • alder/alderman/alderwoman (OED lists /ɔ:l/ and /ɒl/)
  • baldric (OED only lists /ɔ:l/)
  • thraldom (OED only lists /ɔ:l/; I'd assume the morpheme juncture means no one uses /ɒl/)

This analysis is just based on your described pronunciations. I have no personal experience with this; I'm American with the COT-CAUGHT merger, so I have /ɑ/ in all of these words.

  • 1
    I'm a Brit, SSBE speaker. I have /ɒ/ in [ halt, vault, false, alternative] as well as [doll] and [dolled], but I have /ɔ:/ in [bald] as well as [scald]. However, many dictionaries give /ɔ:/ for [false]. It wouldn't surprise me if there were a substantial number of people who say /ɒ/ in [bald]. I'll look it up in LPD tomorrow. Just off the top of my head, I can't think of any words which - I think - I or my SSBE peers here in London would pronounce /ɒld/ at the end, unless the /d/ was a suffix. Jan 29, 2016 at 0:21
  • The problem with /ɒ/ in bald and scald is that it causes ambiguity in meaning because of the existence of bold and scold. "He was a /bɒld/ man" - it really could be either if you don't know that the speaker favours /bɔ:ld/.
    – Tim Down
    Sep 6, 2017 at 10:32
  • @TimDown: Well, that's only true for speakers that merge /oʊl/ into /ɒl/ in that context.
    – herisson
    Sep 6, 2017 at 11:57

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.