How can one devoid of context distinguish between prints and prince? Or drawings and draw rings? Are they actually meant to sound the same? A frequent phenomenon known as ‘epenthesis’ conveys both the versatility of phonology and its ability to prompt misunderstandings. To what extent are learners exposed to this in the ELT classroom? The current article provides a reminder of key phonological features of this concept and their relevance to language education.
Terms, terms, terms
‘Epenthesis’ refers to the insertion of a sound or letter within a word or phrase, and can either be a consonant or a vowel (Oxford Reference, 2018). The former is known as ‘excrescence’ while the latter is termed ‘anaptyxis’, which is also sometimes used interchangeably with epenthesis (Crowley, 1997). This practice contrasts with elision, which conveys omission in lieu of insertion of sounds. The first known use of the term dates back to 1543, originating in Late Latin from the Greek for ‘insert a letter’, epentithenai (Merriam-Webster, 2025). A distinction has also been made between different types of epenthesis. If it takes place in the first syllable, it is known as ‘prothesis’ while ‘paragoge’ occurs in the last syllable. It can also happen between two syllabic sounds, however.
From theory to practice
How do these metalinguistic terms convey what occurs in practice? The intrusive ‘r’ provides evidence of excrescence in order to separate vowels and therefore avoid a hiatus. Examples of this include draw(r)ing or withdraw(r)al. This is common in non-rhotic varieties of English such as Standard British English. As we know, this can be all the more confusing for learners when the ‘r’ is placed between words in a phrase such as: criteria(r) in the document. Duran (1997) showed how American speakers from Eastern Massachusetts would say, ‘I’m gonna(r) ask’ or even ‘a lotta(r) apples’ in lieu of ‘a lot of apples’, suggesting the intrusive ‘r’ can even replace other consonants.
Adding consonants does not occur solely to separate vowels, however, as the ability to bridge consonant clusters exemplifies. Cases in point include the addition of ‘p’ in some(p)thing, ham(p)ster and warm(p)th, or of ‘t’ in prin(t)s and fen(t)ce. Research has shown that the ‘stop epenthesis’ is more common in certain varieties of English than in other ones, such as South African and American mid-Western (Fourakis & Port, 1986). As regards vowels, Crowley (1997) underlined the frequency of the ‘schwa’ sound to bridge consonant clusters in words such as /f ɪl əm/ for film. Anaptyxis is also common in Tok Pisin, Papua New Guinea’s English-based creole, where black becomes bilak or blue is bulu.
Adding as an error
The distinction between acceptable practice and error becomes all the more convoluted when one observes epenthesis in other contexts. Research suggests that Egyptian Arabic speakers of English, for instance, often add / ɪ/ after the first consonant in words such as break or place, mirroring anaptyxis by Farsi speakers when plight sounds like polite (Boucchioua, 2019) or Bengali speakers in words like flat or front (Karim, 2010). Anaptyxis is also used by Egyptian Arabic speakers when they add the vowel before consonant clusters in words like study or special (Broselow, 1987), as occurs with Spanish speakers when school becomes / əsku ːl/ and snow becomes / əsne ʊ/. Korean learners, on the other hand, have been reported to make use of paragoge by adding the vowel at the end of the word, prompting /l ʌgid ʒi/ for luggage (Jenkins, 2000), mirroring the Italian /b ɪg ə/ for big (Avery & Ehrlich, 1992). L1 interference has also prompted Greek learners to pronounce juggle like jungle or fodder as fonder, exemplifying the use of excrescence in production (Avery & Ehrlich, 1992).
The extent to which these should be considered errors or merely a mark of cultural identity akin to the aforementioned varieties of English, however, is subject to debate, and appears to hinge on the potential to prompt misunderstandings. If it is not considered an error by the educator on the grounds that it doesn’t resemble other English words, learners should still be made aware of nuances like these ones as they can hinder reception, production and interaction.
In the classroom
Why and when does raising awareness of epenthesis in the classroom matter? The phonetic transcriptions provided by dictionaries typically focus on major standard varieties of English and therefore overlook other ones, prompting the omission of the added sound. More strikingly, the sound is omitted in situations that are actually common in the standard varieties that most language courses focus on. This may leave language learners unaware of the fact that drawing / ˈdr ɔːɪŋ/ often does include an ‘r’ sound, which can impact listening skills.
Songs can provide learners with suitable models to raise awareness of such phonological intrusions. The Beatles hit ‘A Day in the Life’ has John Lennon singing ‘I saw a film today’ where ‘saw’ practically sounds like ‘sore’, reflecting the use of the intrusive ‘r’. Similarly, Billy Joel sings ‘Brenda(r) and Eddie’ in his ‘Scenes from an Italian Restaurant’ while fans of Justin Bieber might find his reference to prominent poet ‘Maya(r) Angelou’ in ‘Beauty and the Beast’ more relevant to their interests. The latter example shows how the practice even occurs with full names, which can confuse L2 listeners. When it comes to epenthesis stemming from speakers of other languages, the use of podcasts or documentaries featuring speakers from different countries beyond the English-speaking world can expose learners to such subtleties which may otherwise go unnoticed. Needless to say, knowledge of the local context can provide useful information with regard to the speakers that learners are more likely to encounter, what they would struggle with and what should be prioritised.
Conclusion
Raising awareness of epenthesis can provide learners with a clearer picture of phonological nuances which shape interaction. Epenthesis serves as a vivid reminder of a practice that both standard and non-standard varieties have in common, regardless of their differences. Such insertions on behalf of L1 speakers may be a given in their context of use but this is not necessarily the case for L2 learners who are not used to intrusive ‘r’s and the like. Furthermore, the additions on behalf of L2 speakers which do not lead to misunderstandings can act as an additional challenge in the increasingly multicultural and multilingual classroom.
