Edited by Richard Walker, Wednesday 19 November 2025 at 00:27
A phonestheme is when a large number of words that start with the same sound (most typically a consonatn pair) to have related meanings. The phenomenon was first noted by J. R. Firth in 1930. A classic example is fl-, which I remember being fascinated by when first reading about it. Here are some words beginning with this consonant pair fl-.
What all these have in common is some notion of movement, especially sudden or repetitive movement.
The Wikpedia article gives a number of other examples, such as cl-, e,g.clop, clap, cling, clasp, clutch, all to do with moving an object; and sn-, e.g. snort, snitch, snot, snout, snivel, snitch, sneeze, sniff, sneer, snore, snorkel, all nose-related.
So is there some real effect here, is there something inherently fluttery about fl-? If so, is there some deep psychological connect? Or it it mimetic; does "flutter sound like something fluttering? Or is it somehow to do with how we make a "fl" sound, do we flap our tongue when we pronounce it? (probably not). And then we know from historical evidence that words can influence other similar sounding words, so that could be at work too.
Is there even enough statistical evidence to support the idea that fl- carries a semantic load? Perhaps we are just (as people do) see in a pattern because we always look for them?
We might be able to provide some evidence by doing some clever statistical analysis, but it's slippery (there's another example of a phonestheme, sl-; slip, sled. slop, slime slither, slobber, sludge). But what criteria do we use to decide of a word belongs in the list? Should slow be counted? What about slag? Slant? Sleet? Slick?
I tried some rough experiments with the help of Copilot. It says
About 8–10% of common English words starting with “fl” relate to repeated or sudden movement.
Is that evidence. Well maybe. We'd have to come up with some list of representative and comparable (how to define what these mean?) semantic fields and see if 8-10% was unusually high.
Another of the examples in the Wikipedia articles is gl-, which is connected with shining or gleaming etc. I discussed this in a previous post A Little "Eggymology" and it is very likely to be a real connection but one that is simple to explain. The words probably all share an etymology and are descended from a PIE root *ghel-, "shining". So no profound mystery. This time Copilot tells me 6-7%. If the proportion for fl- words sharing the same semantic field is higher than that for gl- where (we think) an effect is known to exist what does that tell us? (But I haven't checjed Copilots findings.)
Another example quoted is stand, stable, state, stasis, but from memory this too is a group of words thought to have a common ancestry, a PIE root *sta-, "stand" or something like that.
So is a phonestheme a real thing? It's an intriguing concept, but the jury is still out. There seems to be a school of thought that believes it is just an illusion, but it seems too tat there are also serious scholars and ongoing research in support of there being something real in the idea. Either way I find it fascinating.
Phonesthemes. Do They Really Exist?
A phonestheme is when a large number of words that start with the same sound (most typically a consonatn pair) to have related meanings. The phenomenon was first noted by J. R. Firth in 1930. A classic example is fl-, which I remember being fascinated by when first reading about it. Here are some words beginning with this consonant pair fl-.
flit, flash, flutter, flung, flicker, flee, flip, flap, flare, flurry, fly, flow
What all these have in common is some notion of movement, especially sudden or repetitive movement.
The Wikpedia article gives a number of other examples, such as cl-, e,g. clop, clap, cling, clasp, clutch, all to do with moving an object; and sn-, e.g. snort, snitch, snot, snout, snivel, snitch, sneeze, sniff, sneer, snore, snorkel, all nose-related.
So is there some real effect here, is there something inherently fluttery about fl-? If so, is there some deep psychological connect? Or it it mimetic; does "flutter sound like something fluttering? Or is it somehow to do with how we make a "fl" sound, do we flap our tongue when we pronounce it? (probably not). And then we know from historical evidence that words can influence other similar sounding words, so that could be at work too.
Is there even enough statistical evidence to support the idea that fl- carries a semantic load? Perhaps we are just (as people do) see in a pattern because we always look for them?
We might be able to provide some evidence by doing some clever statistical analysis, but it's slippery (there's another example of a phonestheme, sl-; slip, sled. slop, slime slither, slobber, sludge). But what criteria do we use to decide of a word belongs in the list? Should slow be counted? What about slag? Slant? Sleet? Slick?
I tried some rough experiments with the help of Copilot. It says
About 8–10% of common English words starting with “fl” relate to repeated or sudden movement.
Is that evidence. Well maybe. We'd have to come up with some list of representative and comparable (how to define what these mean?) semantic fields and see if 8-10% was unusually high.
Another of the examples in the Wikipedia articles is gl-, which is connected with shining or gleaming etc. I discussed this in a previous post A Little "Eggymology" and it is very likely to be a real connection but one that is simple to explain. The words probably all share an etymology and are descended from a PIE root *ghel-, "shining". So no profound mystery. This time Copilot tells me 6-7%. If the proportion for fl- words sharing the same semantic field is higher than that for gl- where (we think) an effect is known to exist what does that tell us? (But I haven't checjed Copilots findings.)
Another example quoted is stand, stable, state, stasis, but from memory this too is a group of words thought to have a common ancestry, a PIE root *sta-, "stand" or something like that.
So is a phonestheme a real thing? It's an intriguing concept, but the jury is still out. There seems to be a school of thought that believes it is just an illusion, but it seems too tat there are also serious scholars and ongoing research in support of there being something real in the idea. Either way I find it fascinating.