Discussion Forum—A Way with Words, a fun radio show and podcast about language

For a number of years I have wondered why the name of the 23rd letter of the English alphabet is still pronounced “double-u”. “W” is different from all other letters in that all other letters have just one syllable, but “w” has three.

In our society today, when people are trying to do things faster and more efficiently, the letter “w” has surprisingly persisted despite its lengthy name. Its usage seems to continuously increase thanks to the pervasiveness of the internet; practically all website URLs begin with “www”. Everyone takes it in stride as they try to say “double-u double-u double-u dot…” The letters tend to get slurred together and sound messy, but everyone knows what is meant.

If English is the living language that we claim it to be, why wouldn't we be able to change the name of a letter?

I propose changing the name of the 23rd letter of the English alphabet to “dub”. It still retains a link to its origins, it is easier and quicker to say, and it falls in line with all of the other monosyllabic letters. You wouldn't have to change the alphabet song - you'd no longer have to blurt out the staccato ‘dub-ble-you' - it would make the ending more uniformly rhythmic. Web site URLs would be conveyed as “dub dub dub dot…” You see? It rolls off the tongue more easily and is a lot faster to say.

If people would prefer a name that reflects the sound that the letter makes, then it can be changed into something like “wuh” - pronounced like the beginning of “wonder”. This doesn't sound as good as “dub” when saying a URL, though: “wuh wuh wuh dot…”

As a Canadian, I tried to think of a name that rhymed with “zed”, but “wed” probably wouldn't be well-accepted… although, you could refer to two “u”s getting “wed”.