# A/an:  historic, historian, historical, hotel, humanitarian, Hawaiian, honour, herb, hypothesis, etc



## drei_lengua

<< This is a composite thread formed by merging several on the same topic - or very similar topics.  The humanitarian thread starts at #61 >>


I was recently reading an article and came across the phrase "an historic". Shouldn't it be "a historic"? I know that "a" precedes vowels and other letters sometimes pronounced like vowels (e.g. "h" in herb) but with "historic" the "h" is pronounced.

Thanks in advance,
drei_lengua


----------



## Kmanx

according to rules  "a historic" is the proper one      but now a days both are valid


----------



## drei_lengua

Thanks Kmanx.

Could this be British English?  I read "an historic" in The Economist.  Maybe the pronunciation in BE makes the "h" silent thus justifying the use of "an" for the letter "i".

Thanks again,
drei_lengua


----------



## Brioche

the system is:
if the stress does not fall on the first syllable, then *an* rather than *a* is used. The h is not silent.

a h*i*story of England. 
an hist*o*rical timeline.
an hist*o*rian of note 

a h*y*sterisis curve
an hyst*e*rical outburst

a h*o*spital
an hosp*i*tible working environment

Just to be different, in BE the h in _herb _is not silent,
so in BE *a herb,*   in AE *an herb* (silent h)

a h*e*rb  (pronounce the h in BE)
an herb*a*rium (pronounce the h in BE)


----------



## drei_lengua

Brioche said:
			
		

> the system is:
> if the stress does not fall on the first syllable, then *an* rather than *a* is used. The h is not silent.
> 
> a h*i*story of England.
> an hist*o*rical timeline.
> an hist*o*rian of note
> 
> a h*y*sterisis curve
> an hyst*e*rical outburst
> 
> a h*o*spital
> an hosp*i*tible working environment


 
Just what I was looking for.     Thanks.

drei_lengua


----------



## MrPedantic

In British English, most people say "a historic", "a hospitable", "a hotel", etc.

However, a minority of BrE-speakers do use "an" before an unstressed, voiced H. (Some people regard this as "affectation".)

In written English, it's a little more tricky. Many people who would say "a historic" write "_an_ historic", because they feel it's somehow more "correct". 

MrP

PS: There are of course many regional versions of English where the H is _un_voiced; in which case, "an 'istoric" is heard.


----------



## panjandrum

My choice of a or an before historic depends on one of two things.
If I am writing for me, how does it sound to me?
If I am writing for someone else, what is their house style.

I think I'd go for an historic, given a free choice.  Some people do indeed consider this an affectation, but I'm used to that and I don't intend changing now


----------



## Outsider

I think it's clear that for some English speakers the 'h' _is_ silent. Thus, they say "an historic".


----------



## GenJen54

I've noted that in many early 19th Century British novels I've read (Jane Austen as of late), the "an + h" construction was very commonly used. 

Obviously, this has evolved for the most part.  I am assuming that even then, the proper pronunciation was:

an *h*istoric (voiced "h") 
as opposed to an (h)istoric (unvoiced "h")


----------



## Outsider

GenJen54 said:
			
		

> I am assuming that even then, the proper pronunciation was:
> 
> an *h*istoric (voiced "h")
> as opposed to an (h)istoric (unvoiced "h")


Why do you assume that?


----------



## fenixpollo

As an historian, I tend to gloss over the "h" and not give it the same breathy weight it receives when I pronounce "history" and "homophone."  I don't feel that my dialect of Western U.S. English is affected.

It's also a matter of convention -- in university history departments, I suspect that "an historian" and "an historic" are pretty common (since that's where I learned it).  It's so ingrained in me that it doesn't sound right to me to say "a historian" ("ey *H*istorian").

Cheers!


----------



## Outsider

Or "uh historian", Fenix. "Ay historian" is emphatic.


----------



## fenixpollo

maybe you're right -- I would probably say "uh Historian" normally, and "ey Historian" to be emphatic.


----------



## DaleC

"An historic" is a venerable *mistake *that some people insist on preserving. 
It would seem that at some point in the 1800s in Britain certain speakers started dropping the 'h' from the pronunciation of 'history', 'historic'. At least, this is the only justification for saying and writing 'an historic', 'an historical'. But these were educated people, not people speaking some regional dialect where initial 'h' was dropped regularly. 

English spelling does of course have a handful of words (honest, honor, hour) in which a long since disappeared initial 'h' is spelled anyway. But "history" was not one of these words. 

In America, you will hear some pathetic people say "an historical", *pronouncing the 'h'*! These individuals would never say "an house". They just dutifully place 'an' before 'historic', 'historical' because they were so taught, despite that it doesn't correspond to their own pronunciation. 



			
				drei_lengua said:
			
		

> I was recently reading an article and came across the phrase "an historic". Shouldn't it be "a historic"? I know that "a" precedes vowels and other letters sometimes pronounced like vowels (e.g. "h" in herb) but with "historic" the "h" is pronounced.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> drei_lengua


----------



## fenixpollo

DaleC said:
			
		

> It would seem that at some point in the 1800s in Britain certain speakers started dropping the 'h' from the pronunciation of 'history', 'historic'. At least, this is the only justification for saying and writing 'an historic', 'an historical'. But these were educated people, not people speaking some regional dialect where initial 'h' was dropped regularly.
> 
> English spelling does of course have a handful of words (honest, honor, hour) in which a long since disappeared initial 'h' is spelled anyway. But "history" was not one of these words.


 The "H" in "history" is aspirate because the stress is on the first syllable, just like in "house".  

The "h" in "historian", "historic", "historical" can be silent because the stress is on the second syllable.  

So, was dropping the "h" at the beginning of a word only for the uneducated, until the misguided "silent h" fad of the 1800's led the educated classes to start this practice?  

And what about "honor", "honorable", "honored", "honorary" and "honorific"?


----------



## Black_Mamba

Gah the English language is so complicated. For example, whilst Brioche would say an hospital environment, I would say a hospital environment. The usage depends on so many things, who you are around (For example, if you were with the Queen, one might sound somewhat posh and say an, or if you were hanging around with a load of youths you might say a, with lots of swearwords around it lol) I think it also depends upon class. Those from an upper class society would be likely to say an, as opposed to the lower class who would stereotypically say a. Just my thoughts. (No offense meant to anyone who does take offense! Tries to put that as politely as I could!)


----------



## DaleC

fenixpollo said:
			
		

> The "h" in "historian", "historic", "historical" can be silent because the stress is on the second syllable.


That's very interesting, I hadn't seen that! Using Google: 6 million hits for "an historical", 0.1 million for "an hysterical", 0.02 million for "an histrionic". (see http://www.grammartips.homestead.com/historical.html) But now that you mention it, this phonological process seems to be unconstrained by lexicon and grammar. For it also generates "when 'e went" from "when he went" (provided of course that "he" is unstressed"). So there's still no strong justification for *writing *the optional automatic sound change. 

I should emphasize that this process doesn't exist is restricted in my dialect. I pronounce 'a habitual', 'a historic', but with a less breathy 'h'. But I DO drop the 'h' in an environment like "when he went".


----------



## MrPedantic

The only "an/a historic" quotation in the Shorter Oxford seems to be from Walpole (i.e. C18), "an historic painter". 

However, the entry on "historical" uses "a _historical treatise_" and "a _historical play_" among its examples. Similarly, the entry for "historic" uses "a historic work, picture, subject, etc." for the substantive.

Among significant native pre-1914 authors available as e-texts, I find "an historic" in Kingsley, Wilde, Synge, Henry James (AmE), Wharton (AmE); "a historic" in Stevenson, Kingsley (again), George Eliot. 

Neither form seems to feature in Jane Austen's best-known works; though "an hotel" turns up in _Persuasion_. (Perhaps JA favoured a "French" pronunciation.) I don't have a copy of her "History of England", though, which seems the most likely location.

"An hospitable" features in Swift and Conrad (not quite native); "a hospitable" in Dickens, Trollope, Collins, Kingsley, Wharton (AmE), Twain (AmE), George Eliot, Shaw, Stevenson, Thackeray, Hawthorne (AmE), Lamb, Gibbon, Scott, Henry James (AmE), Irving (AmE).

But "hóspitable" may well have been the preferred pronunciation for the latter set of authors.

Purely on the basis of my own limited experience, I would guess that "an historical" is more common among speakers of Irish or American English.

MrP


----------



## cuchuflete

Hi Dale,

A small, maybe not very pertinent aside...I suspect that the relative frequency of the terms you looked at in google is a function of the frequency distribution of the words themselves, with or without 'an' or 'a'.

Let's have a look:

historical: *337,000,000* 
histerical:  *47,000* (lots of bad spelling in google?)
hysterical: *6,630,000
*histrionic:    *603,000


*




			
				DaleC said:
			
		

> That's very interesting, I hadn't seen that! Using Google: 6 million hits for "an historical", 0.1 million for "an hysterical", 0.02 million for "an histrionic". (see http://www.grammartips.homestead.com/historical.html) But now that you mention it, this phonological process seems to be unconstrained by lexicon and grammar. For it also generates "when 'e went" from "when he went" (provided of course that "he" is unstressed"). So there's still no strong justification for *writing *the optional automatic sound change.
> 
> I should emphasize that this process doesn't exist is restricted in my dialect. I pronounce 'a habitual', 'a historic', but with a less breathy 'h'. But I DO drop the 'h' in an environment like "when he went".


----------



## panjandrum

MrPedantic said:
			
		

> [...] Purely on the basis of my own limited experience, I would guess that "an historical" is more common among speakers of Irish or American English.
> MrP


Why, thank you Mr P - for leaving that escape route for me


----------



## Kelly B

MrPedantic said:
			
		

> I would guess that "an historical" is more common among speakers of Irish or American English.


Who, us? not with that n in there. Otherwise, yeah, probably.


----------



## river

According to Fowler, the recommended pattern is _an historic(al)_, _an historian_, but _a history_. (_The New Fowler's Modern English Usage_. Revised 3rd ed. Edited by R.W. Burchfield. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.)

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary says that we can use _an_ before an _h-_ word that begins with an unstressed syllable. Thus, we might say an hisTORical. Many writers prefer to use_* a*_ consistently.The choice is a matter of personal taste. _An_ does roll off the tongue easier, doesn't it?


----------



## Brioche

DaleC said:
			
		

> "An historic" is a venerable *mistake *that some people insist on preserving.
> It would seem that at some point in the 1800s in Britain certain speakers started dropping the 'h' from the pronunciation of 'history', 'historic'. At least, this is the only justification for saying and writing 'an historic', 'an historical'. But these were educated people, not people speaking some regional dialect where initial 'h' was dropped regularly.
> 
> English spelling does of course have a handful of words (honest, honor, hour) in which a long since disappeared initial 'h' is spelled anyway. But "history" was not one of these words.
> 
> In America, you will hear some pathetic people say "an historical", *pronouncing the 'h'*! These individuals would never say "an house". They just dutifully place 'an' before 'historic', 'historical' because they were so taught, despite that it doesn't correspond to their own pronunciation.


 
It should be remembered that in old English, there was no "indefinite article"*.* Just like modern German, they used the number one, which was *an.*

Over time *an* was weakened to *a* before consonants - even before vowels in some dialects.

Compare *mine *and *thine,* which became *my* and *thy* before consonants, and remained _mine_ and_thine_ before vowels for a while.
This "mid-term" usage is preserved in old hymns - e.g. _Mine eyes have seen the coming of the glory of the Lord._
Then the adjective _mine_ became _my_ everywhere, and the pronoun _mine_ remained _mine. _
_e.g. That is my book. That book is mine._

I plead guilty to being one of those "pathetic" individuals who says "an historic". 

But my withers are unwrung. I reckon that "an historic" trips off the tongue, whereas "a historic" jerks. You may jerk, but I'll stay euphonic.


----------



## MrPedantic

Kelly B said:
			
		

> Who, us? not with that n in there. Otherwise, yeah, probably.


 
Sorry, I should have been more specific: "more common among AmE speakers than it is among BrE speakers". But this is only based on personal observation. I expect it's nonsense.

On the question of Fowler, the original 1926 edition (i.e. the only edition which is entirely Fowler's own) says:

"..._an_ was formerly usual before an unaccented syllable beginning with h..., but now that the h in such words is pronounced the distinction has become pedantic, & _a historical_ should be said & written..."​Fowler is extremely BrE-centric, though.

On the question of "an hospitable", I'm reliably informed that it has indeed been sighted in _Sense and Sensibility_; so maybe the e-text I searched had been "modernized" in some way.

MrP


----------



## foxfirebrand

Brioche said:
			
		

> I reckon that "an historic" trips off the tongue, whereas "a historic" jerks. You may jerk, but I'll stay euphonic.


That's the bottom line for me too.  I'll add that "an historic occasion" is something of a set phrase in AE, often juiced up with a "truly."  The stuff said about the elided "h" in "he" (after a consonant) was very pertinent-- and it implies to me that "an" before words beginning with an "h" is not commonly heard in AE.  So why should it be written that way?

Huh!  I just wrote *an* "h."  
.


----------



## panjandrum

Ah - river and Brioche are also saving my sanity.  I am Fowlerless at present, so it comes a a relief to see river quoting the NFMEU as supporting an historical and an historic - and of course - a history


----------



## ElaineG

Count me among the pathetic or affected or whatever it is. I can't imagine saying "a historical", or "a h", for that matter, *fox*.  "A h" just sounds like a lot of grunting to me.


----------



## gian_eagle

this is very confusing indeed. "An historical" is silent or not?


----------



## panjandrum

A "h" doesn't sound grunty if pronounced "A haitch", as it often is here.


----------



## Brioche

gian_eagle said:
			
		

> this is very confusing indeed. "An historical" is silent or not?


 
the *H* in *h*istorical is *not* silent.


----------



## te gato

You can use both..and be correct...it is personal preference..
Rule- use 'an' before words that start with a vowel or a vowel like sound..(an hour..an honor)and 'a' before consonants (a horse..a house)...
as for historic..you can use 'an historic' if you stress the 'tor' part of the word...or..'a historic' if you stress the 'his'...
tg


----------



## Brioche

te gato said:
			
		

> 'a historic' if you stress the 'his'...
> tg


 
but you _don't_ stress the 'his'.. in historic !!!


----------



## fenixpollo

Brioche said:
			
		

> the *H* in *h*istorical is *not* silent.


 Only if it "historical" stands alone.  

_Historically_ (hard "h"), _Hitler is considered to have had a negative effect on Europe._

But in my pronunciation, the the *H* is often swallowed by the sounds around it and is not heard.

_This moment has yet to be placed in an historical_ (silent "h") _context. _
_This moment has yet to be placed in a historical_ (soft, not-silent "h" preceded by schwa "uh" pronunciation of "a") _context_. 

My thumbs above do not imply that the last example is wrong... merely that I prefer the first of these two examples.

_Hitler and his hordes happened to have hurt hundreds of hound dogs._
/Hitler and 'is hordes happened to '3ve hurt hundreds of hound dogs./

_The historical_ (nearly silent "h") _ramifications of this moment have yet to be fully understood._

I'm having trouble figuring out if there is a rule or a vague guideline that my pronunciation of "h" follows.  Meaning: I can't explain it, I just do it.

Something I can explain: When referring to one letter "h", we say "an aych" (or "an aitch") because the name of the letter begins with a vowel sound.


----------



## gian_eagle

thankyou cousin pollo! good explanation!


----------



## Tabac

Brioche said:
			
		

> the system is:
> if the stress does not fall on the first syllable, then *an* rather than *a* is used. The h is not silent.
> 
> quote]I have never heard of this. All I can find in six different sources mention only vowel/non-vowel following a(n). Can you cite an authority? I must have missed something.


----------



## boonognog

MrPedantic said:
			
		

> Purely on the basis of my own limited experience, I would guess that "an historical" is more common among speakers of Irish or American English.



Purely on the basis of my own limited experience, I disagree, as regards speakers of American English, in casual conversation.

In public (i.e., formal) discussions or presentations, people often speak in a manner that is not customary for them in informal conversation.  Call it affectation if you must.

(My guess is that the urge to use 'an' before 'historical' goes back to the Norman influence in England.  'House', on the other hand, is an older, native English word, so the Norman influence would have been weaker.  But I don't know that this has ever been explored as a possibility.)


----------



## boonognog

Tabac said:
			
		

> I have never heard of this. All I can find in six different sources mention only vowel/non-vowel following a(n). Can you cite an authority? I must have missed something.



The rule, more correctly, is not about vowels per se, but rather vowel *sounds*.

So *honest *is preceded with 'an' -- _an honest answer_.  But *huge *is preceded with 'a' -- _a huge increase_.


----------



## fenixpollo

I've heard "huge" pronounced with a silent "h" in some speakers of the Northern dialect of AE (Matthew Broderick comes to mind).  I agree that, while "an historic" might be more common in AE than in BE, it is not said by a majority of AE-speakers.  Therefore, I supposed that it could easily be seen as pedantic or affected.  I will continue to use it, however, until I become an historical artifact.


----------



## Outsider

Why should the "wrong" pronunciation be considered pedantic?


----------



## GenJen54

Dr. Grammar cites both the _Oxford Dictionary of American Usasge and Style, _and Fowler in his treatise of the conundrum. Unfortunately, it appears as if there is no solid "correct" answer to the problem, at least in AE. 

Fenixpollo's use is obviously more "industry specific" to his field of study/line of work, and thereby more widely accepted among his peers.

The rest of us just have to muddle through as best as we can.

*Edit*:  I've also heard "huge" pronounced as euge, likewise "Houston" pronounced as ewe-ston.


----------



## DaleC

Brioche said:
			
		

> I plead guilty to being one of those "pathetic" individuals who says "an historic".
> 
> But my withers are unwrung. I reckon that "an historic" trips off the tongue, whereas "a historic" jerks. You may jerk, but I'll stay euphonic.



Just to confirm that we're talking about the same things: I disapprove of "an Historic", not "an 'istoric". Although I don't speak the latter, I don't disapprove of it.


----------



## DaleC

Brioche said:
			
		

> the *H* in *h*istorical is *not* silent.



It's not silent for *some* individual speakers, or for *some* dialects. 

As fenixpollo noted in post #15, in some dialects, only stressed syllables can start with 'h'. This is the (unconscious) phonological reason to have "an 'istoric".


----------



## MrPedantic

In the Preface to his 1485 edn of Malory, Caxton writes:

As for the Paynyms, they were tofore the Incarnacyon of Cryst, whiche were named, the fyrst Hector of Troye, of whome *th'ystorye* is comen bothe in balade and in prose, the second Alysaunder the Grete, and the thyrd Julyus Cezar, Emperour of Rome, of whome *th'ystoryes* ben wel knowen and had.​In the previous paragraph, however, he writes "...the noble *hystorye*". 

This suggests to me that the H in "history" (and related words) was originally silent (at least in some dialects), as in their modern French equivalents. Perhaps our "an" is indeed a relic of that early usage (as was suggested by Fowler 1926, in the passage quoted above).

On the question of the physical effort involved in saying "a historical" (I think it was described as "grunting"), I note that if I pronounce "a historical" in my poor attempt at an American accent, it does indeed feel slightly uncomfortable; maybe because the "i" in "hist-" is more distinctly pronounced, in AmE, and the vowel in "-or-" is different. 

If I pronounce it in a normal southern British accent, on the other hand, it feels much easier: the schwa of "a" glides happily into the near-schwa of BrE "hist-"; and since the vowel in "-or-" is lower in the mouth, very little throat movement is required.

(Apologies for the somewhat over-detailed description of my guttural 
arrangements.)

MrP


----------



## BasedowLives

Outsider said:
			
		

> Why should the "wrong" pronunciation be considered pedantic?




it wasn't said that it "should" be considered pedantic.

but if the wrong pronunciation has a holier than thou connotation (which i suppose to easily offended people it might), of course it's going to seem pedantic.  of course i don't think that saying it like that is, i'm just trying to explain this point of view.  

i probably say both of them not knowingly.  because saying uh historical, and an historical (without breathing the H) both sound fine to me.


----------



## Outsider

I just thought it was ironic that people who used a pronunciation nowadays considered _inferior_ (by some) would act holier-than-thou... 
But looking back I think I had misunderstood Fenixpollo's point, which was that the pronunciation "an (h)istorical" might be seen as pedantic because _few people_ use it.


----------



## Brioche

Tabac said:
			
		

> Brioche said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the system is:
> if the stress does not fall on the first syllable, then *an* rather than *a* is used. The h is not silent.
> 
> quote]I have never heard of this. All I can find in six different sources mention only vowel/non-vowel following a(n). Can you cite an authority? I must have missed something.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Yes, you have missed something! MrP's post further up the thread!*
> 
> Quote from MrP
> On the question of *Fowler*, the original 1926 edition (i.e. the only edition which is entirely Fowler's own) says:
> 
> *"...an was formerly usual before an unaccented syllable beginning with h...,* ​The Fowler referred to here is Fowler's *Modern English Usage*
Click to expand...


----------



## fenixpollo

Outsider said:
			
		

> But looking back I think I had misunderstood Fenixpollo's point, which was that the pronunciation "an (h)istorical" might be seen as pedantic because _few people_ use it.


 I should say you did!  I was admitting that I am probably in the minority by saying, as Dale put it, "an 'istoric", and that I care not one whit that people find me pedantic.  I don't see that as a holier-than-thou attitude, because I'm not saying that my way is better.  I'm just arguing that my way is equally valid.

On a more philosophical note, that which is pedantic is, in one sense of the definition, inherently wrong; since the definition of pedantic is that it is a "narrow" focus on "trivia;" and since many people consider wrong anything that deviates from the norm.  

The irony is that stubborn insistence about the correctness of one particular answer is one common pitfall of perfectionist pedants.


----------



## laurahya

My mother and I saw an advertisement for 'A Hawaiian Experience' the other day, and proceeded to have an argument about whether or not it should be '*An* Hawaiian...' (yes, this is what we have arguments about in my house  )

It set me to wondering what is current for English-speakers these days. I know that 50 years ago you would always hear '*an*' before an aspirated '*h*', but nowadays I for one certainly don't do it, and I know many other people that don't. What would the rest of you say? For those of you who have learned English, what were you taught?

Thanks in advance...


----------



## kayokid

Hello.
I always use "a" before an pronounced (aspirated) "h" and "an" before a silent "h". I would therefore agree with the advertisement that you quoted, because the "H" in Hawaii is pronounced. This is what was taught to us in school as kids as well. I do notice that times and pronunciation/rules/uses of the language are changing, probably in part because people are apt to use a more colloquial/slangy form of speech. One other interesting point is the very often seen "an historical event..." which in my mind is dead wrong because I pronounce the "h" (although it is considered the correct form by purists).


----------



## petereid

This question a rose recently about "an" or "a" before "hotel" I and most of my aquaintences say "an hotel"  I wouild write it like that 
When I read out loud this post, I said "an Hawaiian". Otherwise I have to force a pause before the H  like a glottal stop. But I don't have to force a pause in saying  "a horse"  or "a hose pipe"  even though I aspitate the "H"
It could be how I learned it as a child. I can half understand the "an Hotel" from its french origins. But "an Hawaiian"??   Help


----------



## Whodunit

I was taught to use "an" before pronounced vowels and "a" before pronounced consonants, and that's how I still do it. I say:

a horse/home
an hour/honor
a unit/unicorn
an udder/upside down question mark

But your "Hawaiian" thing makes me doubt. I'd read and write "a Hawaiian" (Word agrees with the "an" version), but if I were to pronounce it most fluently, I'd insert an almost mute "n". If I pronounce the glottal stop before the "a" exaggeratedly, then there's no problem for me to say "a hotel". However, if the aspirated "H" is followed by an "a", it's better to insert the "n":

an Hawaiian
an hang-over
an hand

It seems to be easier to pronounce "a hand" if the "a" gets an exaggerated American "pat" of pronunciation [æ].

Interesting topic, indeed!


----------



## kayokid

I would also like to point out that the majority of AE speakers pronounce the indefinite article like a grunt "uh" (sorry I don't know the correct phonetic symbol) and not like the name of the letter (which would rhyme with the word "day"). There was a rule (I think) to this variation as I recall but I don't remember it now. This may also have some relationship to how people see the a/an variation.


----------



## timpeac

laurahya said:
			
		

> I know that 50 years ago you would always hear '*an*' before an aspirated '*h*',


 
Really, are you sure? Are you not just thinking of words such as "hotel" and "history" that purists continue to pronounce "an" to reflect their Latin roots (and, I would have thought, don't actually pronounce the "h" either).


----------



## daviesri

Whodunit said:
			
		

> I was taught to use "an" before pronounced vowels and "a" before pronounced consonants, and that's how I still do it. I say:
> 
> a horse/home
> an hour/honor
> a unit/unicorn
> an udder/upside down question mark


 
I agree with Whodunit.  These are the rules I have always been taught and used.  

I also agree with kayokid in that I would probably pronounce it as "uh Hawaiian" vs "a Hawaiian'.  You definitely would not hear the "n".


----------



## Brioche

Some people (me for instance) use *an* before an aspirated H is the stress is not on the first syllable.

For example.
This *a* HIS-tory of England written by *an* his-TOR-ian who was raised in France.

This is *an *ha-WAI-ian shirt which I bought in *a* HO-no-lu-lu shopping mall.


----------



## panjandrum

As far as I am concerned, the use of a or an is a matter of speech convenience.  If your pronunciation of Hawaii makes it difficult to say a Hawaiian, then you say an Hawaiian, you write an Hawaiian, and I understand more about how you say Hawaiian.

For me, this should not be a matter of blindly following an apparent rule.

On the other hand, if I happened to be writing for an organisation known to favour an Hawaiian, then nothing would persuade me to write it any other way.  That is a different kind of rule


----------



## kayokid

This is extremely interesting to me. I have never heard of such rules (as quoted by Brioche) nor have I ever heard a native AE speaker use such a pronunciation. For me, the "h" is aspirated in ... a history of England... and in ...written by a historian... and therefore I personally would always use simply "a". The same goes for ... a Hawaiian shirt... I would say from my own personal point of view  an Hawaiian, an hangover and an hand are absolutely incorrect since the "h" is pronounced. I have never heard this said with the indefinite article "an". I would give these examples to further illustrate my point of view: a home, a hotel, a horse and a healthy person (and never an in the preceding examples); an apple, an elephant, an island and an ocean (and never "a" in these examples).I believe this correctly illustrates how we speak in the US. If it is of interest, I am in the Midwest (Chicago).


----------



## mstewie08

i thinks its pretty easy. if the first letter makes a consonental-i hop thats a word- sound then u use an a before it. if it makes a vowell sound, u use an an. 

an apple
a duck
a huh-why-in vacation
an idaho tater

so the a hawaiian was proper english.


----------



## Brioche

mstewie08 said:
			
		

> *I* thinks it*'*s pretty easy. *I*f the first letter makes a conson*a*ntal-i hop that*'*s a word- sound then *yo*u use an a before it. *I*f it makes a vowe*l *sound, *yo*u use an an.
> 
> an apple
> a duck
> a huh-why-in vacation
> an *I*daho tater
> 
> so the a *H*awaiian was proper *E*nglish.


 
*There is nothing improper about my English!!!*

You say tom-ay-to and I say tom-ah-to.
You don't pronouce the h in herb, and I do.

I also pronounce *the* as /ði:/ before words which start with a vowel, 
and also in the same places where I use an.

long e : 
th*e* apple, an apple
th*e* historian, an historian

schwa : 
thə dog, a dog
thə hog, a hog

Most AE speakers use schwa whether or not the next word begins with a vowel.
This style of pronunciation is becoming more and more common among younger Australians.


----------



## MarcB

In my AE I also pronounce *the* as /ði:/ before words which start with a vowel, and also in the same places where I use an.
I don't pronounce h in herb but many AE speakers do.
schwa : thə dog, a dog thə hog, a hog I do this too, many AE speakers also say ay. I never say an before a voiced h,but I know people in other countries do so I do not consider it wrong just different.I say tom-ay-to and I know people from other countries and some AE speakers also say tom-ah-to.It reminds me of the song.lol.Right and wrong are relative to the norm where you live.


----------



## petereid

I couldn't understand why I could say "a history lessson" but had to say "an historical event"
I think I now understand it. For those words begining with H and where the second syllable is sressed I use "an"
an hotel                        
an Hawaiian Holiday       
an historical event
I also find that  before these words I tend to pronounce  "the" as "thee"'
Or is it just me.
Do americans who say "A hotel" stress the first syllable ?


----------



## danielfranco

Well, I have never thought about this matter with any kind of depth really. I suppose I just memorized every single example that came along as I was learning English... So in Brioche's example of "herb", would AE be "an herb" and BE "a herb"?


----------



## panjandrum

danielfranco said:
			
		

> [...]So in Brioche's example of "herb", would AE be "an herb" and BE "a herb"?


Yes - basil is a herb.

There was a very comprehensive discussion of the a/an topic in January.
"an historic"


----------



## danielfranco

panjandrum said:
			
		

> Yes - basil is a herb.
> 
> There was a very comprehensive discussion of the a/an topic in January.
> "an historic"


 
Thank you for your answer and the info.


----------



## kayokid

Hello, everyone.
Just a quick note... I never meant to say or imply that anyone was wrong in how they speak or what they learned in terms of grammar or pronunciation. I often state my opinions as statements of fact when arguing a point (something I was taught long ago in English classes). I merely tried to express how I speak and what I hear around me here in the USA. I certainly can understand how it could be argued that what we speak here is not English...  Thanks to all for a very interesting discussion.


----------



## mstewie08

Yea, I'm sorry too. One, I posted that before I learned I was supposed to use capitals, and two I meant to mention that the a vs an rule is all reliant on how the user uses the noun.


----------



## IkHouVanPulcino

Maybe It was a honour?

Simona


----------



## cas29

IkHouVanPulcino said:


> Maybe It was a honour?
> 
> Simona


 

Good point, it could certainly have been (_permit me_) *an *honour.


One way to remember which "h" words need "an" as opposed to "a" is if they are aspirated or not. 

Honour, hour, heir, need *an *because they sound like they start with vowels.

History, hotel, horse use *a *because the *h *is aspirated an is considered a consontan.


----------



## IkHouVanPulcino

Ow, right, thank you  

Simona


----------



## Blackleaf

The rules governing "h" can be confusing.

Usually, the longer version of a word beginning with H uses a silent H, but the shorter version uses an H that is pronounced.

For example - 

A history book

but

An historical society

The H in "history" is spoken, but in "historical" it's silent. 

I think Italians find H difficult to pronounce, just like English speakers find it hard to pronounce the trilled R.


----------



## ladybird

Blackleaf said:


> The rules governing "h" can be confusing.
> 
> Usually, the longer version of a word beginning with H uses a silent H, but the shorter version uses an H that is pronounced.
> 
> For example -
> 
> A history book
> 
> but
> 
> An historical society
> 
> The H in "history" is spoken, but in "historical" it's silent.
> 
> I think Italians find H difficult to pronounce, just like English speakers find it hard to pronounce the trilled R.


 
I have always pronounced the "h" in "historical".

Does anybody else do this or is it my accent again?


----------



## .   1

ladybird said:


> I have always pronounced the "h" in "historical".
> 
> Does anybody else do this or is it my accent again?


Historical keeps the h.
Herb loses the h but sounds poncy.
I can not think of many words with a silent leading h.

.,,


----------



## ladybird

. said:


> Historical keeps the h.
> Herb loses the h but sounds poncy.
> I can not think of many words with a silent leading h.
> 
> .,,


 
I'm fairly sure that we keep the h in herb over here, I've never heard it pronounced differently in the UK.

I know that in AE they say "erb", how about in Oz?


----------



## .   1

ladybird said:


> I'm fairly sure that we keep the h in herb over here, I've never heard it pronounced differently in the UK.
> 
> I know that in AE they say "erb", how about in Oz?


I used 'erb yesterday talking to a mate and she looked at me blankly but understood when I said herb.

It seems as though 'erb gave herb the elbow down here.

.,,


----------



## ladybird

. said:


> I used 'erb yesterday talking to a mate and she looked at me blankly but understood when I said herb.
> 
> It seems as though 'erb gave herb the elbow down here.
> 
> .,,


 
Thanks for enlightening me


----------



## Brian P

It is probably more correct to pronounce "herb" as "erb" as it derives from the French word _herbe _for "grass".  By the same token the American pronunciaton of "garage", also a borrowed French word, as "garazh" is more correct that the British pronunciation "garridge".  On the other hand, the American pronunciation of _lingerie _as "lonzharay" makes me cringe.  I beleive the Brits pronounce it the French way "lanzherie" (not an exact rendering)

This is a bit off topic.


----------



## panjandrum

Brian P said:


> [...] This is a bit off topic.


Let's just say there's enough about aspirated/non-aspirated h to hang in there 

I've added today's thread to a long earlier discussion on the same topic.


----------



## Porteño

Thanks Mr. Pedantic for bringing up '*an* hotel'. I have always understood that hotel may be pronounced with either a 'hard h' as in 'a hotel' or a 'silent h' is in 'an hotel'. As you mention, it occurs in some of Jane Austen's works but when I was younger the alternative pronunciation was taught at school! I don't doubt that that practice has fallen by the wayside in 'modern' Britain.


----------



## foxfirebrand

Everybody knows about "the rain in Spain," but this aspirated-_h_ thread still makes me think of the line that follows it, in the scene in _Pygmalion_ where Eliza is being taught enunciation-- _"But in Hartford, Hereford      and Hampshire, hurricanes hardly ever happen."_ 

Eliza is supposed to speak the lines with a lit candle a couple inches in front of her lips, and the candle is supposed to indicate to her that her haitches are sufficiently plosive. On her first attempt, the flame stands unperturbed-- until she gets to the word _ever,_ which she aspirates hard enough to blow the flame clean out.

So this invites a question.  In a country where so many dialects don't aspirate 'ardly _any_ haitches, 'ow are we supposed to come to any accord about 'ow to pronounce "hannistoric occasion?"
.


----------



## francais_espanol

Hello,
I am proofreading an article in English written by a Francophone and am now second-guessing myself. Do we say "a humanitarian" or "an humanitarian"? 
Thank you in advance for your advice.


----------



## Porteño

*a* humanitarian


----------



## GEmatt

Then when is "an" used in front of a word beginning with 'h'?  You also see "an historian", for example. . .


----------



## panjandrum

All the answers and opinions you could possibly want are here - in this thread - in the posts now underpinning the latest word to come before the a/an scrutineers.

The key is, an before a vowel *sound*.
It all depends on how you pronounce the word following the article.


----------



## GEmatt

Yes, totally sure.


----------



## Anais Ninn

GEmatt,

I think you are confused. Like panj said, the key is the sound.

*a* humanitarian
*an* honest person
*a* historian
*an* honorable thing
*a* huge mountain

Anais


----------



## panjandrum

I can't imagine pronouncing humanitarian in such a way that would persuade me to put an in front of it.

Historian and historical? It all depends on the sentence.
History, always a.

Herb?
BE always a.
AE, usually an.


----------



## Porteño

I was taught (in the UK (SE RP) that 'hotel' could be used in two ways, either with 'an' and a silent 'h' or with 'a' and a voiced 'h'. As far as 'humanitarian' (which I believe was the origin of this thread), 'hospitable', 'historic', 'historian', etc. are concerned it was considered correct to use 'a'.


----------



## JamesM

I'm curious about "humble."  In which category does it fall for most BE speakers - "an humble" or "a humble"?


----------



## panjandrum

Oh my, how you tempt me sir.
But then I'm only an 'umble servant around 'ere.
For Uriah Heep and his followers, an humble.
For most of the rest of us, a humble.


----------



## ophthalmologist

Which is correct?

this:
'It was like *a* once-in-a-lifetime moment'

or this:
'It was like an once-in-a-lifetime moment'


----------



## dn88

I think it should be 'a'.


----------



## jonquiliser

I'd imagine "a", as the o of "once etc" is a consonant sound, but what about this, that I've seen with both: a(n) herb?


----------



## la reine victoria

ophthalmologist said:


> Which is correct?
> 
> this:
> 'It was like *a* once-in-a-lifetime moment'
> 
> or this:
> 'It was like an once-in-a-lifetime moment'


 
Welcome to Word Reference, opthalmologist.  

"a" is correct.

"an" comes before such words as apple, egg, interval, orange, umbrella.

There is no hard and fast rule - these have to be learnt as you go along.  Not so long ago it was considered important to say "an hotel".

LRV


----------



## chat9998

Hi all,

I'm pretty sure there is a hard and fast rule for this.  If the sound following the article is a vowel sound, it needs to be "an," otherwise, it is "a".  Since we pronounce "once" as if it started with a "w," we use "a."  But if we want to write, even a letter, like 's' or 'f', we say "give me an F," because this is pronounced as though it starts with an e.    The only problem comes in with words that start with h.  (like herb) some people pronounce the 'h' and some people do not.  I do not, so it is correct for me to say "an herb," but if you do pronounce the h, then you would say "a herb."  I have heard many people misuse "an historical ..." and pronounce the h, but if you pronounce the h, it should be "a."


----------



## Consolaceon

Regarding those pesky 'h's - what are called silent/unvoiced, or pronounced/voiced 'h's are in fact aspirated ('help') or unaspirated ('hour', sounds like 'our'; 'heir', sounds like 'air'). This is inherited from the French (thanks to the Norman invasion and conquest of England in 1066). It's basically the same as when French uses the elision with 'le' or 'la' or not. For example, le havre, but l'hotel; la housse, but l'humanite (sorry, can't put in the necessary ^ and '). 

This is why, in British Isle English, apart from the tendency in some areas to drop initial 'h's ('Oo the 'ell do you think you are?), there is even in newspapers some inconsistency over whether to use 'a' or 'an' with hotel - because the French influence/etymology suggests it's a silent, or unaspirated 'h'.  In the US, hotel is always pronounced with an aspirated 'h'. It is always 'a hotel.' Whereas in the UK you'll hear both. (The reverse example has been mentioned: in the States they say 'herbs' as unaspirated - erbs; in the UK they say 'herbs' with a pronounced, aspirated 'h'. So _an_ herb in the US, _a_ herb in the UK.)

BRIOCHE's contribution was spot on - the use of 'an' or 'a' is related to whether the first or second syllable is accented.  But notice, it's still a matter of whether we aspirate the initial 'h' in our pronunciation or not:  'a history of English,' 'an historical look at English.'  (Besides ease of pronunciation, one reason to use 'an historical' instead of 'a historical' is that in conversation the sounds would be ambiguous as between something that is historical and something that is ahistorical!)

As inconsistent as English is (thanks to its combination of Saxon/Germanic root words, with French/Latin root words), it _is_ consistent about when to use 'a' and 'an'.  You can only figure it out if you know the pronunciation of the word in question.

If it _sounds_ like a vowel, even if it's a silent consonant, then use 'an' (an apple, an hour, an outage, an ounce - even in rare cases of 'y' when it is pronounced as a vowel - an yperite, which is pronounced 'ee-peh-rite (a chemical, mustard gas actually, taken from the Belgian town of Ypres, where it was first used in World War 1).

If it _sounds_ like a consonant, use 'a' (a letter, a hit, a yell, a one, a unit.

As for acronyms, it depends on how they tend to get pronounced - like a single word (UNESCO), or as a series of letters (ADA, pronounced A-D-A [assistant district attorney]). Since UNESCO sounds like it starts with a 'y' (pronounced: yu-nes-ko), it takes 'a' - A UNESCO employee. Whereas ADA is pronounced as three letters, so it takes 'an' - An ADA will handle the case.

Hope this was interesting and useful.


----------



## Porteño

Very well expressed Consolaceon, I loved it. -)


----------



## Forero

Except from habitual _h_-droppers, I have never heard or seen _an_ with any of these:

a hello
a hurrah
a harpoon gun
a hexameter
a whodunit
a high-pressure system
a however

Stress pattern, language of origin, and fixed expressions do seem to come into play when deciding between _a_ and _an_ before an _h_.  Sound does trump spelling.


----------



## Consolaceon

This is sound-related, because all the words you mention are aspirated, or pronounced 'h's - they all start with the actual 'h' consonant sound.


----------



## timpeac

Forero said:


> Except from habitual _h_-droppers, I have never heard or seen _an_ with any of these:
> 
> a hello
> a hurrah
> a harpoon gun
> a hexameter
> a whodunit
> a high-pressure system
> a however
> 
> Stress pattern, language of origin, and fixed expressions do seem to come into play when deciding between _a_ and _an_ before an _h_.  Sound does trump spelling.



Yes and no. In my experience someone who dropped the "h" in those words would say "an" before the word. However, actually writing "an" would be on a par with not writing the "h" - so I would expect that even an h-dropper would write "a hello". However, if someone was trying to represent speech they might write "he entered the office every morning without even an "'ello".


----------



## Consolaceon

Hi -- Well I'm glad you're intrigued by the issue.  Yes, it's virtually always a question of sound - of ease of pronunciation.  So that if someone drops their (aspirated) h's and pronounces words that would normally begin with a consonant sound as though they start with a vowel sound (arpoon instead of harpoon) then they will naturally use 'an' as the article.  Just trying saying 'a arpoon' - not nearly as easy as 'an arpoon.'  But if they did use an aspirated 'h' beginning, they would naturally use 'a' instead.


----------



## timpeac

Forero said:


> Except from habitual _h_-droppers,


Just realised I misread this earlier as "excerpt" rather than "except"!


----------



## icecreamsoldier

timpeac said:


> Just realised I misread this earlier as "excerpt" rather than "except"!


Not a silly mistake:
excerpt from
except for

"except _from_" is incorrect (in my part of the world at least).

As for 'a' vs 'an', it drives me crazy when people pronounce 'a' (as an article, not just a letter on its own) as /ei/ ('ay'), and thus insert /j/ ('y') between 'a' and the following vowel sound:

a apple (ayapuhl)
a historian (ayistoriuhn)
etc.


----------



## Forero

Unfortunately, it is too late to edit my post, but I thought it was clear that I meant:

"Except when I have heard such things from habitual h-droppers, I have never heard or seen _an_ with ..."

I meant to be excepting such occasions from "never", not _h_-droppers themselves from anything.


----------



## Brioche

Black_Mamba said:


> Gah the English language is so complicated. For example, whilst Brioche would say an hospital environment, I would say a hospital environment.)



I do *not* say an hospital environment!!!

It is "*a* h*o*spital" because the first vowel is stressed.

I do say *"an* hosp*I*table environment", because the first vowel is not stressed!


----------



## canismajoris

Consolaceon said:


> Regarding those pesky 'h's - what are called silent/unvoiced, or pronounced/voiced 'h's are in fact aspirated ('help') or unaspirated ('hour', sounds like 'our'; 'heir', sounds like 'air'). This is inherited from the French (thanks to the Norman invasion and conquest of England in 1066). It's basically the same as when French uses the elision with 'le' or 'la' or not. For example, le havre, but l'hotel; la housse, but l'humanite (sorry, can't put in the necessary ^ and ').


If it's the same as the French (which I think it is to an extent), it's no wonder it seems completely arbitrary to modern speakers.  There is almost no phonological necessity for it in English.  



Consolaceon said:


> This is why, in British Isle English, apart from the tendency in some areas to drop initial 'h's ('Oo the 'ell do you think you are?), there is even in newspapers some inconsistency over whether to use 'a' or 'an' with hotel - because the French influence/etymology suggests it's a silent, or unaspirated 'h'.  In the US, hotel is always pronounced with an aspirated 'h'. It is always 'a hotel.' Whereas in the UK you'll hear both. (The reverse example has been mentioned: in the States they say 'herbs' as unaspirated - erbs; in the UK they say 'herbs' with a pronounced, aspirated 'h'. So _an_ herb in the US, _a_ herb in the UK.)


I find it incredible that anyone cares about the etymology of surrounding words when deciding how to pronounce something. If you're pronouncing the same H in "historical" and "hamburger" then there isn't a real explanation for it.  It's an outmoded prescriptive rule that has no justification for itself. 



Consolaceon said:


> BRIOCHE's contribution was spot on - the use of 'an' or 'a' is related to whether the first or second syllable is accented.  But notice, it's still a matter of whether we aspirate the initial 'h' in our pronunciation or not:  'a history of English,' 'an historical look at English.'  (Besides ease of pronunciation, one reason to use 'an historical' instead of 'a historical' is that in conversation the sounds would be ambiguous as between something that is historical and something that is ahistorical!)


There's nothing conversational about saying "ahistoric."  Furthermore, the IPA transliteration of that word as I'd pronounce it is [eɪhɪˈstɔrɪk], while "a historic" would be [ə hɪˈstɔrɪk] almost all of the time. They're not in any danger of being confused.  I can't figure out a reason to explain why putting stress on a later syllable is supposed to make it harder to pronounce.  I do not seem to have any trouble with it.  And really transitioning from a mid central vowel to a glottal fricative regardless of stress isn't particularly difficult, nor should it be for any English speaker.  



Consolaceon said:


> As inconsistent as English is (thanks to its combination of Saxon/Germanic root words, with French/Latin root words), it _is_ consistent about when to use 'a' and 'an'.  You can only figure it out if you know the pronunciation of the word in question.


It isn't consistent at all.  The "an + h" thing isn't in any way standard.


----------



## Forero

canismajoris said:


> I can't figure out a reason to explain why putting stress on a later syllable is supposed to make it harder to pronounce.  I do not seem to have any trouble with it.  And really transitioning from a mid central vowel to a glottal fricative regardless of stress isn't particularly difficult, nor should it be for any English speaker.


Unstressed syllables in English are just not pronounced identically with stressed syllables.  In unstressed syllables, vowels are reduced, and stop consonants are generally less aspirated.  It makes sense to me that _h_, being little different from an aspiration, can also be reduced in unstressed syllables.  "Birmingham", Alabama, has a secondary stress on the "ham", and the _h_ and vowel are as in the word "ham"; "Birmingham", West Midlands, has zero stress on the "ham", the vowel is reduced, and the _h_ is silent.


----------



## canismajoris

Forero said:


> Unstressed syllables in English are just not pronounced identically with stressed syllables.  In unstressed syllables, vowels are reduced, and stop consonants are generally less aspirated.  It makes sense to me that _h_, being little different from an aspiration, can also be reduced in unstressed syllables.  "Birmingham", Alabama, has a secondary stress on the "ham", and the _h_ and vowel are as in the word "ham"; "Birmingham", West Midlands, has zero stress on the "ham", the vowel is reduced, and the _h_ is silent.


Well that's not really relevant.  It's a glottal fricative to me in either case, so the "an" is superfluous. To those for whom it isn't ever a glottal fricative, it would probably be the opposite.


----------



## blacklagoon

Dear Friends,

I agree with those (AmE speakers) who find "an historic" archaic.  I grew up mostly in the States, and was shocked to hear it on tv for some "historic moment".  I was never taught this in any grammar class.  I am now 58 years old, and I love grammar and languages.

Sorry to those who think that it is American.  Not currently.

Amitiés


----------



## Otter

panjandrum said:


> My choice of a or an before historic depends on one of two things.
> If I am writing for me, how does it sound to me?
> If I am writing for someone else, what is their house style.
> 
> I think I'd go for an historic, given a free choice.  Some people do indeed consider this an affectation, but I'm used to that and I don't intend changing now



Ciao a  tutti,

I agree that I'd go with "an historic" and I feel like it's a verbal "flow" thing.  Studying Italian, I've learned that when wondering "why" certain grammar is the way it is in italian, the logical answer is that it's for the sound; for the flow.  And I believe this is the same.  To say, 'a historic' is awkward.  We can move into the 'h' more easily via 'n'.   I believe we use "an" the way Italians use 'ad', etc. (maybe that's the wrong example in Italian - I'm tired - but you get my drift, right?).  Affectation.  Sheesh


----------



## e2efour

I'm a very tolerant person, but *I can't stand* people who say or write "an historical" and pronounce the h.


----------



## Porteño

e2efour said:


> I'm a very tolerant person, but *I can't stand* people who say or write "an historical" and pronounce the h.


 

Here! Here!


----------



## cmpc10

Thanks Panjandrum, but once again a I have a question about the examples:

an hist*o*rical timeline.
an hist*o*rian of note 
an hyst*e*rical outburst
an hosp*i*tible working environment

Is* H* silent or voiced?


----------



## CaruraLeam

Otter said:


> Ciao a  tutti,
> 
> I agree that I'd go with "an historic" and I feel like it's a verbal "flow" thing.  Studying Italian, I've learned that when wondering "why" certain grammar is the way it is in italian, the logical answer is that it's for the sound; for the flow.  And I believe this is the same.  To say, 'a historic' is awkward.  We can move into the 'h' more easily via 'n'.   I believe we use "an" the way Italians use 'ad', etc. (maybe that's the wrong example in Italian - I'm tired - but you get my drift, right?).  Affectation.  Sheesh



I've hit on this thread accidentally and it's driving me crazy!
When I speak English I follow the "flow"rule you explained so clearly (tanto di cappello!).I think it's the easiest way to pronounce "a" or "an" followed by "H".
Years ago I perfectly studied those rules about "h"..but I completely forgot them!!!


----------



## panjandrum

cmpc10 said:


> Thanks Panjandrum, but once again a I have a question about the examples:
> 
> an hist*o*rical timeline.
> an hist*o*rian of note
> an hyst*e*rical outburst
> an hosp*i*tible working environment
> 
> Is* H* silent or voiced?


I'm sorry, but there is no absolute answer.
In the first two, _historical _and _historian_, some people voice the h, others don't.  Those who do, use a, those who don't, use an.

What's even more confusing, I know for certain that I do both.  It may be whim or it may be to do with the overall shape and sound of the sentence.  I also know for certain that I use both _a historical_ and _an historical_ in speech and in writing.

I'm a little bit more sure that _hysterical _and _hospitable _have voiced h's, but only a little bit.


----------



## Otter

cmpc10 said:


> Thanks Panjandrum, but once again a I have a question about the examples:
> 
> an hist*o*rical timeline.
> an hist*o*rian of note
> an hyst*e*rical outburst
> an hosp*i*tible working environment
> 
> Is* H* silent or voiced?



*I'm happy to note you're writing "an" rather than "a".   In many decades of being an American speaker of English, I've never heard the "h"not pronounced.  I'm guess that's a British (other other) pronunciation.

It'll be interesting to hear more.

Otter.*


----------



## Otter

panjandrum said:


> I'm sorry, but there is no absolute answer.
> In the first two, _historical _and _historian_, some people voice the h, others don't.  Those who do, use a, those who don't, use an.
> 
> What's even more confusing, I know for certain that I do both.  It may be whim or it may be to do with the overall shape and sound of the sentence.  I also know for certain that I use both _a historical_ and _an historical_ in speech and in writing.
> 
> I'm a little bit more sure that _hysterical _and _hospitable _have voiced h's, but only a little bit.



I'm American.  I use "an" and don't drop the "h". I don't know anyone who drops the "h" in American Standard English and to use "a" rather than "an" in the quoted examples is simply incorrect American Standard English (in my opinion) and I find it maddening.


----------



## panjandrum

Otter, you are confusing me.

If I were to pronounce the "h" in historical, it would be _*a* *h*istorical occasion_, just as _<article> *h*orse_ is *a horse*.
I frequently don't pronounce the "h" in historical, and it is *an historical occasion*, just as _<article> 'orse_ is _an 'orse_.

I couldn't possibly use "an" and not "drop" the h.
That would be like saying _an *h*am _or _an *h*ouse._


----------



## Waylink

In standard British English, we would always say "a herb" (becasue the h is not silent).

As the h in herb is silent in American English, would an educated American *write *e.g.

_He put *an herb* in the soup._


----------



## mplsray

Waylink said:


> In standard British English, we would always say "a herb" (becasue the h is not silent).
> 
> As the h in herb is silent in American English, would an educated American *write *e.g.
> 
> _He put *an herb* in the soup._



He would, yes. Please note, however, that some educated Americans, myself included, do indeed pronounce herb with an /h/.


----------



## timpeac

panjandrum said:


> Otter, you are confusing me.
> 
> If I were to pronounce the "h" in historical, it would be _*a* *h*istorical occasion_, just as _<article> *h*orse_ is *a horse*.
> I frequently don't pronounce the "h" in historical, and it is *an historical occasion*, just as _<article> 'orse_ is _an 'orse_.
> 
> I couldn't possibly use "an" and not "drop" the h.
> That would be like saying _an *h*am _or _an *h*ouse._


But people do Panj - my memory of this thread (although I've not reread it now so maybe I'm thinking of another source) is that some people use "an" before a pronounced "h" as long as the syllable isn't stressed (which differentiates it from "an ham"). So such a person would say

an historian _but_
a history

and pronounce the "h" in both. 

I heard people say "an historian" with the "h" pronounced quite often when I was at university.

I'm not sure whether, for such a person, they would use "an" before _any _word starting with an unstressed pronounced "h" or just certain ones (ones I presume coming from Latin).


----------



## timpeac

Otter said:


> *I'm happy to note you're writing "an" rather than "a".   In many decades of being an American speaker of English, I've never heard the "h"not pronounced.  I'm guess that's a British (other other) pronunciation.
> 
> It'll be interesting to hear more.
> 
> Otter.*


I haven't come across it (other than from people who would routinely drop all "h"s anyway, which is fairly-ish common in British English) or if I have I haven't remarked upon it - I suppose I might well have assumed that they were dropping the "h" in the way that some people drop all "h"s. My experience (in British English) is that it is usually

a historian

but some people (it seems to me with a "posher", for want of a better word, than average accent) say

an historian

with the "h" pronounced (subject to the unstressed and possible Latin based criteria I put in my post above).

Otter - as an "an"-pronouncing-before-a-pronounced-"h" person - would you say "an" before a stressed pronounced "h" as in "an history"?


----------



## Otter

panjandrum said:


> Otter, you are confusing me.
> 
> If I were to pronounce the "h" in historical, it would be _*a* *h*istorical occasion_, just as _<article> *h*orse_ is *a horse*.
> I frequently don't pronounce the "h" in historical, and it is *an historical occasion*, just as _<article> 'orse_ is _an 'orse_.
> 
> I couldn't possibly use "an" and not "drop" the h.
> That would be like saying _an *h*am _or _an *h*ouse._



*
Hi Pan, 

Herb.  hmm.    You're correct that some/many/(most?) Americans do not pronounce the 'h' in "herb" and, indeed, use "an" with it.  I'm thinking this is an exception and the general rule of thumb, usage-wise, is as brought up by someone much earlier in this thread: it's "a" if the first syllable is stressed; "an" if the second is stressed and in U.S., we pronounce the 'h'.  And I stand by my original post that it often has to to with 'flow', like Italians sometimes use "a" and sometimes "ad", etc.

I'm not an expert;  can't quote any schoolbook rules.   Pronunciation changes regularly in most places.  Certainly American, Irish, Australian, Scottish, South African, etc. English usage/pronunciation differs wildly.  And then written vs. spoken comes into play.* *Yikes!  I need more coffee or a warm creek to play in.
*
*Otter*


----------



## Elunah

Brioche said:


> the system is:
> if the stress does not fall on the first syllable, then *an* rather than *a* is used. The h is not silent.
> 
> a h*i*story of England.
> an hist*o*rical timeline.
> an hist*o*rian of note
> 
> a h*y*sterisis curve
> an hyst*e*rical outburst
> 
> a h*o*spital
> an hosp*i*tible working environment
> 
> Just to be different, in BE the h in _herb _is not silent,
> so in BE *a herb,*   in AE *an herb* (silent h)
> 
> a h*e*rb  (pronounce the h in BE)
> an herb*a*rium (pronounce the h in BE)


To clarify, does this system only apply to words starting with the letter "H"?

Apologies if I've missed a prior reply that addresses this.


----------



## timpeac

Elunah said:


> To clarify, does this system only apply to words starting with the letter "H"?
> 
> Apologies if I've missed a prior reply that addresses this.


Welcome! Yes, that's right - and moreover a _pronounced _"h" (as opposed to "hour", say, where the "h" is a purely etymological remnant and would therefore be treated as if it started with a vowel, so "an hour").

Note that there are some people who would always use "a" before a pronounced "h" no matter where the stress falls.


----------



## Elunah

timpeac said:


> Welcome! Yes, that's right - and moreover a _pronounced _"h" (as opposed to "hour", say, where the "h" is a purely etymological remnant and would therefore be treated as if it started with a vowel, so "an hour").
> 
> Note that there are some people who would always use "a" before a pronounced "h" no matter where the stress falls.


Ah, I understand, and thanks!


----------



## haggard

Why it's "a horizontal" instead of "an horizontal"? I thought h letter wasn't pronounced here. I realize h pronunciation at "a hole", it is the same rule and h is also pronounced?
Thanks in advance.

<Moderator note: this is now merged with the mega-thread we have on the same subject>


----------



## boozer

Welcome to the forum 

The "h" is typically pronounced in standard English, although I've heard people who drop it in similar words. Of course, there are exceptions - hour, heir, etc.


----------



## Smoking Harold

Hi,
are words beginning with the root "homo-" an exceptional class in this context? (such as homosexual, homophonous...)

Thanks
Harold


----------



## entangledbank

Some people (a minority) say 'an' before /h/ + _unstressed_ vowel: an hi*sto*ric opportunity.

It is possible that they would also say 'an' before /h/ + _secondary stressed_ vowel, but I think it is unlikely. The secondary stress is enough to require 'a' in: a *ho*ri*zon*tal, a *ho*mo*sex*ual.


----------



## Smoking Harold

Perfect, thanks!


----------



## mikerotheatre

Is the distinction due to the word's origin? French words [an hotel, an honorable man] require "an" - others [though existing in French, but not imported directly from it] do not... [Oh - there goes another straw!]


----------



## boozer

mikerotheatre said:


> French words [an hotel, an honorable man] require "an"


I fully agree about the "honourable man", but I'm surprised to hear that hotel requires "an" ...


----------



## JuicyJew

Um... Maybe I'm clueless, but I have never said "an hotel" in my life. I say "a hotel".


----------



## Copperknickers

The general rule is that if the H is pronounced, it get's an 'a'. Many if not most Standard British English would dictate that it would be 'an historic', pronounced with an H for some reason.


----------



## mikerotheatre

Nor have *I *ever *said* it. But I have *heard* it from the upper classes, who, in this context, do not pronounce the h at the start of the word. Unaspirated h's require the n.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/page/aoranhistoric discusses the matter clearly.


----------



## JuicyJew

Well if I were putting on a cockney accent then yes definitely! "an 'otel!"


----------



## Trevy

Elunah said:


> To clarify, does this system only apply to words starting with the letter "H"?
> 
> Apologies if I've missed a prior reply that addresses this.


 
I guess that depends on what part of the system we're looking at.  The rule about an or a prior to a vowel or consonant sound is generally quite consistent e.g. an umbrella a useful gift.  The problem is that in conversation and for whatever historical reasons we often don't pronounce the H at the start of a word and perhaps this is the only letter where it possibly optional in many cases.  

So if whatever the syllables are after the H is possibly irrelevant to whether you use a or an it's more dependent on the whether the H is pronounced. So an 'istorian is fine and so is a historian. Equally a huge bag of sweets is fine and so is a 'uge bag of sweets coz in this instance 'uge is pronounced with the same y sound as is the case in uniform. 

So what it boils down to is what is correct, which probably can't be answered directly and boils down to all sorts of class an' cultural influences.  Like bath or barth, castle or carstle.

When written it's probably necessary to be more precise in some instances so I might say an 'awaiian but I'd write a Hawaiian.

Summit like that anyway.


----------



## mplsray

_Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage_, in the article "a, an," notes several complications to the rule about pronouncing _a_ before a consonant sound and _an_ before a vowel sound, of which the following is relevant to this thread:



> Before _h_ in an unstressed or weakly stressed syllable, _a_ and _an_ are both used in writing (_an_ historic, _a_ historic), but _an_ is more usual in speech, whether the _h_ is pronounced or not. This variation is the result of historical development; in unstressed and weakly stressed syllables, _h_ was formerly not pronounced in many words where it is pronounced at the present time. A few words, such as _historic_ and (especially in England) _hotel_, are in transition, and may be found with either _a_ or _an_. You choose the article that suits your own pronunciation.



My point in quoting this is to show that some people who say _an historic_ pronounce the _h_ while some leave the _h_ silent. I have to take issue, however, with the assertion that _an_ is more common in speech in such situations, at least in American English. I think this use of _an_ is rather rare, and occurs mainly with the words _historic_ and _historical_, and not with other words such as _hysterical_.


----------



## Otter

Beg to differ but I've already put in my two cents much further up in this thread.  I speak standard American.  "She's an hysteric"; "She's a total hysteric".  And I'm pronouncing the H. 




mplsray said:


> _Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage_, in the article "a, an," notes several complications to the rule about pronouncing _a_ before a consonant sound and _an_ before a vowel sound, of which the following is relevant to this thread:
> 
> 
> 
> My point in quoting this is to show that some people who say _an historic_ pronounce the _h_ while some leave the _h_ silent. I have to take issue, however, with the assertion that _an_ is more common in speech in such situations, at least in American English. I think this use of _an_ is rather rare, and occurs mainly with the words _historic_ and _historical_, and not with other words such as _hysterical_.


----------



## mplsray

Otter said:


> Beg to differ but I've already put in my two cents much further up in this thread.  I speak standard American.  "She's an hysteric"; "She's a total hysteric".  And I'm pronouncing the H.



Note that I did say "rather rare." Just because a usage is rare does not make it nonstandard.


----------



## Trevy

Otter said:


> Beg to differ but I've already put in my two cents much further up in this thread. I speak standard American. "She's an hysteric"; "She's a total hysteric". And I'm pronouncing the H.


 
Ultimately I guess it boils down to one man's meat is another man's poison.  I've noticed that quite a few folk from the USA use an and pronounce the H whereas (except for Hour or Honour where the H isn't pronounced anyway) this would sound quite unnatural to myself.  

When writing, just to be safe, I'd always pretty much go with a in all situations when followed by an h except when the h isn't pronounced or is pronounced as a vowel.  But that's just me I guess and from all the comments on this subject I can't see that there's a definitive right or wrong.


----------



## frognsausage

Are we all pronouncing "a" in the same way?

a (ah) and a (ay) (sorry, I don't know IPA)

My lips, tongue and ears hate the "a historical occaision" (a = ah) and would prefer "an histrorical occaision" - 'h' making a nice 'h' sound.

My ears and mouth do like, however, "ay historical occaision".

I feel the same hate towards "an hotel". It sounds wrong.

The more I repeat the word "historical", the less I am believing it is a word at all .


----------



## Otter

frognsausage said:


> Are we all pronouncing "a" in the same way?
> 
> a (ah) and a (ay) (sorry, I don't know IPA)
> 
> My lips, tongue and ears hate the "a historical occaision" (a = ah) and would prefer "an histrorical occaision" - 'h' making a nice 'h' sound.
> 
> My ears and mouth do like, however, "ay historical occaision".
> 
> I feel the same hate towards "an hotel". It sounds wrong.
> 
> The more I repeat the word "historical", the less I am believing it is a word at all .



How about "An hysterical historical production"


----------



## Trevy

Otter said:


> How about "An hysterical historical production"


 The a (ah) / a (ay) pronunciation certainly adds an interesting dynamic to the an / a with h conundrum.  I'd certainly quite often use a (ay) in speech rather than a (ah) as an alternative to dropping the h.  

So a (Ay) Hawaiian sounds better to me than An 'awaiian which might be considered a bit of lazy aitch dropping. A (ah) Hawaiian doesn't trip of the tongue quite so readily as either of the above alternatives and in fact does so even less readily in my opinion than a (ah) hotel.

But then again it probably boils down to horses for courses and I'm certainly not going to get into a lather about it


----------



## ricey

Hi all,

In Australia, the use of 'an' before either 'hypothesis' or 'historical' seems to be limited to older academics and the occasional newsreader from the Australian Broadcasting Commission. In my opinion it is an anachronism and an affectation. I don't drop my aitches so therefore I use 'a' (pronounced 'ey' or 'uh') not 'an'. If the aitch is pronounced in a word beginning with 'h', then 'a' is the logical use.

How awkward do these sentences sound?

"I climbed an hill and then an hillock, only to see an higgledy piggledy pile of horses".

or

"An hypotenuse is the longest side of a right angle triangle"

or

"The junkie used an hypodermic syringe for an hit"

Cheers,

ricey


----------



## JulianStuart

I'm fine if people choose to pronounce or omit the h at the beginning of some words (I think honour and hour are the ones I "drop"). I can see that an h may be dropped if it's not stressed in a different form of the word where the stress is later (like  a history but an 'istorian). What I don't understand is the reasoning/origin of sometimes using a and sometimes using an *when the h is always pronounced,* even if it's not stressed.  Why break the "rule" of "a before consonant and an before vowel sound" - this would require that a voiced h change from a vowel to a consonant based on the sounds that come later in the word.  That is analogous to saying  "uh *end*less thread but an en*dur*ing thread" (or perhaps vice versa, you can see I get confused about this).


----------



## Andygc

Trevy said:


> So what it boils down to is what is correct, which probably can't be answered directly and boils down to all sorts of class an' cultural influences.  Like bath or barth, castle or carstle.


I don't think "correct" comes into it. I write "a hotel", but because my pronunciation of the "h" in hotel is very soft, I say "an hotel". I don't say "an 'otel" - the mouth position for the " ho " and " 'o " sounds is not the same. I just don't voice the _h _in _hotel _in the same way as the _h _in _hot_. For my pronunciation it's similar for _an historic day_ as opposed to_ a history lesson_. (and I usually say "bath")


----------



## JulianStuart

Andygc said:


> I don't think "correct" comes into it. I write "a hotel", but because my pronunciation of the "h" in hotel is very soft, I say "an hotel". I don't say "an 'otel" - the mouth position for the " ho " and " 'o " sounds is not the same. I just don't voice the _h _in _hotel _in the same way as the _h _in _hot_. For my pronunciation it's similar for _an historic day_ as opposed to_ a history lesson_. (and I usually say "bath")


Thanks for that - I had never thought of the possibility of _three_ versions of the h! Full off, full on and soft.


----------



## Trevy

Andygc said:


> I don't think "correct" comes into it. I write "a hotel", but because my pronunciation of the "h" in hotel is very soft, I say "an hotel". I don't say "an 'otel" - the mouth position for the " ho " and " 'o " sounds is not the same. I just don't voice the _h _in _hotel _in the same way as the _h _in _hot_. For my pronunciation it's similar for _an historic day_ as opposed to_ a history lesson_. (and I usually say "bath")



I'm certainly not sure that correct comes into it either, although some earlier posts to the forum made attempts to do so via various quotes and that's fine by me.  I still believe it comes down to background influences etc. and just to muddy the waters even further along those lines I've just been reading "Danny Champion of the World" to my kids and was reminded (curtesy of the police sergeant Chapter 20) that there's also a tradition of portraying such individuals in our literature as dropping their haitches where they should be pronounced but adding them elsewhere where they shouldn't.  So in this context a sentance might read ('e went galloping off hon 'is 'orse which made me very hangry).  In this case I guess he might talk about 'a hinteresting' observation rather than 'an interesting' observation and in terms of the pronunciation rules in front of haitches which we've been discussing he'd probably be quite correct to do so


----------



## languageGuy

If you don't pronounce the word correctly, why would you even care if it was 'a' or 'an'?


----------



## salai

Hello,

These are sentences from http://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/ What happened on Dec. 7, 1941? Why is the attack on Pearl Harbor such an historically important event? 


I have always thought that we use an indefinite article 'a' in front of a word that starts with a consonant, but why is 'an' used in front of the word 'historically'?

Thank you in advance.


----------



## ewie

*Moderator note:* Thread merged with a previous extremely long one on the subject.  It's best to start at page 1 and carry on until you feel you've had _enough_ answer, Salai


----------



## salai

Thank you for pushing me in such an interesting direction. After reading all the posts I will stick to what some textbooks say- in most cases it is the usual 'a' in front of a consonant. I do not feel like flooding my students with all this information; if they decide to sit a TOEFL or IELTS exam, they need to know some cut and dried rules.





ewie said:


> *Moderator note:* Thread merged with a previous extremely long one on the subject.  It's best to start at page 1 and carry on until you feel you've had _enough_ answer, Salai


----------



## kamenko

Which of the following is correct: a historical or an historical?


----------



## LilianaB

A historical. H is a consonant. An honorable, though, because h is silent in the second case. Some people may pronounce historical differently.


----------



## Gwan

Welcome to the forums! Remember to search to see if your topic has already been discussed.

I quite like "an historical" myself, but not everyone agrees, as you will see by reading the thread above.


----------



## Waylink

Whether you say a/an before a noun or modifier is primarily influenced by the initial *sound *of the noun/modifier, *not *whether it is classified in writing as a vowel or consonant.  As LillanaB says, pronunciation of English words like 'historical' varies widely, as with 'hotel' and other 'h'-words with a French origin.

So think of the 'sound', not whether it is written as a vowel/consonant, e.g.:

He is *a European*.   
She is *an elegant* Asian businesswoman.    
His name is Tom Haigh. His surname begins with *an 'H'.*
Why isn't there *an 'f' *in physical?
I bought her *an R.Kelly* CD for her birthday.
The  SW-32 has *a universal* fitting.
His computer is so old it does not have *a USB* port!
She has *a university* degree.
The doctor ordered *an X*-ray.


----------



## ewie

*Moderator note:* Thread merged with a  previous extremely long one on the subject.  It's best to start at page 1  and carry on until you feel you've had _enough_ answer ​


----------



## LilianaB

Hi, Waylink, I did not mean consonant in writing. Consonant is a sound. I meant that I pronounce h in historical as a consonant, whereas h in honor is silent for me.


----------



## JamesM

A consonant is a consonant whether it is spoken or silent. The "h" in honor is still a consonant; it's just a silent consonant.


----------



## Brioche

kamenko said:


> Which of the following is correct: a historical or an historical?



If the letter h is silent, always say *an. An *honour, *an* heir, *an* hour - this is accepted everywhere as correct.

Now, here comes the hard bit.
Traditionally *an* is also used before a sounded h if the accent is not on the first syllable.

*His*tory has the stress on the first syllable, thus _*a* history of England._
His*tor*ical has the stress on the second syllable, thus _*an* historical novel.
_
Many people consider this to be old fashioned, and always use a before sounded h, regardless of the stress pattern.
So, the answer is "Both are correct, but if your teacher is young, and not particularly well educated in the history of English, she may well mark you wrong. So stick with a historical"_.



_


----------



## Waylink

Thanks, Brioche, that's really helpful.


----------



## livvie

Hello,

A friend and I are having a conversation about the use of *a* or *an*.

I would say *a history* professor because I pronounce the h in history

The conversation started with the use of *A* or *An* in the following :

An historic harbour

Should it be *A *or *An* historic harbour?


IEDIT : I have just found this on the net which I believe answers my question :


 If you said the words “historic” and “historical”  alone, you would hear an “h” sound, so you should say, “a historic” and  “a historical.” Further, nobody would ever say a song was “an hit.”  You’d say the song was “a hit,” and the “hi” sound at the beginning of  “hit” is exactly the same as the sound at the beginning of “historic”  and “historical.”


----------



## livvie

I think there are conflicting ideas in this thread!!

I haven't read all of the thread but I must admit I don't think I'm any wiser!


----------



## pob14

That's just it, livvie; everybody has his own opinion, and everybody's right.     (Ewie, perhaps a TEENY one!)


----------



## Brioche

livvie said:


> I think there are conflicting ideas in this thread!!
> 
> I haven't read all of the thread but I must admit I don't think I'm any wiser!



Go to your local library, and look for the second edition of *Fowler's Modern English Usage*.  It is not very modern these day, as it was published in 1965.

On the first page of the text, after the introductions, etc, etc, is says 
*A* is used before all consonants except silent h (a history, an hour);
*AN* was formerly usual before an unaccented syllable beginning with h _and is still often seen and heard_ (an hist*o*rian, an hot*e*l, an hyst*e*rical scene, an her*e*ditary title, an hab*i*tual offender).  [my emphasis].
...
*A *is now usual also before any vowel letters that in pronuciation are preceded by a consonantal sound (a unit, a eulogy, a one)


Those three lines tell you all you need to know.


----------



## blasita

I recently opened a thread on _a/an half_ in the _Spanish-English Grammar_ after having been corrected in another thread (I'd written '_a_ half'). You might find it interesting (it's also got comments on 'historic', 'herb', etc. and is fairly short).


----------



## panjandrum

New Fowler's Modern English Usage (Third edition, 1998) says more or less the same, and adds:Opinion is divided over the form to use before _h_-words in which the first syllable is unstessed: the thoroughly modern thing to do is to use _a_ (never _an_) together with an aspirated _h _(_a habitual, a heroic, a historical, a Homeric, a hypothesis_), but not to demur if others use _an _with minimal or nil aspiration given to the following _h _(_an historic, an horrific_, etc).
... _an hotel_ is now old-fashioned, but by no means extinct.
... AmE herb, being pronounced with silent _h_, is always preceded by _an_, but the same word in BrE, being pronounced with an aspirated _h_, by _a_.
​


----------



## mplsray

panjandrum said:


> ... AmE herb, being pronounced with silent _h_, is always preceded by _an_, but the same word in BrE, being pronounced with an aspirated _h_, by _a_.​


I'd just like to note that, although rarer than the _h_-less pronunciation, the pronunciations of _herb_ and _her​bal_ with /h/ is also standard in American English (see the online versions of Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, the Random House at infoplease.com, the American Heritage Dictionary online at http://education.yahoo.com, and the Cambridge Dictionary of American English.


Addition: I forgot to mention. The pronunciation with /h/ of _herb_ and _herbal_ is what I myself have used all my life.


----------



## neosoum

Hello everybody,

I have got a/an h problem with a/an homogeneous and a/an heterogeneous

As I understand it, I should write a homogeneous and a heterogeneous if the first syllable is stressed.
I checked those two words on wordreference dictionary and found that the first stress is not on the first syllable. But there is something named second stresses on the first syllable. So finally, I do not know what to do. Could someone help please? 
If it can help, I precise that the context is a scientific article that should be written in American English.

Thank you in advance!


----------



## JulianStuart

neosoum said:


> Hello everybody,
> 
> I have got a/an h problem with a/an homogeneous and a/an heterogeneous
> 
> As I understand it, I should write a homogeneous and a heterogeneous if the first syllable is stressed.
> I checked those two words on wordreference dictionary and found that the first stress is not on the first syllable. But there is something named second stresses on the first syllable. So finally, I do not know what to do. Could someone help please?
> If it can help, I precise that the context is a scientific article that should be written in American English.
> 
> Thank you in advance!


My understanding (I have not re-read the whole discussion) is that the use of a/an depends on whether the h is silent or  not, rather than whether it is stressed or not.  In those words, I have never heard anyone say 'omogeneous - the h is always sounded, not silent, so you should use a, not an.


----------



## Andygc

I'm a _an historic, an hotel_ sayer, but I'd definitely say _a homogeneous _and _a heterogeneous_.


----------



## Consolaceon

neosoum said:


> Hello everybody,
> 
> I have got a/an h problem with a/an homogeneous and a/an heterogeneous
> 
> As I understand it, I should write a homogeneous and a heterogeneous if the first syllable is stressed.
> I checked those two words on wordreference dictionary and found that the first stress is not on the first syllable. But there is something named second stresses on the first syllable. So finally, I do not know what to do. Could someone help please?
> If it can help, I precise that the context is a scientific article that should be written in American English.



NEOSUM:  Yes, the main stress for both 'homoGEneous' and 'heteroGEneous' falls on the third or fourth syllable; but because they are longer words with a multi-syllabic prefix ('homo,' 'hetero,') they have second stresses on their opening syllables.  This opening stress means that standardly you would use 'a' not 'an.'  Pronunciation practices across different English speaking communities can lead to variations, but in terms of what is currently deemed correct standard English for writing, always use 'a' when the 'h'-word is aspirated - that is, when pronounced with an opening 'ha' sound.  

You will find in several places in this long thread reference to exceptions, such as with 'history' versus 'historical' - a history, but an historical novel.  The use of 'an' with 'historical' is more common in Britain and other Commonwealth English-speaking countries, but not so much in the States and (I believe, but Canadians please correct me) in Canada.  It has to do with ease of pronunciation, based on the principle that we all tend to be lazy speakers.  If I were writing, I would always write, 'a historical novel.'  But in pronunciation, when the stress doesn't fall on the opening 'h' syllable, but on a later syllable, as it does with 'hisTORical,' it's common to say 'an historical novel' because it's just easier/faster to pronounce.  I believe the pronunciation practice migrated into written practice and became 'standard' in Britain, for example; but has not become 'standard' in the States.  (I put 'standard' in single quotation marks because what is standard is always evolving, since languages are living things.)

(You'll always find in another of my postings in the thread, sometime back, a point about disambiguating in spoken English the single word 'ahistorical' and the two words 'a historical' - 'an historical' helps clear that up.)


----------



## Consolaceon

canismajoris said:


> If it's the same as the French (which I think it is to an extent), it's no wonder it seems completely arbitrary to modern speakers.  There is almost no phonological necessity for it in English.
> 
> 
> I find it incredible that anyone cares about the etymology of surrounding words when deciding how to pronounce something. If you're pronouncing the same H in "historical" and "hamburger" then there isn't a real explanation for it.  It's an outmoded prescriptive rule that has no justification for itself.
> 
> *Just happened to see your argumentative reply, so one or two small notes:  I'm not saying any usual speakers care a jot, or know a jot, about etymology.  But etymology, and how words get imported, does help explain how pronunciations come about.*
> 
> 
> There's nothing conversational about saying "ahistoric."  Furthermore, the IPA transliteration of that word as I'd pronounce it is [eɪhɪˈstɔrɪk], while "a historic" would be [ə hɪˈstɔrɪk] almost all of the time. They're not in any danger of being confused.  I can't figure out a reason to explain why putting stress on a later syllable is supposed to make it harder to pronounce.  I do not seem to have any trouble with it.  And really transitioning from a mid central vowel to a glottal fricative regardless of stress isn't particularly difficult, nor should it be for any English speaker.
> 
> *You'll find variations in pronunciation of 'a historic' between [eɪ] and [ə].  Also, I am NOT, as is plain by my post, saying it is all that hard to pronounce (though, please, 'should' just doesn't come into it when it has to do with speakers' practices).  What I am saying is that speakers tend to be lazy pronouncers, and that 'an 'istorical' is faster to say than 'a historical.'  It's not a question of whether YOU have trouble with it, just of what people in general find easier.*
> 
> 
> It isn't consistent at all.  The "an + h" thing isn't in any way standard.



*You misunderstood.  Using 'an' with an aspirated 'h' word such as 'historical' is an inconsistent, variant practice.  But generally the use of 'a' and 'an' is in fact quite consistent - which is not the same thing as saying invariant.  Speakers consistently (but granted, not invariably) use 'a' with aspirated 'h' words and 'an' with unaspirated 'h' words.*


----------



## Forero

_Heterogeneous_ and _homogeneous_ do not fall off the tongue easily, and I would not expect to hear them without the _h_, so I expect the majority of speakers who use these words at all to say them with "a", not "an".

However, in light of the discussion so far in this thread, I can imagine a person saying "an heterogenous" or "an homogeneous". As was mentioned already, the _h_ in a completely unstressed syllable will generally be less strongly aspirated than it would be in a stressed syllable, and it is normal for some native speakers to use "an" before a word beginning with a weakly-aspirated _h_ (which is not the same as no _h_ at all).


----------



## Andygc

> and it is normal for some native speakers to use "an" before a word beginning with a weakly-aspirated _h_ (which is not the same as no _h_ at all).


Exactly. That's me, and I think I made the point some way back that there are three ways to pronounce the 'h' - aspirated,  weakly aspirated and silent. I don't say an 'otel, I say an hotel. That doesn't happen, for me, when I say heterogenous.


----------



## neosoum

Thank you all for your answers, I will use a heterogeneous and a homogeneous, and I am happy to know this because it was a current mistake I was doing.
Thanks again!


----------



## chatterbox0610

Dear all,

A friend of mine wrote an excellent book about a member of the French Resistance. This book is now being translated into English. The language used in French is both very literary and technical and the publisher wants to preserve the tone and style in English. My friend asked me to look through the translation provided by native professionals who have translated into US English. 
I stumbled on "...his background as *an* historian and geographer ...". I would spontaneously have written "a historian" (as opposed to "an heir", because of the pronunciation of the "h"). 
Could you please tell me if "an historian" is an Americanism, and is correct US English. Similarly, would you accept "... like most men his age did". ?
Both "hurt" me ...but I'm British Old School ... (snobbish?)
Thank you very much for  helping me relieve my "scruples" !


----------



## natkretep

Moderator note: Chatterbox, I've added your thread to this mega-thread. Please scroll up, as there are many useful comments.


----------



## newwrite

Since there are so many threads and questions, I was not able to see if my comment had been addressed using the same reference(s). An historian was a surprise to me when I first read the pair of words with that spelling, however, after reading James Clavell and Tom Clancy, I am convinced that the aforementioned use of "an" is an acceptable spelling preceding the word historian. In fact, I've used that spelling in at least one of my own written works.


----------



## Maria_Kos

Hello everyone! I was looking through a student's book which I was going to use for my classes. I was very surprised to see an article "an" with "historical film". Isn't it correct to say "a historical film"? Please comment!


----------



## JustKate

Hi, Maria. This is a topic that's come up before, so you might find the earlier answers useful. I have therefore merged your question with an earlier thread. If you still have questions, you're welcome to ask them here.

JustKate
English Only moderator


----------



## Pinutera

If we say a hero or a heroine why do we say an heroic act?

Thanks


----------



## The Newt

We don't always; "*a* heroic act" would probably be more common in the US.


----------



## Pinutera

The Newt said:


> We don't always; "*a* heroic act" would probably be more common in the US.


 So is an heroic more British than American? and are both considered grammatically correct?


----------



## The Newt

Pinutera said:


> So is an heroic more British than American? and are both considered grammatically correct?



Each is considered correct by some speakers. In the US "an heroic act" sounds pretentious, but it may be perfectly fine in the UK.


----------



## entangledbank

This is a frequently discussed topic. If the stress is not near the /h/, some people say 'an' instead of 'a'.


----------



## lingobingo

This is one of my pet hates. There’s no logical reason to use “an” in front of words like heroic, hotel, historic, horrific, unless for some reason you’re pronouncing them as though they began with a vowel. Words that are normally pronounced that way are a different matter — e.g. an honour, an heir, an hour.

An official view of it can be found here: ‘A historic event’ or ‘an historic ev... | Oxford Dictionaries


----------



## Pinutera

lingobingo said:


> This is one of my pet hates. There’s no logical reason to use “an” in front of words like heroic, hotel, historic, horrific, unless for some reason you’re pronouncing them as though they began with a vowel. Words that are normally pronounced that way are a different matter — e.g. an honour, an heir, an hour.
> 
> An official view of it can be found here: ‘A historic event’ or ‘an historic ev... | Oxford Dictionaries




Thank you. Apparently 'an heroic' is another of those 'exceptions' of the English language, which by the way they drive me crazy.


----------



## Pinutera

The Newt said:


> Each is considered correct by some speakers. In the US "an heroic act" sounds pretentious, but it may be perfectly fine in the UK.



Thank you. Good to know. I think I'll use mostly a heroic since it sounds more logical to me.


----------



## RedwoodGrove

It might be worth noting that pronunciation of the "h" varies widely in English so it is not an easy question nor would it be obvious to language learners. I've struggled a bit over this because in my own pronunciation I sometimes drop the "h". Also, in AE, it sounds a little bumpkin-like to say "uh historic" (a historic) when you can say "an historic". There are no dialects in AE that regularly drop the "h" to my knowledge, but the print renditions of some BE dialects seem to think those do. Though those may be ones that wouldn't care if you said "an 'umble" or "a 'umble".

Finally, of course, this is a pretty antiquated convention so I'd go with what lingobingo said.


----------



## Loob

RedwoodGrove said:


> Also, in AE, it sounds a little bumpkin-like to say "uh historic" (a historic) when you can say "an historic".


Can you explain why, RG? Is "historic" pronounced with an /h/, or is the /h/ omitted? Would the speakers who say "an historic occasion" also say "an house"?


----------



## panjandrum

It looks like there is a very simple choice to be made.
a historic OR an 'istoric
a heroic OR an 'eroic
a house OR an 'ouse
a Honour OR an 'onour

The challenge, of course, is that there are three classes of words beginning with h+vowel
1 - those in which the H is ALWAYS pronounced (house, hero, heroic, hippopotamus)
2 - those in which the H is NEVER pronounced (honour, heir, hour)
3 - those in which the H is pronounced by some people or in some variants of English, but not in others (hotel, historic, herb)

There is no explanation, otherwise this thread would be 3 posts long, not 193.


----------



## Loob

panjandrum said:


> There is no explanation,


I was wondering, though, why "a historic" sounds bumpkin-like in AmE,  at least to RG.
Perhaps there might be an explanation for that?


----------



## Hermione Golightly

> 3 - those in which the H is pronounced by some people or in some variants of English, but not in others (hotel, historic, herb)
> 
> There is no explanation, otherwise this thread would be 3 posts long, not 193.


Brilliant comment.
All I can say about "Category 3" is that I would not go out with them if they begged me on bended knee.


----------



## Andygc

Well, Hermione, I wasn't planning to bend my knee anyway. I say "an hotel", because that "h" in my speech is barely sounded - it is not "an 'otel". Somewhere earlier in this thread I pointed out that there is not a simple binary choice between "an 'otel" and "a hotel". The same goes for "historic", but I do not say "an herb" or "an 'erb".


----------



## RedwoodGrove

Loob said:


> Can you explain why, RG? Is "historic" pronounced with an /h/, or is the /h/ omitted? Would the speakers who say "an historic occasion" also say "an house"?


No, it's pronounced with an "h". It's just that it becomes a kind of enunciation-cum-dramatization issue because typically the phrase "an historic" is associated with very august occasions etc. The article always gets stressed. So you have the choice of "_ay_ historic", "_ah_ historic", "_eh_ historic", "_schwa_ historic", and last but not least, "_uhh_ historic". (Which in fact is the natural way to pronounce it.) There's no good answer. You need to listen to an American say _uhhh_ to know how stupid it sounds. So "_an_ historic" seems like the least offensive option.


----------



## Loob

RedwoodGrove said:


> No, it's pronounced with an "h". It's just that it becomes a kind of enunciation-cum-dramatization issue because typically the phrase "an historic" is associated with very august occasions etc. The article always gets stressed. So you have the choice of "_ay_ historic", "_ah_ historic", "_eh_ historic", "_schwa_ historic", and last but not least, "_uhh_ historic". (Which in fact is the natural way to pronounce it.) There's no good answer. You need to listen to an American say _uhhh_ to know how stupid it sounds. So "_an_ historic" seems like the least offensive option.


I'm still really really puzzled, RG. You say "a historic" is the natural way to pronounce it, and then you say it sounds stupid.


Perhaps I should confess: I say "a historic".


----------



## panjandrum

RedwoodGrove said:


> No, it's pronounced with an "h". It's just that it becomes a kind of enunciation-cum-dramatization issue because typically the phrase "an historic" is associated with very august occasions etc. The article always gets stressed. So you have the choice of "_ay_ historic", "_ah_ historic", "_eh_ historic", "_schwa_ historic", and last but not least, "_uhh_ historic". (Which in fact is the natural way to pronounce it.) There's no good answer. You need to listen to an American say _uhhh_ to know how stupid it sounds. So "_an_ historic" seems like the least offensive option.


I was thinking about exactly this point.  I would be quite comfortable saying "ah historic" in almost all situations. I am inclined to slip into "an istoric" otherwise. 


Loob said:


> I was wondering, though, why "a historic" sounds bumpkin-like in AmE,  at least to RG.
> Perhaps there might be an explanation for that?


I poked about a bit and found a few references to h-insertion in some dialects.
For example, HERE I found this interesting example:
H'are you 'ungry? Why don't you 'ave a h'apple?"
... Claimed to be a Newfoundland dialect version.
If that is valid, it could explain why RedwoodGrove is inclined to regard the borderline "a h..." words as bumpkinisms.


----------



## lingobingo

Herb is of course something of a special case in that it actually is pronounced with an aspirated H in BE but as ’erb in AE. So presumably in AE “an herb” makes perfect sense, though I can’t say I recall ever seeing it written like that.


----------



## zaffy

Moderator note: I've added this question and the following posts to our mega-monster thread on this topic.  If you feel you have the stamina for it, you might find it interesting to read from the beginning to see how peoples' perceptions of this have changed over the last thirteen years, if indeed they have.   DonnyB - moderator.

"an 'istorical monument"  

I was listening to a radio programme and had an impression that the letter 'h' was dropped and for that reason the article changed form 'a' to 'an'. Is that standard English?


----------



## PaulQ

I don't think you heard an apostrophe. You heard an old-fashioned "an historical" with an unpronounced "h" (rather than an omitted "h"). This use of *an *history/historic/historical, etc., all but died out in the mid-19th century in the UK.

There is a similar pronunciation with "an hotel", which lasted a little longer: you may hear it from time to time.


----------



## zaffy

So would you be surprised to hear someone say 'an hotel', 'an historical', or perhaps you wouldn't even notice or pay attention to it?


----------



## Steven David

zaffy said:


> "an 'istorical monument"
> 
> I was listening to a radio programme and had an impression that the letter 'h' was dropped and for that reason the article changed form 'a' to 'an'. Is that standard English?





It's incorrect. We pronounce the /h/ in "historical", and use indefinite article "a", not "an".

I've heard of this, and maybe have heard it once or twice myself. However, it's not correct.

"a historical monument"


----------



## JulianStuart

Steven David said:


> It's incorrect. We pronounce the /h/ in "historical", and use indefinite article "a", not "an".
> 
> I've heard of this, and maybe have heard it once or twice myself. However, it's not correct.
> 
> "a historical monument"


I think there will be those who disagree with such a dogmatic assdertion - this thread above contains such discussion, if I recall correctly.


----------



## PaulQ

zaffy said:


> So would you be surprised to hear someone say 'an hotel', 'an historical', or perhaps you wouldn't even notice or pay attention to it?


I'd notice it but wouldn't be over-surprised. I'd put it down to over-correction. I must admit that it doesn't sound that bad to me.


----------



## JulianStuart

PaulQ said:


> I'd notice it but wouldn't be over-surprised. I'd put it down to over-correction. I must admit that it doesn't sound that bad to me.


Would that be (h)ypercorrection? I would notice it and just mark it down to a different era or education. Just like I notice when AE speakers say 'erb for herb


----------



## Andygc

Steven David said:


> However, it's not correct.





JulianStuart said:


> I think there will be those who disagree with such a dogmatic assertion


Too right, and as covered in several of the posts earlier in this now merged thread.


zaffy said:


> I was listening to a radio programme and had an impression that the letter 'h' was dropped and for that reason the article changed form 'a' to 'an'. Is that standard English?


I suspect you heard the other form of initial "h" - the lightly voiced "h" as opposed to the voiced "h" as in _a horse _and silent "h" as in _an 'orse_. If you climb up this thread you will see that there are several words that some speakers pronounce with a lightly voiced "h", and _hotel _and _historical _are two of them.


----------



## Egmont

I admit that I haven't read through all 200+ posts here, but there are also regional variations in whether or not an initial "h" is voiced in certain words (not in every word that starts with "h"). To the extent that the initial "h" in a word such as "herb" is voiced by some people and not voiced by others, that word will properly take "a" with the first group of people and "an" with the second. There's a good chance that people in each group, having heard only their pronunciation when they were growing up and forming their language habits, will think that they speak properly and the other group does not.


----------



## sdgraham

Egmont said:


> There's a good chance that people in each group, having heard only their pronunciation when they were growing up and forming their language habits, will think that they speak properly and the other group does not.


----------



## dojibear

Steven David said:


> It's incorrect.



I agree it is incorrect in AE, in the Massachusetts and New York City dialects (the 2 that I speak). It may not be incorrect in BE, or in Louisiana.

That does not mean it is incorrect in BE, or in Louisiana. I probably have not heard this in speech, but I've seen it many times in books, in dialog (where the book is imitating a character's speech). The books write things like *'otel*, *'ello *, *'horse*. The *'* shows a missing H sound.

Because I've seen it in books, it may be out-of-date. And I don't know where it is used. I think of it as "one of the BE accents".

As others have said above, we choose between "a" and "an" based on the following sound. If an H is silent (in the speaker's dialect) I would expect "an" before it.


----------



## Steven David

dojibear said:


> I agree it is incorrect in AE, in the Massachusetts and New York City dialects (the 2 that I speak). It may not be incorrect in BE, or in Louisiana.
> 
> That does not mean it is incorrect in BE, or in Louisiana. I probably have not heard this in speech, but I've seen it many times in books, in dialog (where the book is imitating a character's speech). The books write things like *'otel*, *'ello *, *'horse*. The *'* shows a missing H sound.
> 
> Because I've seen it in books, it may be out-of-date. And I don't know where it is used. I think of it as "one of the BE accents".
> 
> As others have said above, we choose between "a" and "an" based on the following sound. If an H is silent (in the speaker's dialect) I would expect "an" before it.




Yes, of course, I know very well that it has to do with the sound. And it is correct to pronounce the /h/ in historical and put indefinite article "a" before it.

After this, yes, it has to do with local dialects.

Yes, this has to do with local dialects. However, in the national Standard dialects of English, it's correct to pronounce the /h/ in "historical" and use indefinite article "a" before it.


----------



## sdgraham

Steven David said:


> Yes, this has to do with local dialects. However, in the national Standard dialects of English, it's correct to pronounce the /h/ in "historical" and use indefinite article "a" before it.


I cannot image any American saying 'Arley Davidson."


----------



## dojibear

I'm not sure WHAT he said! The engine noise is so loud, he could be speaking Eye-talian for all I know!


----------



## Loob

zaffy said:


> "an 'istorical monument"
> 
> I was listening to a radio programme and had an impression that the letter 'h' was dropped and for that reason the article changed form 'a' to 'an'. Is that standard English?


Some non-standard varieties of English routinely drop /h/ at the beginning of words, so it could have been a speaker of one of those non-standard varieties that you heard.

But... some speakers of standard English do use "an" before _historical, _as you will see from posts earlier in this thread.

So my answer is a resounding "maybe".


----------



## dojibear

That's 2 votes for "maybe"!


----------



## JulianStuart

For those that follow this  particular standard, 





Brioche said:


> *the system is*:if the stress does not fall on the first syllable, then *an* rather than *a* is used. The h is not silent.
> 
> a h*i*story of England. [but] an hist*o*rical timeline. an hist*o*rian of note
> a h*y*sterisis curve [but] an hyst*e*rical outburst
> a h*o*spital [but] an hosp*i*table working environment
> Just to be different, in BE the h in _herb _is not silent, so in BE *a herb,*   in AE *an herb* (silent h)
> a h*e*rb  (pronounce the h in BE) an herb*a*rium (pronounce the h in BE)


Interesting to note that in AE, herb is cited with a silent h but herbarium has an h


----------



## zaffy

Great summery, Julian Stuart


----------



## Andygc

Steven David said:


> Yes, this has to do with local dialects. However, in the national Standard dialects of English, it's correct to pronounce the /h/ in "historical" and use indefinite article "a" before it.


You appear to be deaf to what others say. The use of _an hotel_ and _an historical_ is completely normal in one variety of standard BE pronunciation. It's not non-standard dialect, it's standard. In other varieties of English it is normal to use _a_ not _an_. Neither use is incorrect. The choice depends on which standard pronunciation is used by the speaker - fully voiced or lightly voiced 'h'.

I do wonder what you mean by "national Standard dialects of English". There's no Dialect Standardisation Board in Britain. Is there one in America now?


----------



## Steven David

Andygc said:


> You appear to be deaf to what others say. The use of _an hotel_ and _an historical_ is completely normal in one variety of standard BE pronunciation. It's not non-standard dialect, it's standard. In other varieties of English it is normal to use _a_ not _an_. Neither use is incorrect. The choice depends on which standard pronunciation is used by the speaker - fully voiced or lightly voiced 'h'.
> 
> I do wonder what you mean by "national Standard dialects of English". There's no Dialect Standardisation Board in Britain. Is there one in America now?




I'm not deaf at all to anything anyone is saying. I understand it all very well. 

There are national standard dialects of English, dialect at the national level, not the local level.


----------



## Forero

Andygc said:


> You appear to be deaf to what others say. The use of _an hotel_ and _an historical_ is completely normal in one variety of standard BE pronunciation. It's not non-standard dialect, it's standard. In other varieties of English it is normal to use _a_ not _an_. Neither use is incorrect. The choice depends on which standard pronunciation is used by the speaker - fully voiced or lightly voiced 'h'.
> 
> I do wonder what you mean by "national Standard dialects of English". There's no Dialect Standardisation Board in Britain. Is there one in America now?


I should point out that this use of the term "voiced" is not the one we use in the study of phonetics. Phonetically, a fully pronounced [ h ] is an "unvoiced consonant". Another example of an unvoiced consonant is [ s ] as in "sassy".

But each of these has a voiced counterpart, where "voiced" means "pronounced with vibration of the larynx (voice box)". The voiced counterpart of [ s ] is [ z ] as in "buzzes", and the voiced counterpart of [ h ] is [ ɦ ].

And there are sounds between [ h ] and [ ɦ ], just as there are sounds between [ s ] and [ z ]. In phonetics, these are called "partially voiced".

These in-between sounds, along with the [ ɦ ] sound itself, are what you are calling "lightly voiced 'h'", which in English we perceive as a variety of /h/ sound that, although it is actually a consonant, is vowel-like enough to prompt some of us to use "an" for the indefinite article as well as the  [ði] pronunciation of the definite article as opposed to [ðə].


----------



## JulianStuart

zaffy said:


> Great summery, Julian Stuart


The credit goes to Brioche for a post early in the thread that seemed worth reposting. I only added one comment 
(When I lived in the UK I knew many well-educated people who follow this pattern, as Andygc notes, and both their language and diction were very carefully controlled through rigorous education.)


----------



## sdgraham

Steven David said:


> There are national standard dialects of English, dialect at the national level, not the local level.


Can you please give us a link to the standardizing authority in the U.S.?
Thanks


----------



## Andygc

Forero said:


> I should point out that this use of the term "voiced" is not the one we use in the study of phonetics.


Thank you for pointing out that my terminology is non-standard, unlike my use of "an historic".   

Meanwhile, addressing other posts, I look forward to meeting a speaker of the British national standard dialect of English. I've been waiting to meet one for 70 years, and I suspect there's little hope of one coming along in my remaining lifetime.


----------



## Giovanna-Ipazia

canismajoris said:


> And really transitioning from a mid central vowel to a glottal fricative regardless of stress isn't particularly difficult, nor should it be for any English speaker.


Uh-huh!


----------



## Tappahannock

For the musically highbrow among us, there are these guideposts:







But The Venerable Bryan [Garner] concurs with Fowler and Twain, and with many earlier contributors to this thread, that the modern  practice is 'a' in all cases relating to history, historic(al), historian, and a number of others; adding:





It would be tempting and satisfying to assume that Garner borrows his stages of language change from oncology, but in fact he defines them rather differently.

Meanwhile, I've found this 16-year discussion more than usually enlightening on the historical currents on the subject, but it has in the end made me entirely comfortable aligning my own practice with Garner's recommendation.


----------



## Forero

Tappahannock said:


> …
> But The Venerable Bryan [Garner] concurs with Fowler and Twain, and with many earlier contributors to this thread, that the modern  practice is 'a' in all cases relating to history, historic(al), historian, and a number of others; adding:
> 
> 
> 
> Anyone who sounds the _h_- in words of the type here discussed should avoid pretense and use _a_. _An_ humanitarian is, judged even by the most tolerant standards, a pretentious humanitarian. …
Click to expand...

Even without the _h-_, _humanitarian_ does not start with a vowel sound, so yes, "an humanitarian" does not comport with even the most tolerant standards.


----------



## JulianStuart

Forero said:


> Even without the _h-_, _humanitarian_ does not start with a vowel sound, so yes, "an humanitarian" does not comport with even the most tolerant standards.


I recall Carl Sagan used you-man as his version


----------



## jbening

JulianStuart said:


> I recall Carl Sagan used you-man as his version


Broadcasters are taught not to aspirate h's so the blowing of air won't sound in the microphone. The US sportscaster Al Michaels has hu's that sound just like yu's.


----------

