My mother never uses the word an, and similarly always pronounces the as “thuh,” never “thee.” Unlike what the OP describes, she never repeats a syllable. She says things like “he made a nouncement,” “the larm is going off,” etc.
February 23, 2003. You didn’t get the memo? Must’ve been a oversight.
“Well, Gearge, can ye guess what I’ve got in the bag. Hit’s somethin’ ta eat startin’ with N.”
“Is it a napple?”
“No.”
“Is it a nonion?”
“No, me son.”
“I gives up. What his it?”
“Why, hit’s a narange!”
/slight hijack
That actually depends on what countries’ mythology you’re reading. It’s mostly in Western mythologies where the unicorn resembles a horse or a goat.
http://www.unicornlady.net/legends.html
Eastern unicorns looked far different, and Chinese (Ch’i lin or K’i lin) and Japanese (the Kirin or Sin-you) unicorns bear far more resemblance to those countries’ dragons or lions than anything.
The Middle Eastern unicorn mythologies (the Karkadann) even relate an animal with the body of a rhino, the tale of a lion, and three hooves on each leg.
An *western * unicorn is an horse with an horn.
I work for a company that does transcription for business conferences, and I’ve been hearing this frequently when checking my transcriptionists’ work. Many of them, in fact, just assume the guy said (for example) “an earnings boost” when in reality the guy said “a…earnings boost.” In all such cases, the a is pronounced as a long a, ay, and if I had more time I’d do a little more digging into the possibility of whether the end of that sound, as it’s a diphthong, would substitute for the consonant requirement, as the beginning sound in unicorn does. Frequently, too, there’s often a slight pause between the article and the noun, as if the speaker was going to say one word that possibly had a consonant beginning (“a boost,” for example) but changed his wording after he’d already said the article.
Sounds to me like it’s probably a little from Column A, a little from Column B.
And that’s exactly what the fruit originally was: a naranja. Similarly for “a nadder”, and the other way round for “an ewt”.
I thought Western Unicorn was the telegraph company.
Regarding the use of “an” with history/historian: I never heard this until a few years ago, and now it grates on my last nerve when I hear or read the combination. It just doesn’t, well, flow.
How did this change come about? And who decides to make these types of changes to the English language?
It’s not a recent change. “An history” and, more commonly, “an historical” is classical use. If you ever sift through legal and historical documents in the US, you will see this usage abound. I’d say it’s only relatively recently that “a history” and “a historical” have become preferred usage.
How interesting. I’m slightly embarrassed that I didn’t know. Obviously, legal or historical documents aren’t part of my daily reading.
This makes me wonder, though- why is it that newscasters, reporters and newspapers are using “an” more often? I’m quick to pick up on annoying affectations, and I really hadn’t heard “an history” before a few years ago.
That explains the difference to the German “Natter” (for the snake). I have always wondered about that, and now I know! Thank you.
It is an telegraph company. There are others.
I say “an historical event,” but dropping the “h” (annistorical), which, oddly, I don’t do when the “an” isn’t there (/h/istorical events).
I say “a history,” though – probably because the h is part of a stressed syllable.
Note also, please, the link between a napron and a napkin (and hence, a nappy*). And in sports, don’t forget a numpire!
*[sub]British/Irish diaper[/sub]
One of my first experiences with this was from TV when I was younger. In fact I still dwell upon it today, hence my posting.
In an episode of MASH, Hawkeye was on the phone impersonating Winchester, trying to acquire “an harmonica”.
That was so many years ago, but it did affect the way I treat my "a"s and "an"s with the respect to words with the letter “h”.
The moral of the story is that TV was a better teacher than what I learned in school. = )
I do the same thing. As others have said, it depends on how much (if at all) I aspirate the ‘h’ sound, and in ‘history’, i aspirate it a lot, whereas most of the time, I don’t with ‘historian.’ Yet if it is preceeded by ‘the’, then I will aspirate the ‘h’ as much as I would with history.
The HIS-torian vs. an is-torian (I’m not attempting phoetic spellnig here, just an approximation of what I do and don’t pronouce.)
However, history ALWAYS has the ‘h’ soudned out, so it’s always ‘a history.’ ‘An history’ looks and sounds silly to me, ebcause I would still say it as before, instead of saying it more like I would if it were historian.
A/an is actually the easiest grammar rule in the English language. It’s just based on the initial sound of the word immediately following it, not whether it starts with a vowel or an “h”. See…an “h”! Thus “a historian”, “a urologist”. Bugs the hell out of me when people screw that up too.
Yes. If you aspiriate the “h” in “historian.” As evidenced by this thread, many people don’t, hence “an historian.”
Blame Brooklyn
<Norton> But can it core a apple? </Norton>