Is the use of the prevowel indefinite article 'an' in from of 'h' words where the 'h' is not silent, such as 'historic', 'heroic' and 'horrendous' correct english or just a pompous affectation? Why is it only used in front of words that sound formal or serious such as those above? Do we say: I put on an hat to go look for an house and saw an helicopter while hearing an heartfelt song and ate an hamburger? Obviously that sounds ludicrous. It only sounds reasonalbly right when you hear journalists and others use it in front of solemn or dramatic words. When used in front of prosaic or common words it sounds very wrong. Dictionaries advise that it should be used in front of words beginning with vowels or silent 'h's. To use it in front of other h words is just wrong and is mere pomposity on the part of the perpetrator.
The "formal" rule is:
- when an h-word is stressed on the first syllable ("hat", "heritage"), "a" has to be used over "an"
- when an h-word is not stressed on the first syllable ("historic", "heroic", "horrendous"), then either "a" or "an" can both be used
This is why "an historic..." is acceptable but "an hat" is not.
But you're right, it does sound rather pompous to use "an" before an h-word.
I personally think it sounds quite pretentious. I rarely hear it, but when I do it tends to be in formal speech. Otherwise, I see things like "an historical event" sometimes in writing, which also seems odd. However, there appears to be a historical reason for its existence, at least in British English. For some time, even in upper-class BrE, h's were commonly dropped in conversation or were not even normally pronounced in many words, usually of Latin or French origin. This was once the case for the word "herb" (which came from Old French "erbe"...in modern French spelled "herbe" tho still "h-less" as before) in British English whose older "h-less" pronunciation lives on in American English.
However, by the 1800s, some British accents which normally dropped /h/ in many or most positions (not just Latinate or French words) became highly stigmatized, and amongst the class-conscious, many spelling pronunciations were adopted, adding spoken /h/ to words that had only ever had them in spelling (much like "hour" and "honor" are today...they appear to have escaped spelling pronunciations). As a result, there was probably a time in earlier English where it would've been common to not pronounce /h/ in "historical," even amongst the most formal upper-class speech, so "an" was used with it, just like in the class of words "hour" and "honor" belong to. The predominant pronunciation of "historical" is with /h/ today, so it seems strange to most modern speakers to use "an" before it, but it remains on in some instances (possibly more often in the written language, tho it's still somewhat rare) as a relic.
"... adding spoken /h/ to words that had only ever had them in spelling ..."
Are there any such words? I mean, it you trace "hour" and "honour" back far enough you'll find that they had a /h/s in them. Sure, it's Classical Latin that I'm talking about but ...
I'm aware of that, but I meant in English. Words like "honor" "herb" and "hour" all came from Old French words "onor" "erbe" and "ure/ore" which were at times variably spelled with "h" (as they now are in the modern French equivalents: "honneur" "herbe" and "heure" ) but even in Old French were not pronounced with /h/, which had been lost very early on in Romance (notice Spanish and Italian don't have /h/ in those words either, no matter what spelling conventions are used).
I'm not making any value judgements about whether or not these words "should" or "shouldn't" be pronounced with /h/, I'm simply stating the historical fact that when the words were introduced into English, there was no /h/, so it's not surprising that the words would stay /h/-less in English--in fact, that would be expected, barring any possible spelling pronunciations, such as "herb" with /h/ in modern British English. This from oed.com in reference to "herb" in particular:
"but the h was mute until the 19th c., and is still so treated by many"
This relatively recent development in BrE also explains the American pronunciation of /3rb/ for "herb," as that's how it had been pronounced in English when America was colonized.
As a native AE speaker, I always use the word an before historic.
I barely pronounce the h in that word when it is preceded by an,
most likely because I learned to use the prefix an and so my
pronunciation grew to match that usage. The h is always silent in
herb, hour, and honor in my accent. I use the prefix an before
hysterical and Hispanic even though, in isolation, I would prononce
the h in those words.
It seems to me that the difficulty is that the spelling rules are
based on pronunciation, but the pronunciation of words in AE
is not well defined because the same word can have several
pronunciations depending on where the word fits in a sentence.
I myself only use "an" before "h"-words that by default do not start with /h/, such as "honor", "herb", and "hour", even though in my speech I tend strongly towards initial-/h/-elision in a general fashion even when words are in sentence initial position. However, I still seem to preserve such /h/s when words starting with such are following a word with a vowel, which would indicate that the /h/ phoneme is still there, unlike in classically /h/-dropping English dialects, which would indicate why I still use "a" rather than "an" in such cases.
Well, slight correction: in places where /h/ in a word-initial position is following another vowel, if preceded by a non-low front vowel, I may replace it with [j], and if preceded by a rounded back vowel, I may replace it with [w]; however, I still seem to preserve it if it is preceded by /@/, /A/, or /{/.
In h-dropping dialects like Cockney, do they put "an" before all h-words? For example, would they say "a 'orse" or "an 'orse"?
Further to Lazar's first entry, I'd be curious to know where the 'formal' rule he refers to comes from. After all, do we say "that was an hilarious movie" or "it was only an hallucination" or "he's an homosexual" or "she brandished an harpoon", or even "that was an hypocritical statement"? In all these words the emphasis is not on the first vowel yet we would not use 'an' in front of them.
No, the purpose of using 'an' in front of some 'h' words appears to be simply to impart an air of erudition on the part of the speaker. It is always pompous and should be avoided.
<<I'd be curious to know where the 'formal' rule he refers to comes from.>>
I read it in a dictionary.
<<After all, do we say "that was an hilarious movie" or "it was only an hallucination" or "he's an homosexual" or "she brandished an harpoon", or even "that was an hypocritical statement"?>>
My "formal rule" says that "an" is *optional*, not required, before unstressed H. So it isn't even a rule really. As for me, I never use "an" before any H, in any situation.
John says:
>No, the purpose of using 'an' in front of some 'h' words appears to be
>simply to impart an air of erudition on the part of the speaker. It is
>always pompous and should be avoided.
As a native speaker, I never think to myself, while speaking, "should I use
a or an in this sentence?" I use whichever comes naturally. That means
that I say "an historic," "an hallucianation", and "an heroic." I don't see
how you can justify the claim that this is pompous, since I _dont think
about it_!
The idea that I should change my speech patterns so that I don't offend
people who, for some reason, don't like to use the word "an" before an h
seems more pompous to me ... .
Lazar says:
>> As for me, I never use "an" before any H, in any situation.
That's more bizzare. Do you have a hour to kill?
<<That's more bizzare. Do you have a hour to kill?>>
I meant I never use "an" before a *spoken* h.
I always use "an" before an "h" word in which the second syllable is stressed. I can understand why it might sound pretentious, but it's easier for me to say "an historical" rather than "a historical."
Like D, I use the form that comes naturally, I don't think it over before saying it.