Twitter
Email
RSS“A Historic” or “An Historic” Event?
A Google search will show more uses of a historic than an historic, but in speech, “an historic event” is the more idiomatic.
To repeat something I wrote in a comment,
“An historic” is idiomatic when the words are run together and the stress falls on the second syllable of historic. The use of “an” becomes self-conscious and unidiomatic when the speaker pauses after the “an” and then puts the stress on the first syllable of historic.
Some speakers tend to use historic and historical interchangeably, but a useful difference exists.
The word historic has the sense of uniqueness. An historic event is one that stands out as having had a significant, history-changing impact. The Battle of Waterloo was an historic event. It stopped Napoleon’s wars of conquest. The Seneca Falls Convention in 1848 was an historic event. It mobilized the women’s suffrage movement in the United States.
The word historical, on the other hand, may be applied to any event that occurred in the past. The Battle of Waterloo was both historical and historic.
On the other hand, if you wish to say that something is not historical, you can use either ahistoric. or ahistorical to mean the same thing: “not concerned with or related to history.”
For example, a political leader who repeats the mistakes of his predecessors may be said to have an ahistoric attitude towards governing. A novel based on an historical person or event may nevertheless be ahistorical if it interprets the character or event in a way to contradict the known facts.
Another, useful, if unlovely, “history” word is historicity. Ex. Some people deny the historicity of the Nazi Holocaust of the Jews and Gypsies.
Got Your Free eBook?
- Subscribe to Daily Writing Tips and you will be able to download our free ebook: Basic English Grammar.
- You will also get all our grammar, spelling, punctuation and writing tips.
- The download link will go along with the first email (you might need to wait up to 24 hours).
Forgive me, maybe I’m just clueless, but I just can’t figure out how or when one would ever stress the first syllable of “historic.” “History” yes, “historic” no.
I do agree that “historicity” is one ugly word, though–to where I thought it was an author’s invention when I first encountered it.
I absolutely disagree and would never ever use “an” in front of any word with an aspirate H at the beginning. That just isn’t what it’s for, and it sounds pretentious (and wrong to my ear).
When I see “an historic”, I aspirate an almost-silent “h”. When I see “a historic”, the “h” gets a full “h” sound. I hadn’t noticed, until you mentioned it, that the emphasis shifts between the second and first syllable, too.
When I am writing, I usually use “an historic event” with the nearly-silent “h” and emphasis on the second syllable of “historic”. It seems more euphonious to my inner “ear”.
It is always “a history” for me.
Hmm, a little research on the web shows there’s considerable disagreement. One rule states:
Any word beginning with an aspirated “h” (one that’s sounded when spoken) always takes “a”. For example, a hotel, a holiday, a history professor, and a historic treaty.
But another says:
when the first syllable of a word that begins with an aspirated “h” is unstressed a writer may use either a or an, depending on pronunciation.
Plus:
In British English in the past, the initial ‘h’ was pronounced weakly or not at all in words with an unstressed first syllable, so ‘an’ was generally used before these words.
Since I was raised in Britain, “an historic” does not sound strange. However; my father always insisted on “an hotel” which always did, and still does sound weird.
–paul
I do agree it depends on your accent and how you pronounce “historic” – personally I pronounce it with a aspirated H, so it’s “a historic event” for me.
I agree with Saphira that you would never stress the first syllable of “historic”–so I don’t think I’ve ever heard a speaker pause and put the stress on the first syllable. And I agree with Brad and Paul that what is really at play is a distinction between aspirated and silent (or quasi-silent, apparently) “h.” If the initial h is silent, it makes sense for the word to take “an” because it then begins with a vowel sound. I suppose aspirating the “h” can make the first syllable of “historic” sound a little more underscored or stressed in a broad sense, but it’s still not the syllable on which the stress falls.
Perhaps “stress” was the wrong word for me to use in the context of
“The use of “an” becomes self-conscious and unidiomatic when the speaker pauses after the “an” and then puts the stress on the first syllable of historic.”
Maybe I should have said “and then aspirates the ‘h.’”
The major stress would still be on the “tor.”
I am confused. Which is more grammatically correct? Are you saying that either usage is acceptable. I always thought ‘An’ was the proper form.
OK, call me an old fart, but my English teacher in high school would have cracked my head for using “a historic.” Technically, this is a split infinitive when you use “a historic.”
As far as Google hits, I don’t see the relevance with that. Using “an historic” appears to have fallen out of style, but we all tend to use words the way we originally learned. I will continue to use an historic. Either seems to be acceptable now.
I seem to have missed the spot where this post turned into an attack on the use of “an historic” or a defense of “a historic.”
I’m probably as old a fart as you are, Hal, and I do not say or write “a historic.”
I learned the same rule you did:
Use “a” in front of a word in which the initial h is aspirated; use “an” in front of a word in which the initial h is silent.
However, in speech the pronunciation of words shifts. An individual speaker may pronounce the same word differently, according to where it falls in a sentence. Depending on context, I would not throw stones at a speaker for saying “a historic.”
PS “a historic” has nothing to do with a split infinitive.
An attack? Discussion and disagreement is not an attack.
I realize that word usage changes over the years. And you are right about the split infinitive.
Finally, I’ll stick with my old, long dead English teacher as far as an historic… .
That was not an attack.
Hal,
I wasn’t calling any of the comments an attack! I was referring to the post. I don’t think the post has anything in it to suggest that I’m against the use of “an historic.”
I’m very sorry if any of my responses suggest that I don’t welcome disagreement and discussion.
Like many others, I would never write “an historic”. For me it’s a speech thing. I would never say “an ‘istoric”, so would never write. The letter H is always sounded. Maybe it’s an accent thing??
I am glad that I am not the only person in the world that this bothers. From what I have read, the ‘an historic’ is appropriate if you speak the queen’s English and don’t pronounce the h. However, if you speak American English and pronounce the h then it should be ‘a historic’. This explains why it bothers be when certain people say an historic. Our president elect for instance said ‘this is an historic event’ and it grated on my soul, while some nameless news media talking head said ‘this is an istoric event’ and it didn’t seem to grate me. Either way I will continue to say a historic event for the same reason that Eddie Izzard said Americans say erb and the British say herb “Because there’s a f***ing ‘h’ in it.”
Ridiculous. Really, what a ridiculous argument. Wait, is it an ridiculous??? C’mon, why does “historic” get this special treatment? Listen, the word has an H, by itself you pronounce the H, so when it’s in the middle of a sentence, you shouldn’t suddenly change that. It’s that simple, isn’t it? Um, yeah, it is.
I’m confused…. do you say,
“…an event or a event”?
As in, “an historic event” or “a historic event”…
Perhaps the idiomatic expression has “the best of me”.
Only a handful of nouns (hour, heir, honor, herb) have a silent h and thus should be used with an.
The remainder (history, house, hat, hill, hobo, etc.) are pronounced with the “aitch” sound and should be use with a.
Only a Cockney or an hidiot would do otherwise…
According to the Oxford American Dictionary,
“The distinction between a and an was not solidified until the nineteenth century. Up to that time, an preceded most words beginning with a vowel, regardless of how the first syllable sounded. The U.S. Constitution, for example, reads: “The Congress shall have Power . . . [t]o establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization.” But that is no excuse for a twenty-first-century writer.
People worry about whether the correct article is a or an with historian, historic, and a few other words. Most authorities have supported a over an. The traditional rule is that if the h- is sounded, then a is the proper form. So people who aspirate their h ’s and follow that rule would say a historian and a historic. This is not a new “rule.” Even the venerated language authority H. W. Fowler, in the England of 1926, advocated a before historic, historical, and humble.”
(Under the word “an” in the USAGE section)
I have two theories regarding the misuse of “an historic”:
1) People are making a connection between “an” and “event ” in the phrase “an historical event”. They probably think that the connection between “an” and “event” is more important since “historical” is only modifying the noun.
But this is incorrect since the logic behind using “an” over “a” is to dissolve back-to-back vowel sounds (when spoken). So “an hour” makes sense not because “hour” is a noun, but because the “h” is not pronounced.
2) People assume that because we use “an hour”, they can apply it willy nilly to whatever “h” words come their way.
In either case, and from what little research I’ve done, contemporary views support the rule that “an” is only used to break up back-to-back vowel sounds. So when people use “an historical” on NPR, it’s because their snooty.
Alex, I am totally with you. However, I can’t resist but comment on the irony of your use of the incorrect form of “their/there/they’re” in the last paragraph. I am sure that it was a heated omission, but funny none the less!