thoughts from a brokenSoldier

Okay, after all the recent ire I’ve spilled onto the virtual pages here, it’s time for a little aside on a lighter note.  There is a habit among our media - country-wide - that kinds of sticks in my craw.  (I am an English Major, which explains why I take issue with this…)

In recent history, I have noticed that many journalists, national and local, have taken to using the phrase "an historic" when describing significant events in our society.  While this seems very intellectual and proper, it is quite definitely an erroneous use of the language as we have come to use it in America.  (Before you accuse me of nitpicking, be advised that I know this is a minor thing, but I wanted to stray away from the political, even if just for a moment.) 

The use of this phrase can quite easily be traced.  When speaking in the British dialects of the English language, the phrase "a historic event" is most certainly incorrect, but only because in those specific dialects, the "h" is silent.  That means that the first syllable actually pronounced is the vowel "i."  And as we know, when putting an identifying article in front of an adjective, the "a" becomes "an" if the first pronounced syllable is a vowel, illustrated by the difference between saying something such as "a building" and "an event."  But when American journalists speak, they pronounce the consonant "h" in the word historic.  So what we end up with is the phrase "an historic event."  Try it in reverse and you’d get something like the phrase "an significant event in history."  Take away the fact that British speakers display this trait, and we have no reason to place the word "an" in front of a word that begins with a consonant.  As an example, do you ever hear anyone describe something large and heavy as "an hefty item?"  You do not, even though the British dialect, true to its form, would certainly mandate such a pronunciation.  The problem, though, is that British journalists rarely ever use that phrase. 

Hey, I told you it was minor!  I simply wanted to take a break from outlining the faults of the McCain-Palin ticket for just a hot minute.  I mean hey, you can only say something so many times before it becomes a bit boring, and boring is not something I take a lot of enjoyment in being.  At the risk of being branded sexist, I’ll use a well-known axiom to explain my momentary departure from my recent theme.  Trying to get a message across to hardcore Republicans about how unfit their nominees’ ticket is is like teaching a pig to sing - the only two things you’ll accomplish are to waste your time and annoy the fuck out of the pig. 

But don’t despair…  With all this recent material surfacing about the inconsistencies in statements and policy records/ proposals from the McCain-Palin camp, I’m sure I’ll be getting back to familiar topics fairly soon!