Vegas & The Aftermath - Diary

[tikay]

Finally, for the grammatical pedants. Why can we write "a mysterious hotel", but "a hotel" has to be "an hotel"?

I always wondered this. The answer is it doesn't have to be an

foud this in AskOxford:

The form an for the indefinite article is used before a spoken vowel sound, regardless of how the written word is spelt. If you say 'an otel' when speaking (which is now often regarded as distinctly old-fashioned), then it may be appropriate for you to write 'an hotel'; but most people say 'hotel' with a sounded 'h', and should write 'a hotel'.

By contrast, words such as 'honour', 'heir' or 'hour' in which the 'h' sound is dropped are written with 'an'. Americans who drop the 'h' in 'herb' may also prefer to write 'an herb', but in standard British pronunciation the 'h' is sounded, and 'a herb' is therefore correct in writing. Because 'European' is said with an initial 'y' sound, which counts as a consonantal sound in English speech, it is said (and written) with 'a' not 'an'. An abbreviation such as M.P., which is pronounced em pea, begins with a spoken vowel, and so it is 'an M.P.'

Many thanks - that sort of makes sense. It's always intrigued me.

"...distinctly old-fashioned..." eh? We can't have that, can we?

I'm grateful for the explanation. I once wrote a piece for a poker newspper, using "an hotel", & the sub-editor changed it, & wrote to me to point out my typo. He was Oxford educated.

Using 'an hotel' is just plain wrong.  It's never been correct English, and hopefully never will be.

Well, as odd as it may sound, & look, (& it always did) it most certainly WAS correct English when I was at School - 100%. To save you the trouble of pointing it out, I concede it was a long time ago.

I agree it's bizarre, & I hope it's now history, but it used to be something very important in written English.

OK, London here I come, the delights of the M1, M40 & M25 await.

[Chompy]

If it's an hotel, should it not also be an hostel? Never heard anyone say that, ever. A hotel imo.

[kinboshi]

Finally, for the grammatical pedants. Why can we write "a mysterious hotel", but "a hotel" has to be "an hotel"?

I always wondered this. The answer is it doesn't have to be an

foud this in AskOxford:

The form an for the indefinite article is used before a spoken vowel sound, regardless of how the written word is spelt. If you say 'an otel' when speaking (which is now often regarded as distinctly old-fashioned), then it may be appropriate for you to write 'an hotel'; but most people say 'hotel' with a sounded 'h', and should write 'a hotel'.

By contrast, words such as 'honour', 'heir' or 'hour' in which the 'h' sound is dropped are written with 'an'. Americans who drop the 'h' in 'herb' may also prefer to write 'an herb', but in standard British pronunciation the 'h' is sounded, and 'a herb' is therefore correct in writing. Because 'European' is said with an initial 'y' sound, which counts as a consonantal sound in English speech, it is said (and written) with 'a' not 'an'. An abbreviation such as M.P., which is pronounced em pea, begins with a spoken vowel, and so it is 'an M.P.'

Many thanks - that sort of makes sense. It's always intrigued me.

"...distinctly old-fashioned..." eh? We can't have that, can we?

I'm grateful for the explanation. I once wrote a piece for a poker newspper, using "an hotel", & the sub-editor changed it, & wrote to me to point out my typo. He was Oxford educated.

Using 'an hotel' is just plain wrong.  It's never been correct English, and hopefully never will be.

Well, as odd as it may sound, & look, (& it always did) it most certainly WAS correct English when I was at School - 100%. To save you the trouble of pointing it out, I concede it was a long time ago.

I agree it's bizarre, & I hope it's now history, but it used to be something very important in written English.

OK, London here I come, the delights of the M1, M40 & M25 await.

It's surely never been correct written English. 

[tikay]

Finally, for the grammatical pedants. Why can we write "a mysterious hotel", but "a hotel" has to be "an hotel"?

I always wondered this. The answer is it doesn't have to be an

foud this in AskOxford:

The form an for the indefinite article is used before a spoken vowel sound, regardless of how the written word is spelt. If you say 'an otel' when speaking (which is now often regarded as distinctly old-fashioned), then it may be appropriate for you to write 'an hotel'; but most people say 'hotel' with a sounded 'h', and should write 'a hotel'.

By contrast, words such as 'honour', 'heir' or 'hour' in which the 'h' sound is dropped are written with 'an'. Americans who drop the 'h' in 'herb' may also prefer to write 'an herb', but in standard British pronunciation the 'h' is sounded, and 'a herb' is therefore correct in writing. Because 'European' is said with an initial 'y' sound, which counts as a consonantal sound in English speech, it is said (and written) with 'a' not 'an'. An abbreviation such as M.P., which is pronounced em pea, begins with a spoken vowel, and so it is 'an M.P.'

Many thanks - that sort of makes sense. It's always intrigued me.

"...distinctly old-fashioned..." eh? We can't have that, can we?

I'm grateful for the explanation. I once wrote a piece for a poker newspper, using "an hotel", & the sub-editor changed it, & wrote to me to point out my typo. He was Oxford educated.

Using 'an hotel' is just plain wrong.  It's never been correct English, and hopefully never will be.

Well, as odd as it may sound, & look, (& it always did) it most certainly WAS correct English when I was at School - 100%. To save you the trouble of pointing it out, I concede it was a long time ago.

I agree it's bizarre, & I hope it's now history, but it used to be something very important in written English.

OK, London here I come, the delights of the M1, M40 & M25 await.

It's surely never been correct written English. 

Wrong possibly, yes, but "never", clearly no. It's a frequent debating point, & has been for decades, - but it's incorrect to say it was "never used". My question was "why?", which we now know. It's that phonetic thing.

The use of the article "a" or "an" before "hotel" is influenced by the usage (i.e. whether American or British); however the conjecture that the usage of "a hotel" indicates the British is incorrect. There is a predilection for the phrase "an hotel" in the Queen's English when compared with the American usage (the Queen's English being the monastic form of British English). In using the Queen's English, the "h" is pronounced when the word "hotel" is spoken exclusively, but dropped when speaking the phrase "an hotel" (i.e. "an hotel" is pronounced: an o-tel'). This predilection is not sui generis to the word "hotel:" polysyllabic words beginning with "h" (e.g. "historic" and "hypothesis") are similarly phrased (e.g. "an historic") in the Queen's English. Whilst scholars argue the Queen's English is correct, the trend favours the 'American' usage ... even in Britain.

[kinboshi]

Finally, for the grammatical pedants. Why can we write "a mysterious hotel", but "a hotel" has to be "an hotel"?

I always wondered this. The answer is it doesn't have to be an

foud this in AskOxford:

The form an for the indefinite article is used before a spoken vowel sound, regardless of how the written word is spelt. If you say 'an otel' when speaking (which is now often regarded as distinctly old-fashioned), then it may be appropriate for you to write 'an hotel'; but most people say 'hotel' with a sounded 'h', and should write 'a hotel'.

By contrast, words such as 'honour', 'heir' or 'hour' in which the 'h' sound is dropped are written with 'an'. Americans who drop the 'h' in 'herb' may also prefer to write 'an herb', but in standard British pronunciation the 'h' is sounded, and 'a herb' is therefore correct in writing. Because 'European' is said with an initial 'y' sound, which counts as a consonantal sound in English speech, it is said (and written) with 'a' not 'an'. An abbreviation such as M.P., which is pronounced em pea, begins with a spoken vowel, and so it is 'an M.P.'

Many thanks - that sort of makes sense. It's always intrigued me.

"...distinctly old-fashioned..." eh? We can't have that, can we?

I'm grateful for the explanation. I once wrote a piece for a poker newspper, using "an hotel", & the sub-editor changed it, & wrote to me to point out my typo. He was Oxford educated.

Using 'an hotel' is just plain wrong.  It's never been correct English, and hopefully never will be.

Well, as odd as it may sound, & look, (& it always did) it most certainly WAS correct English when I was at School - 100%. To save you the trouble of pointing it out, I concede it was a long time ago.

I agree it's bizarre, & I hope it's now history, but it used to be something very important in written English.

OK, London here I come, the delights of the M1, M40 & M25 await.

It's surely never been correct written English. 

Wrong possibly, yes, but "never", clearly no. It's a frequent debating point, & has been for decades, - but it's incorrect to say it was "never used". My question was "why?", which we now know. It's that phonetic thing.

The use of the article "a" or "an" before "hotel" is influenced by the usage (i.e. whether American or British); however the conjecture that the usage of "a hotel" indicates the British is incorrect. There is a predilection for the phrase "an hotel" in the Queen's English when compared with the American usage (the Queen's English being the monastic form of British English). In using the Queen's English, the "h" is pronounced when the word "hotel" is spoken exclusively, but dropped when speaking the phrase "an hotel" (i.e. "an hotel" is pronounced: an o-tel'). This predilection is not sui generis to the word "hotel:" polysyllabic words beginning with "h" (e.g. "historic" and "hypothesis") are similarly phrased (e.g. "an historic") in the Queen's English. Whilst scholars argue the Queen's English is correct, the trend favours the 'American' usage ... even in Britain.

For every quote, there's a counter-quote:

"The grammar rule is whether you use 'a' or 'an', and the TRADITIONAL grammar rule is quite clear - you use 'a' if the 'h' is aspirated, and 'an' otherwise. The 'h' cannot be aspirated if it is silent, by definition. So it then becomes a matter of pronounciation. The point of contention is whether you accept the traditional grammar rule - some do, some don't, and that is why some linguists say you can use either.

Now, we come to the pronounciation. What IS true is that in Middle English many more words were pronounced with a silent, unaspirated 'h', probably, as you say, because of a Norman French influence. For example, the King James Bible has the following text from Genesis: "And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years." At the time, 'hundred' was unaspirated. It is not now, because Modern English changed that pronounciation. RP is based on Modern English, and in Modern English both 'hotel' and 'history' have aspirated aitches. So formal Modern English would dictate the use of 'a', not 'an'."

(now I know that the King James Bible wasn't around when you were young and at school, so in your day it is possible that the English language was quite a different beast).

[tikay]

But we learn from the above - or at least, I learn - that there is (are?) "Queen's English" & "British English" Never knew that!

Edit - And now I note a third - "Modern English"!

How many are there?

No wonder pedants argue so......

[tikay]

If it's an hotel, should it not also be an hostel? Never heard anyone say that, ever. A hotel imo.

With respect Chomps, you have never heard it because you mix with the working class. Indeed - & one has no wish to offend - but it could be argued you are working class. IMO, of course. (You are a friend of Sir Donkalot - I rest my case).

[kenjude]

As a certified aeroplane geek, that's a breathtaking reply - thank you.

Radials, airways - the answer begs more questions the more I read it.

You seem very well infomed on all this - were you, or are you, involved with ATC?

I hope you are well, & had a good Cheltenham. Did you back Kauto?

Very well thanks, not a great Cheltenham for me personally (severe bout of place-itis) but mightily impressed by Kauto Star, and by the bumper winner.

My ATC knowledge comes purely from being interested in it and two or three years in the simulated flying world years ago. So I have lots of second hand Aerad airways charts covering most of the world, and Aerad approach procedures booklets for lots of airports. You can buy them cheaply in the hobby shops at airports and viewing areas once they've been replaced by newer versions. They all come stamped "not for real world use" as soon they have been superceded but are a cheap way of getting good information for simming.

They used to sell them in the shop in the terminal at East Midlands so next time you were flying out from there you could browse and see what they look like in the flesh. Very interesting if you're interest extends beyond the actual planes.

Airways - a network of low level and high level motorway routes in the sky (low and high level each have their own charts)
Radials -  Think of them like 360 degree spokes transmitted out from a VOR (VHF omnidirectional range) radio beacon

The airways generally run between the beacons so you fly "from" one beacon on, say the 170 degrees radial and halfway along switch to tracking "to" the next beacon on the 170 degree (may be a difference of a degree or two depending on the distance between beacons). The radio receiver is linked to an instrument that has a needle telling you whether you're left or right of the correct track, which you dial in, with a "To" and "From" indicator and autopilots can be set to track the setting on the radio receiver. That's how it was before GPS anyway, presumably that has or will take over from tracking beacons on commercial airliners.

You then have Standard Instrument Depatures from airports which essentially get the planes from the airport up to the airways, via beacons and intersections, and standard approach procedures that get them from airways to holds and then into approaches to the relevant landing runway.

 

[Chompy]

If it's an hotel, should it not also be an hostel? Never heard anyone say that, ever. A hotel imo.

With respect Chomps, you have never heard it because you mix with the working class. Indeed - & one has no wish to offend - but it could be argued you are working class. IMO, of course. (You are a friend of Sir Donkalot - I rest my case).

LOL, if anything I'm upper-middle class, hence I pronounce it "Eh Oo tel".
That's a fact, as is that Richard Orford is the BEST player among Sky pundits. Last night's result proves that.

[Royal Flush]

Pollack looks like a young Karabiner i reckon

Imagine being an old Karabiner!

Some of us have the pleasure of looking forward to that in a few years time...

[Royal Flush]

As a certified aeroplane geek, that's a breathtaking reply - thank you.

Radials, airways - the answer begs more questions the more I read it.

You seem very well infomed on all this - were you, or are you, involved with ATC?

I hope you are well, & had a good Cheltenham. Did you back Kauto?

Very well thanks, not a great Cheltenham for me personally (severe bout of place-itis) but mightily impressed by Kauto Star, and by the bumper winner.

My ATC knowledge comes purely from being interested in it and two or three years in the simulated flying world years ago. So I have lots of second hand Aerad airways charts covering most of the world, and Aerad approach procedures booklets for lots of airports. You can buy them cheaply in the hobby shops at airports and viewing areas once they've been replaced by newer versions. They all come stamped "not for real world use" as soon they have been superceded but are a cheap way of getting good information for simming.

They used to sell them in the shop in the terminal at East Midlands so next time you were flying out from there you could browse and see what they look like in the flesh. Very interesting if you're interest extends beyond the actual planes.

Airways - a network of low level and high level motorway routes in the sky (low and high level each have their own charts)
Radials -  Think of them like 360 degree spokes transmitted out from a VOR (VHF omnidirectional range) radio beacon

The airways generally run between the beacons so you fly "from" one beacon on, say the 170 degrees radial and halfway along switch to tracking "to" the next beacon on the 170 degree (may be a difference of a degree or two depending on the distance between beacons). The radio receiver is linked to an instrument that has a needle telling you whether you're left or right of the correct track, which you dial in, with a "To" and "From" indicator and autopilots can be set to track the setting on the radio receiver. That's how it was before GPS anyway, presumably that has or will take over from tracking beacons on commercial airliners.

You then have Standard Instrument Depatures from airports which essentially get the planes from the airport up to the airways, via beacons and intersections, and standard approach procedures that get them from airways to holds and then into approaches to the relevant landing runway.

 

This is pretty much spot on, and sounds a lot easier than it is when you are flying single pilot...

GPS will take over combined with TCAS it presents the cheapest way of getting from A>B so will no doubt be the way of the future, nowhere near as fun as tracking radials though....

[cdw1111]

  I often think of modern airline pilots as button pushing bus drivers due to the technology available,however an incident like the recent Hudson river spashdown really puts that into perpective.I been in the cockpit many times during flights and it's all a bit robotic,but one time i was on my way to Hong Kong and asked the hosty if the captain would allow me up the front for landing.She never said anything about it so me and my mate proceed to tuck into the free booze,well about ten hours later she sidles over and takes us up there,god only knows why as she had been serving us the drinks and must have realised that we were slightly worse for wear.It was a great experience as the old airport(Kai Tak) was right in the city and you basically hurtle towards a mountain with a chequre board painted on it for reference,do a steep turn just before you hit it and land amongst loads of blocks of flats,quite bizarre when your hammered.The pilot said it was everyones favourite destination as there really got to use all there skills and it was something to see that contol over a jumbo,sadly the airport is no more.

[kenjude]

  It was a great experience as the old airport(Kai Tak) was right in the city and you basically hurtle towards a mountain with a chequre board painted on it for reference,do a steep turn just before you hit it and land amongst loads of blocks of flats,quite bizarre when your hammered.The pilot said it was everyones favourite destination as there really got to use all there skills and it was something to see that contol over a jumbo,sadly the airport is no more.

Flown it on my PC many times in everything from a Cessna to a 747 - great fun.

[kenjude]

That's a fact, as is that Richard Orford is the BEST player among Sky pundits. Last night's result proves that.

Spent an hour or so on the same table as Richard last night, until crippled when forced/priced in to call his short stacked shove and then walking into a bigger pocket pair when having to shove myself a few hands later. Very nice guy.

[the sicilian]

If it's an hotel, should it not also be an hostel? Never heard anyone say that, ever. A hotel imo.

With respect Chomps, you have never heard it because you mix with the working class. Indeed - & one has no wish to offend - but it could be argued you are working class. IMO, of course. (You are a friend of Sir Donkalot - I rest my case).

I'll have you riff raff wage slaves  company men know i am of the capitalist elite and feeding money into the poker community on a regular basis is just one of my ways of giving back to the heaving sweaty hoardes...