why do so many people say "thuh" in front of a word that starts with a vowel sound instead of "thee"???
545512
It is a colloquialism. It depends on the geographical area where one is educated. It is ambivalent in that either way is correct.
567303
Like.  People like put the word like in like all the wrong places like all the time when they are like talking.  It's like really annoying!!!
60368
Jewelry - not Joolery\nAsterisk - not a$$-trick (and oddly enough, I had to use dollar signs to avoid asterisks!)\nCavalry - not Calvery (unless you're talking about the mountain) \n\nI have an aunt who cannot say "breakfast" - she says "breftuss". It drives me absolutely bonkers.\n\nJust a note regarding the pronunciation of the word "the" - both pronunciations are correct. Generally, the schwa sound  "thuh" is used before words beginning with consonants (the building), and the long E "thee" is used before words beginning with vowels (the outdoors). "Thee" is also used to emphasize the importance of the following word. See the Wikipedia article below.\n\nI'll also add one more word - Been. I admit, I have a tendency to get sloppy and say "bin" or "ben" although the correct pronunciation is "bee-n". (long E like seen).\n(Update - my "bin" pronunciation is acceptable! Check out the Merriam-Webster Online dictionary with the audio pronunciation. Whew - I'm not an illiterate idiot after all.)\n\nOkay, back with a couple more.\n\nMoot (moo like a cow, not mew like a kitten)\nSpecific (not pacific)\nProbably (this has 3 syllables, not 2 - it is pro bab ly not prob ly)
865071
The most common vowel sound in English is the vowel known as schwa.  It is written with an upside down e in phonetic transcription.  It is the vowel of "but" and "cut" and "putt" in stressed position, but it is the sound that nearly every other vowel assumes in unstressed position.  It is the vowel of the first and third syllables of "democracy" when pronounced normally.  It is the vowel of the second and fourth syllables of "antiquated" when pronounced normally.  Of course, people will disagree because they will pronounce these words slowly to themselves and hear different vowels in those positions, but slow pronunciation is not normal.  Normal pronunciation is how you pronounce things when you aren't thinking about them during extended speech.\n\nAnd no, the other Germanic languages do not have the unstressed vowel reduction process of English.  The English process began during Middle English times about 900 years ago, 500 years after English began to diverge from the other Germanic languages.  I don't know what the most common vowel sound is in those languages, but the frequencies of the different vowel sounds is more evenly distributed among them.  The frequency of the schwa sound in spoken English is very noticeable in counts of sounds.
905503
you would say 'an' hour because in this crazy language, "an" precedes words that begin with vowel sounds...and since the "h" in hour is silent, it sounds like the vowels "ou", kind of like you would san an herb instead of a herb here in the US\n\nHope that helps!
445745
In the case of "historic" it is not necessary, but it's not improper either.  There are good historical and phonological reasons for it.\n\nBASIC explanation why "an" may appear before a word beginning with /h/:\n\n1) the initial /h/ IS not pronounced\n*generally in "hours" hono(u)r"\n*American English - "herb"\n*some dialects "humble", "hotel"\n\n2) history - that is, the /h/ USED to be silent:\nthere are a number of words whose initial /h/ was originally not pronounced, esp. those derived from (Old) French, which did not pronounce it (sometimes did not even spell it)\nSome of these (examples listed in #1) STILL do not pronounce the /h/ in many or all English dialects. Others that have added a pronounced /h/ may still be treated as if they did not have it -- 'historic(al)' is perhaps the best example of this\n\nBUT this is not enough -- those who say "an historic(al) event" (pronouncing the /h/) ALSO usually say "a history"!\nSo, there's one other very important factor, which is:\n\n3) The syllable starting with /h/ LACKS an ACCENT\n--Specifically, if the SECOND syllable is accented, the initial /h/ is WEAKER, perhaps only very slightly pronounced (It seems especially weak if the following vowel is formed in the front of the mouth -- a, i, e (as opposed to vowels made further back -- o, u)\n\nSo, if the first syllable HAS an accent (especially the MAIN accent of the word) it is preceded by "a" --thus we say "A HISTORY" (unless, of course, you're Cockney)\n\nTo get the sense of how this works, just try saying the word "historic" all by itself. You may notice that you scarcely pronounce the /h/. Even if you do, it may feel like it takes extra energy do so (whereas when you say "history" the 'energy' is already supplied by accenting the syllable)\n\n[Some have said 'accented' or 'unaccented', but this is not quite correct. When the SECOND syllable is accented, the first syllable has the LEAST accent; if a LATER syllable has the primary accent the first syllable may still have a SECONDARY accent, and the 'fule' just described does not apply. Examples: 'hospitality' 'hippopotamus']\n\nIn fact, in expressions like "an historic..." many find that the inclusion of the /n/ can actually make the words easier to pronounce (though in that case the /h/ is usually only VERY slightly pronounced).\n\nOther examples where "an" may be found (all of which have an accent on the second syllable): "an hereditary title" [vs. "a HERitage], "an habitual liar" [vs. "a HA-bit"], cf. "an hysterical child"\n\nNow if you were to try some of these expressions in a search engine you would likely find that "an historic" and "an historical" are much more commong (in proportion to "a historic" "a historical") than these other examples. That leads to the FINAL(?) factor that affects pronunciation.\n\n4) HABIT! That is, we're USED to hearing it that way, and so it just seems right, even if it does not follow the "rules" we may generally us for such cases.\n\nThus, the reason 'historic' and 'historical' are far more likely to be preceded by "an" than other words that might "qualify" is that they are more COMMON words or expressions. People are used to hearing them this way. This is hardly unusual. In any language the LESS common a word is in everyday speech the MORE likely it is speakers apply the "general rules" to that word. Thus, irregular verbs in a language [forms of to be, come, go, sit, etc.] are COMMON words.
553263
J is always pronounced as Hh (explained above).\n\nG ispronounced H if it stands before E or I: e.g.ingeniero. \n\nIn all other cases G is pronouced as in "good". \n\nBesides that, if U and other vowel stands after G, U is not pronounced usually, unless it has two dots on it, e.g. guerra, because U is used only to show that G is not H there.
1101934
♡Well, I'm sitting with a group of 8 Japanese (as I pretty much do once a week) and I asked them your Q just now. This is what they said ～　It's a little difficult for us to pronounce "R" as well as "L", "V", "TH" and a few other letters or combinations of letters because they are those letters/sounds that aren't used in our everyday Japanese. SOME of us aren't accustomed to forming the letter(s) with our mouths or making the correct sound. We're just not used to it so when SOME of us speak English, which is foreign to us, we have some difficulty. It's not on purpose! It would be the same for some "foreigners" trying to speak Japanese and using "tsu", "gyo", "ryu" and such, they just don't get it. Think about it. We stress SOME because many Japanese people don't have the problem and pronounce "R" and all sounds perfectly. ～～So Coffee, there you have it, straight from the mouths of Japanese, who all speak English exceptionally well I might add!♡
846455
Wow I havent really heard people say a jean or a pant. But if that's true, wow i would go nuts! It just doesnt sound right. Why do people insist on speaking incorrectly? Slang is okay but still, to change the rules of language are just messed up. I'd correct them if i heard them saying that.
795506
You use the article "an" before any word that begins with a vowel or a vowel sound. \n\nexamples: \nan apple (before a noun beginning with a vowel)\nan enthusiastic reply (before an adjective beginning with a vowel)\nan honest mistake (before an adjective with a vowel sound since the letter "h" is silent)\nan herb (before a noun with a vowel sound since the letter "h" is silent)\nan ytrium (before a noun with a vowel sound since the letter "y" is pronounced as a short i sound)\n\nyou use the article "an" to break the monotny of two consecutive vowel sounds. it really sounds odd if you say "a apple". \n\nhope these help
505401
"comf'terbul" has a perfectly logical explanation and is an acceptable pronunciation (as is "comf'tebul")\n\nAnd why don't pronounce it "the way it's written"?  Because language simply doesn't always work that way.  And so I don't say "I-run" for "iron"; and the "t" that I pronounce in "soft" I do NOT pronounce in the form "soften" (even though it is written that way and even COMES from "soft").\n\n--------------------\n\nThis sort of re-ordering of the sounds of a word --called "METATHESIS"--  is very common in language.  It may come about by confusion, but often it happens simply because the expected form is more difficult to pronounce.    In some cases the change is considered ignorant or at least non-standard, in other instances it is the (or a) ACCEPTED pronounciation.\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metathesis_(linguistics)\n\n\nExamples in English:\n1) incorrect/nonstandard:\n  "nuclear" -- pronounced as "nucular" (by educated people as well... including THREE Presidents in recent times --not just GW but Carter & Eisenhower)\n  "ax" for "ask"  (though actually BOTH forms are found in the Middle English of Chaucer)\n\n2) correct:\n  "iron" -- pronounced "i-urn"  In fact, does ANYONE say "i-ron"?  On the other hand, we DO keep the sounds in their written order in the suffixed form "ironic".  (We do the same with "irony", though it's acceptable, or at least permitted, to say "i-urnee" --as we do with "ironing".   Thus, the most important factor seems to be where the word is ACCENTED.)\n\n3) debated but probably correct\nThe example of "iron" vs. "ironic" --that is, changing the pronounciation based on where the accent falls (often related to whether there is a suffix or not)--  helps explain why we SAY "comfort"  but "comfturble".    There are two conflicting "laws" at work here. In our spelling, we do not change the base when we add the suffix "able".   But the change in the PHONOLOGY (sound pattern) pushes us to SAY the word in a way that is much easier to pronounce.  \n\nHere's how it happens.  Note that the syllable in question --"fort"--  has a slight accent in "comfort" but almost NO accent when we add the "able" suffix.  In English, adding suffixes frequently shifts or reduces accent of certain syllables.  When a syllable loses accent, the vowel typically is shortened; in an UN-accented syllable it may end up as the 'swallowed', unaccented "schwa" sound, or even completely disappear.  But this leaves us with the unaccented combination "frt" which is more difficult or at least less natural to pronounce.    The natural solution is to simplify the pronounciation, either by skipping the "r" sound (which leads some to say "comf'-tubly") or to reverse sounds ("metathesis") and say "comf'turbly".\n\n------------------\n\n(Frankly, I suspect the pronunciation "com-four-tab-ly" is  a hypercorrection.   Some people say it that way BECAUSE of the spelling, whereas the SPOKEN language long ago changed the pronounciation.  But spelling is NOT always a sure guide to the spoken language.  Based on SPELLING, some people improperly pronounce the t in "often", not recognizing that the "t" is from the short form "oft" and is LOST when -en is added . . . as in soft > soften, compare list > listen; haste > hasten, etc.)\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypercorrection\n\n-----------------------------------------------\n\nIncidentally, this process or metathesis explains the origins of some modern English words.   Old English had "brid", now it is "bird";  Old English &quo
13681
Because the word is E-leven, not A-leven, I-leven, O-leven, U-leven, or sometimes Y-leven.  Geesh.  Isn't that obvious?
352103
No, of course not! But I can see how someone could say it with the emphasis on the AS and make it SOUND like a profanity! But that's why you posted your question in the "words and wordplay" category...!
973177
Go by what it sounds like, not what it looks like. M is pronounced "em". And in this case with TLA (three letter acronymn) each letter is pronounced as a word. \n\nWhat gets me is the American English had "an history lesson" before 1940... did they used to drop the "h"????
85309
Because "White tongue" is basically standard English, whereas Ebonix is not standard.  It would be the same thing for me where I come from.  I'm a "hillbilly" and a lot of people here talk with a "hillbilly accent."  But if someone from the city came and talked like a hillbilly, we would assume he was trying to make fun of us!  I think that is a fairly reasonable conclusion.
627748
English is not your first language. \n\nYou're pulling you tongue back in your mouth and your upper and lower teeth are touching when you say 'th'.  That's why it comes out as a 'c'.\n\nDon't do that, instead:  Practise blowing the word out of your mouth while your tongue remains between your teeth. Blow out, don't pull in.
121370
SERIOUSLY... PEOPLE WHO USE LOWER CASE LETTERS FOR VOWELS... NO KIDDING