Bob Costas, of all people!

[Kibitzer]

'anging out in Soho Square, dropping aitches ev'rywhere, apparently overcome by the cockney dialect as he persists in describing exploits of Phelps or Bolt as "an 'istoric achievement."

Bob, news reports about NASA dropping a big cart onto Mars got it right. Universally they described it as "a historic event."

The correct article for history (or variants like historic and historical) is "a," not "an."

When the "aitch" is sounded, it's "a." When silent, use "an."

A house, an honor, a hair, an heir, a Husky, an honorarium. And so on.

Now that we have that aitch business resolved, let's tackle another.

Recently, the word "horrific" has been used frequently in news reports. "Horrific" seems to have supplanted "horrible," and apparently is meant to connote something worse than the fading "horrible."

So I ask, if "horrific" is worse than "horrible," why do "terrible" and "terrific" go in the opposite direction?

Something to think about as we await Lolo Jones's next 'urdle race.

 

[Fishy]

Horrific has always been a media favorite. It is a bit more pointed than horrible.

Horrific is a dedicated adjective whereas horrible can also take a star turn as a noun. Perhaps the more singular focus of the word horrific gives it some sort of advantage when describing horrors.

And if Bob Costas wants to drop the H in horrible, well, orrible is mostly correct anyway...at least in Middle English.