Return-Path: Delivery-Date: Received: from ted.cs.uidaho.edu (no rfc931) by swan.cl.cam.ac.uk with SMTP (PP-6.4) outside ac.uk; Sun, 11 Apr 1993 07:44:26 +0100 Received: by ted.cs.uidaho.edu (16.6/1.34) id AA13449; Sat, 10 Apr 93 23:23:19 -0700 Sender: info-hol-request@edu.uidaho.cs.ted Errors-To: info-hol-request@edu.uidaho.cs.ted Precedence: bulk Received: from ice.ge.cnr.it by ted.cs.uidaho.edu (16.6/1.34) id AA13444; Sat, 10 Apr 93 23:23:09 -0700 Received: from DECNET-MAIL by ICE.GE.CNR.IT with PMDF#10000; Sun, 11 Apr 1993 08:21 MET Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1993 08:21 MET From: FORSTER@IT.CNR.GE.MATGEN Subject: pronunciation of HOL To: info-hol@edu.uidaho.cs.ted Message-Id: X-Envelope-To: info-hol@ted.cs.uidaho.edu X-Vms-To: ICE622::IN%"info-hol@ted.cs.uidaho.edu" I think the situation is best understood as a case of diglossia. The word is an acronym: H O L, so the accompanying definite article is clearly `An'. How people actually denote the logic in the spoken language is a separatequestion. If people in Cambridge pronounce it `HOL' to rhyme with `moll', that is our good right, but it has no bearing on the origins of the word. Once we start worrying about pronunciation we will all go mad! Thomas