Discussion Forum—A Way with Words, a fun radio show and podcast about language

That sounds right.
The reason I brought up the iconic statement-- see, the way it's structured, with the 2 parts contrasting dramatically, it immediately kicks off in the mind that sense of 'for' as 'by the standard of.' But as soon, you realize that cannot be ( that Armstrong cannot possibly mean to say that the achievement looks big only because mankind is puny ). So you end up with kind of a hollow feeling, as though the English is not quite tight and snug there.

I might well be the only one in the world who feel dissatisfied with that masterpiece. That's why I wonder if back in 1969 it might have sounded differently. I take it from your answer that it would have sounded same (though that 'same' is not necessarily same to you and me).

I doubt the debate about that quote will ever end, but the "a" before "man" obviously makes more sense, and Armstrong claims he said it that way.

One thing that Washington Post article neglects to mention is how the communication system NASA was using was voice-activated, so after a slight pause it would often cut out. I've used those types of communication systems, and can say from experience they often miss short words following a pause. So in my mind, it will always be "That's one small step for a man ..."

In closing, at this time, I feel it's appropriate to say: God speed, Neil Armstrong.

I just listened to that broadcast again myself, and I think you're spot on with regards to the length of those pauses. There was not that much of a delay between the "for" and the "man." So perhaps that voice activated transmitter was not to blame. Also damning is the long pause after the second "one," almost as if he had just realized his error and was quickly trying to revise the second half of the quote so it would make more sense (which I don't think was grammatically possible).

The other line of research that supports the "a" being there is an audio analysis done on computer. See:   http://www.space.com/17307-neil-armstrong-one-small-step-quote.html

The analysis shows a small "bump" in the waveform between "for" and "man." It lasts only 35 milliseconds, but could be the missing "a." And when I think about how that one-letter article comes out in my speech, it's often rolled into the following word. Especially when the following word starts with a "soft" sound. Something like that could easily have been lost in the scratchy analog transmission. Your term "mush-mouthed it" would aptly describe that scenario.

However, that audio analysis is not definitive either, and has been criticized as "finding what you want to find in the noise."

I'm not "finding an excuse," nor am I 100% positive Armstrong didn't botch the quote. He was obviously juggling a lot of things in his head at that moment. The quote was composed by Armstrong himself, after landing, about 2 hours before his walk on the surface. How many times he practiced it in his head is anyone's guess. And when he listened to the audio later back on Earth, he had to admit it sounded like he dropped the "a."

Could Armstrong have been "convinced" he dropped the "a" by the recording he listened to later, over-riding his memory of what he actually said? Sure, any psych will tell you memories can be altered by new experiences. Is that what really happened? At this point, I don't think we can ever know.

I'm not a revisionist, but in the face of all that uncertainty, I'd like to see the history books record the quote as: "That's one small step for a man ..."

That's what Armstrong claimed anyway. They had about three hours between touchdown and their moon walk. There were a few things they had to do, but mainly they were waiting for Houston to give them the green light.

Contradicting himself, he was also once quoted as claiming "he came up with it on the way to the Moon."

Knowing how the subconscious mind processes things, I wouldn't be surprised if he was actually "working on" that quote from the day he was told he'd be the first to step out. But yes, he was the author of that quote, and I still think those words were well chosen for that unprecedented event.

Several people (myself included) have tried to find out just how NASA decided it would be Armstrong instead of Aldrin. Someone made that decision ... it's not like they flipped a coin. But NASA has always refused comment on that, so it's lost in the fog of history at this point. Unless Aldrin talks.

"14"?   (Quick calculation)   Hey, EmmettRedd, we're the same age!