First let me say that I am a native english speaker and any typos are due to poor editing and not a lack of education. Next let me be clear that we are talking about abbreviations that are commonly used AS ABBREVIATIONS. Let us take the FBI as a concrete example. It is quite common to refer to them as the FBI or an FBI agent. Likewise MRI. It is quite common to say MRI, not magnetic resonance imaging or whatever.
Those of us who cannot agree that this is common, please open a debate in GD.
Is it AN FBI agent or A FBI agent?
How about the rule in general? Is it an honor to meet you or a honor to meet you?
Lastly, I rarely ask for a cite, but in this case, as I am involved in discussions here at work, can you provide a cite? The person in the discussion will accept a reference from a well-respected author published before 1960. So if Dickens has said “It is an honor to meet you” anywhere in his work, that will be considered sufficient. Faulkner I’m guessing works. Pretty much any well-respected author.
The person in question refuses to accept this cite and says that the rules must have changed since he was taught in the 1960s. He also says that if he had his grammar book from 1960 he could provide a cite for me, but he does not.
I asked this once before and the resultant hijack resulted in a lock down. I hope that my more carefully worded request won’t have the same results.
The difficulty comes, as the cited articlke says, in deciding how an abbreviation is pronounced. Is it “a URL” (pronounced “you are ell”) or “an URL” (pronounced “an earl”)?
How about Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Third Edition, published 1925 (bolding added)?
You seem to be asking for literary cites, but your co-worker wants to prove his case with a grammar book, so I hope Noah Webster’s usage notes are good enough.
Thanks for the great references. I apologise, I mislead you all - I meant to say that we would settle for a literary cite, but are not limited to it - if the cite is prior to 1960.
I promise I will. Although the history of this shows that it may go on quite a while. The co-worker has a PH-D in history and this seems to make everyone believe that we should defer to his opinion in all things remotely scholarly. In things dealing with American History, especially the Civil War, I will happily defer to his knowledgable opinion. But in this case he is simply wrong and I refuse to give up until I have educated the team… I doubt that I’ll ever get him to admit he is wrong though.
That one doesn’t really prove anything, since “O.K.” starts with a vowel anyway, so it would be “an O.K.” regardless of any rule!
Basically, as the above cites indicate, you use “an” before an initialism that starts with a letter whose name, when pronounced, begins with a vowel sound. Namely: A, E, F, H, I, L, M, N, O, R, S or X.
Correct – when, as the OP’s conditions presuppose, the abbreviation is to be pronounced as an abbreviation. When the abbreviation is, by consensus of literate speakers, pronounced as though a word, it is rendered according to whether the initial sound of the “word” is a vowel or consonant sound.
Thus: “Opposition to gun control is an NRA tenet” but “Opposition to Communism was a NATO raison d’etre.”
My personal standard is, when there is no consensus, treat the abbreviation as if orally spelled out. (And in this case, my post is legitimately my cite! ;))
Noted in passing: It is customary in British usage, and occasionally seen in American usage, that a word beginning in “h” takes “an” regardless of whether the “h” is sounded. Thus, “an hono(u)r” on both sides of the Atlantic, but “a horse” (usually) in America, and “an horse” in Britain and occasionally in America.
That’s why I said “initialism”, which to me implies “spelt out”, rather than “acronym” which implies “pronounced as a word”. Or am I wrong in this usage?
That’s news to me, and I am British born and bred. I have never, ever, seen or heard “an horse” used, except maybe in a faux-Cockney way where the “h” is dropped altogether: “Ah’ll get you an 'orse, guv’nor!”.
There are certain words with a sounded “h” which formerly took “an” – “hotel” is one that comes to mind – but that usage is considered pretty archaic by most people. It’s definitely not correct to say that all words beginning with “h” take “an” in British usage.
I could have sworn I had seen in print (Shakespeare? The Bible? something old, definitley) “an” preceding a long “u” sound, as in “an use,” in which “use” begins with a consonant “y” sound.
I promise I will. Although the history of this shows that it may go on quite a while. The co-worker has a PH-D in history and this seems to make everyone believe that we should defer to his opinion in all things remotely scholarly. In things dealing with American History, especially the Civil War, I will happily defer to his knowledgable opinion. But in this case he is simply wrong and I refuse to give up until I have educated the team… I doubt that I’ll ever get him to admit he is wrong though.