Grammarians: 'An' or 'A' in front of (certain) acronyms and abbreviations

[Stan_Shmenge]

@Exapno Mapcase

Good grief.

First, the names of numerous corporations these days are no more than initials. Kentucky Fried Chicken became KFC (and then reverted). The United States Steel Corporation became USX (and then also reverted). The Aluminum Corporation of America was always known as Alcoa and that’s now its official name. There are scads of examples.

Yes, and as I said these are specific examples. Microsoft is NEVER refered to as MS. Never. I have heard it referred to as MSFT, Mister Softee, Satan’s Plan, many other things. Never MS.

Second, it is proper style in all types of writing to write out the name of an organization in full for the the first reference and then follow it with an abbreviation to use thereafter. E.g. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). An FBI spokesperson said… You would not write it out as a Federal Bureau of Investigation spokesperson said … each and every time.

This is true in academic style sheets as well.

Can you point to any exceptions?

Sigh. I already mentioned the FBI. Show me a style sheet where it is alllowed to abbreviate the name of a company like Microsoft to an arbitrary acronym like MS, that is not accepted by anyone. Let’s just start doing it all the time. We can call John Deere JD! We can call Walgreen’s WG! Or WAG! Or what?

/Dad was the Associate Editor of the Universtiy of Chicago Journal of Business.
//Has been proofread by the best.

[Stan_Shmenge]

@Excalibre

Nor does one spell “abbreviate” that way, if you’re going to be picky.

Sorry, typo. See earlier posts for proof of correct spelling ability.

Nor does one do that irritating slash thing.

I do!

The OP has already stated that that’s not the point of their post, and the question still stands when considering other abbreviations. I’m not sure why you keep harping on this one perceived error in Khadaji’s post, but you’re getting in the way of the actual answering of the question.

The question has been asked and answered. We are now discussing something else, but I think that is done as well, because in no manual of style will you find it acceptable to abbreviate the names of corporations that aren’t already acronyms. Y’know, I hear there is a railraod named CSX!

/Just to annoy you.

[twickster]

@Happy Wanderer

We are now discussing something else.

Well, no, you are discussing something else. The rest of us are sitting around rolling our eyes.

[Excalibre]

@twickster

Well, no, you are discussing something else. The rest of us are sitting around rolling our eyes.

Aww, snap!

[Stan_Shmenge]

@twickster

Well, no, you are discussing something else. The rest of us are sitting around rolling our eyes.

Well since the OP has been asked and answered, and your position on proper style has been properly and deservedly refuted, all is left is for you to regain ocular conrol and admit you don’t know anything about formal writing.

Either that or provide a sample of writing from oh, say Business Week or the WSJ that refers to Microsoft as “MS”. :rolleyes:

I’ll be waiting. :wally

/USA Today doesn’t count.

[Stan_Shmenge]

@soulmurk

For my own clarification (since I’ve often found myself wondering about this very thing, but apparently not enough to actually ask about it), when an abbreviation is used in a sentence and you’re assigning either an ‘a’ or ‘an’, do you read the abbreviation as an abbreviation, or do you read it as if it were written out?

i.e.: in the OP’s example, “We have difficulty locating a(n) MS representative.”

If read as two letters, I’d use ‘an’ because M starts with a vowel sound; whereas if read as Microsoft, I’d use ‘a’. Which is the expected (grammatically speaking, not common usage) reading, ‘MS’ or ‘Microsoft’?

I’ve never been able to extrapolate the rule on my own because it seems that both interpretations are used.

See what happens when you don’t follow the rules. Cheaters never prosper.

[Excalibre]

@Happy Wanderer

Corporate names shouldn’t be abbreviated on the page or in speech.

@Happy Wanderer

But you should never abbreviate names of companies in written correspondence.

@Happy Wanderer

You don’t abbreviate names of corporations in formal writing. Go read some.

@Happy Wanderer

One doesn’t abbreveate corporations in writing.

@Happy Wanderer

in no manual of style will you find it acceptable to abbreviate the names of corporations that aren’t already acronyms.

Hey, is there anyone who’s still confused as to Happy Wanderer’s position on abbreviating the name “Microsoft”?

Next question: is there anyone who was confused in the first place? Because I looked through the thread again, and I can’t see where anyone asked. And I certainly can’t see where anyone insisted that it was appropriate to abbreviate “Microsoft” in formal writing.

However, I can see where Happy Wanderer - starting as early as post #3 - decided to harp on the OP having drafted an example without consulting the Chicago Manual of Style. Even though Happy Wanderer didn’t answer the question! He’s spent the entire thread berating the OP for using an abbreviation he doesn’t like in an example, even though the OP specifically said, in post #5, that it wasn’t relevant to the question, as it was just an example he pulled out of his ass.

The funny thing is that for all his vaunted Professional Writing Experience[sup]TM[/sup], Happy Wanderer clearly has no grasp of what the actual answer to the question is, as anyone can see from his irrelevant advice to revise the example sentence in post #3.

@Happy Wanderer

Well since the OP has been asked and answered, and your position on proper style has been properly and deservedly refuted, all is left is for you to regain ocular conrol and admit you don’t know anything about formal writing.

I’m not sure what you think you’ve refuted, but twickster’s explanation starting in post #2 was, and remains, correct.

[ouryL]

I thought the rule of thumb was to define your acronym or intials first such as first “Federal Bureau of Purple Skunks (FBPP)”, then it’s okay to use FBPP hence forth? :o

[Stan_Shmenge]

@Excalibre

as anyone can see from his irrelevant advice to revise the example sentence in post #3.

If you want a good answer, a good example should be provided. In business, somtimes I am faced with a client that is concerned about a certain problem, but they are unable to see that the problem they are concerned with is the least of their worries! The OP was poorly formulated, so poorly that I was under the impression I was dealing with an ESL student. I tried to and did supply some solid grammatical advice in post #3. Excuse me for attempting to contribute.

[Excalibre]

@Happy Wanderer

If you want a good answer, a good example should be provided.

Perhaps if you’re not willing to work with “bad examples”, you shouldn’t answer at all, particularly since other people - notably twickster - stepped up. Clearly you prefer to operate within very clear guidelines; while that’s an asset when answering questions on, say, the SAT test, it’s not as much when you’re discussing things in real life. If you’re not able to ascertain the question - and it really wasn’t unclear - then you might consider asking for clarification or skipping the thread entirely.

In business, somtimes I am faced with a client that is concerned about a certain problem, but they are unable to see that the problem they are concerned with is the least of their worries!

Then, given how poor your judgment was in this thread - poor enough that you managed to avoid answering the question entirely! - I wonder what it’s like in the business world.

The OP was poorly formulated, so poorly that I was under the impression I was dealing with an ESL student.

Hmm. I don’t get that at all, rereading it. And, in fact, there is simply no question as to what the OP’s question was, so it’s still rather inexplicable that you decided not to answer it entirely and instead harp on some minor, irrelevant error in his choice of an acronym to illustrate it.

I tried to and did supply some solid grammatical advice in post #3. Excuse me for attempting to contribute.

I have no complaint with post #3 (aside from it’s not even touching on the question.) My complaints lie more with, well, everything after post #4, where Khadaji acknowledged and apologized for the typo that you whined about and also explained that his use of “MS” in the example was simply the first thing that came to mind. There was no reason to continue discussion of those things further, particularly since they didn’t address any confusion on the part of the OP or anyone else in the thread. So posts #8, #11, #16, #17, #20, #21, #22, and #25, where you continue to repeat your completely irrelevant hijack about abbreviations were a big waste of your time and everyone else’s. Particularly since no one argued that the use of “MS” for “Microsoft” was appropriate in formal writing.

You particularly owe twickster an apology for post #25, when you insulted her repeatedly, assigned her an argument that she hadn’t made (and I challenge you to find any post in which she argued that “Microsoft” is properly abbreviated “MS” in formal writing) and make the bizarre assertion that you had somehow refuted something she said, which is particularly odd since you two haven’t even addressed the same issues - she has posted only to address the OP’s question and you spent the thread ignoring the OP entirely except to berate them for not coming up with an example that meets your standards.

Again, if you’re easily enough confused that you simply couldn’t understand what the OP was asking, it’s better to ask for clarification or ignore the post entirely.

[Stan_Shmenge]

To quote myself: “Your major problem is you shouldn’t abbreviate the name Microsoft if you are trying to evaluate the sentence. That is your first mistake. Corporate names shouldn’t be abbreviated on the page or in speech.”

The OP had a problem they didn’t ask about. A problem that once eliminated, would resolve the conundrum of the OP.

I guess to persnickety I should have said “with the exception of certain corporate names, like GE, corporation names shouldn’t be abbreviated on the page or in speech and even GE should be spelled out in written communication the first time, and it is a rare exception. ALCOA and CSX are the actual names, and therefore are not abbreviations at all and nobody in their right mind would call Microsoft MS” but that seemed a little long.

What is more interesting is why it is that for profit corporations play by different grammatical rules than private organizations or governmental agencies.

And I apologize to twickster, though I am not sure why. I am not in opposition to her original post. I was merely supplimenting the information. Of course she is right about the answer, as far as she went, and I don’t believe I disagreed.

[Excalibre]

@Happy Wanderer

To quote myself: “Your major problem is you shouldn’t abbreviate the name Microsoft if you are trying to evaluate the sentence. That is your first mistake. Corporate names shouldn’t be abbreviated on the page or in speech.”

The OP had a problem they didn’t ask about. A problem that once eliminated, would resolve the conundrum of the OP.

Except it didn’t, since the OP was asking a general question about how to handle abbreviations, not how he might go about revising a particular sentence in a particular document. Your advice about dodging difficulties by rewriting is not bad advice in general, but it didn’t do anything to answer the question in the OP - a question that is rather easy to answer.

And I apologize to twickster, though I am not sure why. I am not in opposition to her original post. I was merely supplimenting the information. Of course she is right about the answer, as far as she went, and I don’t believe I disagreed.

Then what exactly did you “refute”, and why do you claim she doesn’t know anything about formal writing? Post #25, it’s right there in black and white.

[gigi]

@ouryL

I thought the rule of thumb was to define your acronym or intials first such as first “Federal Bureau of Purple Skunks (FBPP)”, then it’s okay to use FBPP hence forth?

Yes, that is correct. Then as long as you use only that meaning for the acronym throughout the paper, you’re fine.

I’m not sure where the absolute declaration otherwise is coming from.

[Rico]

<mod>

Too much BS in here. If this thread were a train it would have derailed in a big mess.

I believe the main question has been answered. If you wish to argue over whether an abbreviation or initials such as MS, FBI, BFD, LSMFT, or M-I-C-K-E-Y M-O-U-S-E should be used, there’s always GD. Take it over there.

This has been answered. I’m going to close this.

</mod>