According to Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage (1994), bolding mine:
It could be that it’s becoming more common again, as you perceive, but on the other hand, casual perceptions on these kinds of matters are often inaccurate.
And regarding the “a(n) historical” variability, the same volume offers:
It goes on, but that’s probably enough.
Very interesting stuff…
Thanks for the info, sundog.
To be honest, i often find Merriam-Webster to be excessively descriptivist in its grammar and usage. I prefer Bryan Garner’s Dictionary of Modern American Usage because Garner, in my opinion, adopts a very judicious balance in his work, avoiding the sort of excessive prescriptivism that can be so annoying and elitist, while refusing to descend into an unproductive descriptivism that makes every piece of grammar or usage as good as any other.
Garner is willing to be prescriptive when it matters, arguing that certain usages, no matter their popularity, are simply incorrect. I realise that where one stands on issues like this largely depends on one’s own beliefs about the nature of language and the importance (or motherwise) of certain forms and conventions, but i find that i agree with Garner on most controversial issues.
The rule of: “an” before “h” words is there only because Brits drop their H’s.
However, in general, “an” is a living fossil. There is no real need for it, and it screws English up. Would meaning be less clear if we dropped it?
No problem.
Yes, it is mostly descriptive, but I thought all we wanted was a description. After all, the speculation in your OP is a descriptive one, namely that the use of a before a vowel is increasing.
What possible grounds could there be for arguing that popular usage is incorrect? Actually, that’s a rhetorical question, because I’m familiar with the usual arguments, and I don’t find them convincing.
If anyone’s interested, here’s a link to an excellent paper that deconstructs the arguments typically used by prescriptivists to justify their prescriptions:
Pullum, Geoffrey K. 2004. Ideology, Power, and Linguistic Theory. [warning: pdf]
Meaning would not be less clear, but (IMO) we’d all sound a lound dumber. Beside, an is useful. Say the following phrases out loud:
“I bought a apple and a orange at a enormous store.”
In contrast,
“I bought an apple and an orage at an enourmous store.”
Which one sounds better, AND is actually easier to say? The second one, because vowels make us stop when we speak if they are not followed by a consonant before another vowel. Consonants allow fluid movement between vowel sounds.
From what I can tell from various message boards “an” can be replaced with either ‘a’ or ‘and’. :dubious:
From bouv’s post:
Becomes:
:rolleyes:
Not really.
First, it is not true that “Brits drop their H’s.” It is true that there are several British dialects in which an initial H is more frequently omitted. However, many British dialects continue to aspirate their initial Hs quite nicely. In fact, there are several words (herb, for example) where Brits speak the initial H while Yanks do not.
And, of course, there are several American dialects in which an initial H is not aspirated if the accent falls on the second syllable. The constant wrangling over the pronunciation of (h)istorical being a prominent example.
I’ve noticed an increase in the misuse of “a” and “an” lately as well.
And…Liberal made me laugh with the unicorn riff.
If it is an uninformed unicorn, use western unicorn…okay, I’ll stop.
To pontificate a bit, because dammit, if I can’t use my degree in the real world I’m gonna use it here , the glottal stop, which is that pause you not-quite-hear in ‘a apple’ and ‘uh oh’, is considered a consonant in many languages. It follows all the rules other consonants do, and is considered a distinct phoneme (a ‘letter’ of speech).
It’s sort of the same in English. While it’s highly limited and not considered a phoneme, it is consistent with at least one rule: a consonant must be placed between two separate vowels. If there’s no consonant, insert a stop. Try saying ‘a apple’ or ‘a igloo’ without the stop; the words run right into each other and it’s much, much harder to decipher than with the stop. ‘An apple’, on the other hand, already has a consonant between the a and the apple, and therefore there’s no need for a stop. It flows naturally.
Really, I think that if the article ‘an’ becomes disused, it won’t matter too much. As the stop would be replacing the n, it won’t impede communication. Granted, it’ll sound weird to us adults, but children will learn to hear and speak English that way, and it’ll be more or less natural to them.
I like the glottal stops in some British English dialects. Like “shu’ up!” It sounds endearing.
You’d think with the numerous article in German (der, die, das, den, dem, ein, eine, einem, einen) that getting a grasp on just 3 of them would be no problem. Of course, the uses of the various ones in German are based on the case of the subject and its gender, whereas English is based on how it sounds. Still…
How about “I bought one apple and one orange at this enourmous store”? :rolleyes: Sure 'an" is a bit easier to say in your rather convoluted example- but then again "she sells seashells by the seashore " is extremely hard to say but is still proper English.
“An” should join the Dodo, and take “whom” with it. :mad: