A and An

Today, let's talk about "a" and "an". When I was in school, may I add, a long time ago, my teacher told us this simple rule. Use "a" for words beginning with a consonant letter....a pussy cat, a church mouse, a silly nanny; use "an" for words beginning with a vowel....an orang utan, an old horse, an idiot, and so on.

Actually, the choice depends on whether the word begins with a consonant sound or not. This may be right or wrong, and is a bit tricky, as some words may be pronounced differently with dialects from different parts of the world. Take the word "history". The "h" is usually prounounced, hence "a history". However, with Cockney English,  sometimes the word is pronounced with the "h" dropped.  Hence, "an historian" or "an historical novel".  Saying "an history", "an hotel", etc., is incorrect and is not in keeping with proper English pronunciation anywhere, and does not appear in standard writing.

Above everything, in proper English, with words beginning with "h" but not pronounced, "an" is used. "An hour", "an heir". This is correct.

"A" is also used for words beginning with a "You" sound.  Thus, we say "a used old bag" or "a United fan"

Finally (?) , common errors occur in report writing, where numbers are involved. These are usually out of sheer carelessness or ignorance. For example, "They are going to build a RM80 million sports complex down the road." "An" should be the correct word.  "With a Do-It-Yourself bookshelves and wardrobes available in the market, furniture makers are losing out to the departmental stores". The "a" should be dropped.      

Flammable and Inflammable

Look at these pairs of words. Accurate and inaccurate. Appropriate and inappropriate. Decent and indecent. You can name many pairs like those I have pointed out. The second word is the opposite of the first, simply by adding the prefix "in".  There is, however, a strange case, in the words flammable and inflammable.

There is no difference in meaning between flammable and inflammable. Both mean burn easily. There is a preference, however,  for flammable in both British and American English. 
   
Actually, inflammable is the original form, derived from the verb inflame. "In" is derived from the Latin preposition meaning en (engulf, endanger, enslave) not the prefix meaning un. But because it’s easy to interpret the in as the common negative prefix in (as in inaccurate, inappropriate), the word has always caused confusion. Therefore it was only a matter of time, that Safety and Fire Protection Agencies and Associations would urged the use of the word "flammable" rather than "inflammable".

Bill Bryson (Dictionary of Troublesome Words, Penguin Reference, 1984) has this to say, "Because the meaning of inflammable is so often misapprehended, there is an increasing tendency to use the less ambiguous flammable. In other cases this might be considered a regrettable concession to ignorance. But it would be even more regrettable to insist on linguistic purity at the expense of safety."

Hanged and Hung

Now, hanged and hung are derived from the same word "hang". You hang pictures on the wall. So they were hung there last week. When prisoners are sentenced to be executed by hanging, it is laughable to say that they were hung yesterday. The correct term is "hanged". It is not that difficult to remember then. People are hanged. Pictures and other objects are hung.

But a reminder. Prisoners were hanged. Not "hanged to death". "Hanged" means that the prisoner is dead already.

Can and May

It's August 8. I suddenly remembered one common colloquialism which is unacceptable in formal usage. You have probably heard it quite often before, but can applies to ability and may denotes permission. Thus we say, " Yes you can go, but no you may not." In other words, we mean, " Yes, you have the ability to go, but no you dont have my permission."

In informal usage, can and may are used interchangeably. [Can is generally used for both permission and ability. Can I go now? You can if you want to ....This is in such general usage that it should be regarded as good English in speaking and in informal writing. (Book of Usage and Abusage; Eric Partridge, 1954)] Thus I often hear this from friends, " Can I borrow your dictionary?", or "Can I have a ride back home today?" They are both grammatically wrong in formal usage. May should be substituted for Can.

May also implies uncertainty, possibility and wish in some usage: "We may buy a new washing machine when the company gives us a month's salary as bonus this year."

Could and might also add to the confusion. Could implies ability but with conditions attached: "We could get new computers for the office if we had the money". Could is also a polite way of asking a question: "Could you do this for me?" Might shows less probability that can, could or may. "The PC we ordered might get here next week." "Sure, they have been telling us that for three months, but it might never get here." (The New American Dictionary of Confusing words; Wiliam C Paxson, Penguin Books USA Inc., 1990).

Might is used after a governing verb in the past tense, may after such a verb in the present tense: "She says we may go." "She said that we might go." (Dictionary of Problem Words and Expression; Harry Shaw, Washington Square Press, 1975)

Repeat Again

This is another of those common redundancy in spoken English. When we want someone to say what he had said earlier, we do not request him to "repeat again" what he said. The correct way is to ask him to "repeat" what he said.

Repeat means to say or write something again. The prefix re means again. So we say" Please repeat that", or "Please say that again", NOT "Please repeat that again". In the last sentence "again" is superfluous.

Pronounciation?

Just the other day, I overheard this guy talking about how words can often be mispronounced. I joined in the conversation. When he said that "pro-noun-ciation" must be right or it may convey a different meaning, I was amused at his apparent ignorance of the pronunciation of the word.

Pronunciation is the noun formed from the verb pronounce. It is not pronounciation. Certainly, it is not surprising then that, the uninformed would pronounced it as pronounciation.

Anyway, most of us, me included, would have been guilty of mispronouncing words like zoology, culinary, awry, macabre, and misled, at one time or other. Understandably, mispronunciation occurs when we are confused by the different ways words with similar spelling are pronounced differently. For example, dough and tough, beard and heard and bear and dear. This is especially so with the way locals spell certain words especially names of people and places. Try Geoffery or Julio, Durham, Worcester, or Derby. How about the Mojave Desert or Mexico?

There are exceptions where American English is concerned. Common examples are schedule, vase, and route. They are pronounced differently in English English.

Alumnus, Alumna and Alumni

Nowadays my wife June is busy with her MGS (Methodist Girls School) Alumni. Alumni are the former students or graduates of a school, college or university. Hence MGS Alumni comprise of the former students of that school.

It is quite interesting to note that where before, alumnus (singular) and alumni (plural) referred to male graduates of academic institutions, alumni has now evolved to mean former men and women graduates of coeducational institutions. Most dictionaries define alumnus as a male graduate or former student. A new term alumna has now been coined to refer specifically to a female graduate or former student of the school, college or university (alumnae plural). Hence David is an alumnus of UNSW and Sarah an alumna of UTS.

Usage has changed over the years, and the words now also refer to former employees of organisations, and former inmates of prisons. It is quite interesting to note that many terms are now being rephrased into sex-neutral language, for example stewardesses are called Flight Attendants, Freshman to First Year Student, and Coed to the gender-free Student. Graduate is preferred in a non-sexist world. (Dictionary Of Confusing Words by William C Paxson, Penguin Books USA Inc., 1990).

Biannual, Biennial, Bimonthly and Biweekly

I used to get a bit confused when the words biannual and biennial were mentioned. Biannual means twice a year and bienniel means every two years. Thus we go back to our home town biannually, for Chinese New Year and for Christmas. We take a vacation abroad biennially, that is once every two years.

Biennial can also mean lasting for two years. Thus a bienniel plant is a flowering plant that takes two years to complete its lifecycle. It bears leaves, stems and roots in the first year, and then flowers, produces fruits and seeds and dies in the second year.

Now there are confusion where bimonthly (or bi-monthly) is concerned. Bimonthly means occurring every two months, but is often taken to mean twice a month! A similar error is encountered with biweekly (or bi-weekly). I guess to be clear, we should say "twice a month" or "every two months".

Split or Spit Image

Today our first grandchild is home (she's two month's old). Welcome home, Kaitlyn!!


At breakfast I mentioned that in her latest movie, Meryl Streep looks very much like Margaret Thatcher..the split image of the then British Prime Minister. June (my wife) said the phrase should be "spit image". Wow, I was caught there for a second and insisted that split image was the correct term.

A search in contemporary English dictionaries reveal that "spitting image" was the more likely, and correct idiom for "someone who looks exactly like another person" [Macmillan English Dictionary]. "Split image" was not mentioned at all in all the dictionaries available in my library.

However, for fear that I might be splitting hairs or spitting in disgust over which is the correct phrase, those interested in a discussion on the origin of the above phrases, the following websites should be enlightening:
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/8509/spitting-image-or-splitting-image
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/spitting-image.html
There is even an amusing webpage http://www.splitting-images.com/celebrity_list.html on clones of your favourite personalitites.

Soulmate

Recently, a well known artiste got married and the newspaper headline screamed "...... Found His Soulmate At Last". It got me thinking about the misleading usage of the word.

My Macmillan English Dictionary defines soulmate as someone who you have a special relationship with because you share the same feelings, attitudes, and beliefs. For example a political or philosophical soulmate.

A soulmate can be of the same gender or opposite. Having said that, your spouse may or may not be a soulmate (can be a nightmare sometimes). Although, ideally, a spouse should be your soulmate.

Believers, Fanatics, and Bigots

Nowadays, these three words are quite often (there are more, actually) inferred to some followers of the major religions of the world. I will limit this mini-discussion to the usage of these words in this aspect although one can be a believer of health food or fashion, another a football fanatic, and yet another a racial bigot.

Generally, these words are an indication of the depth (rightly or wrongly) of the follower's conviction in his particular faith. A believer then is a person who has a religious belief (or who has the confidence in something good). He could be a Christian, a Muslim or a Hindu, for example.

Let's have a look at the Christian believer. He could be a passive follower, meaning that he professes the faith in name only and rarely engages in the rituals of the faith. About the only time that he exhibits his particular faith are during the festive occasions, when he gets married, or when he gets buried. An active follower, on the other hand, attends church on Sundays, participates in the various activities of the church such as welfare for poor and needy, visitations of the sick and elderly, prayer meetings, helping out with the Library, or sings in the choir. Passive or active devotees do not make them fanatics or bigots.

A fanatic is a believer filled with excessive and often misguided enthusiasm for his particular faith. For example, fanatic Christians wear thorny crowns and carry heavy wooden crosses during Easter in the Philippines. A fanatic talks incessantly about his faith and indulges in wild and extravagant notions of the religion. A zealot is a fanatic who has extremely strong beliefs, and is too eager to make other people share them. Being a fanatic, enthusiast, or zealot do not make one a bigot. They are still friendly people, if you know them.

Who then is a bigot? Webster's New World Dictionary defines bigot as a person who holds blindly and intolerantly to a particular creed or belief. He thinks that anyone who does not hold the same beliefs is wrong. In particular, a bigot is one who exhibits intolerance and animosity towards one of another creed or belief (Wikipedia).

However, take note that he may not be a true believer, devotee or fanatical about his belief. He just takes an active part in showing his displeasure claiming to be a loyal, ardent and firm believer of his superior creed or belief.

Cantab or Cant

It's 2011 and let me start off the year by shedding a bit of light on pretentious abbreviations after people's names, in particular, the abbreviation 'Cantab'. The University of Cambridge is the second oldest university in England and one of the most prestigious university in existence. Hence, for the toffee-nosed graduates of this university a business card or letterhead may have the following after their names. E.g. Mark Chew BA (Hons)(Leeds), MA (Cantab).

That's fine. However, being a graduate of the University of Canterbury from New Zealand, I find it rather amusing when fellow alumni use the Cantab after their qualifications. This may be out of ignorance. It Should be Cant. (NB: This in no way suggests that the University of Canterbury is inferior).

Degrees from The University of Kent (formerly the University of Kent at Canterbury) are followed by the abbreviation 'Cantuar', e.g. B.Sc (Cantuar). The abbreviation for Oxford degrees is 'Oxon', e.g. MA (Oxon).