English: A vs. An

It’s simply that, in English, there is no indefinite plural article — or, equivalently, that the indefinite plural article is null. So ‘they are doctors’ is consistent with the behaviour of plural nouns elsewhere.

Contrast this with, for example, French, where the indefinite singular un(e) correspond to the indefinite plural des: La boulangerie vend des baguettes ‘the bakery sells baguettes’ (whereas English cannot say *‘a baguettes’). But as in Spanish, professions take no article either way: Il est médecin / Ils sont médecins. So all three languages are self-consistent, just in their own ways.

The further back you go in Indo-European languages, they don't have articles. It's a relatively recent innovation.

So for example latin didn't have them. Eventually they evolved from ille and unus.

Much of Eastern Europe still does not have articles.

There is no plural equivalent of a/an. So where you would use a/an becomes no-article for plural nouns.

I suppose you could say, “they are both doctors” or “they are all doctors.”

Those sound fine to me, depending on context.

In "They are doctors" the 'they' is the subject and you don't need articles. 'They' is plural.

But in "The doctors are female" you do because the subject is some specific group of doctors. It's singular because its a single group of things.

Is French different? Il est un médecin? Il est médecin? Ils sont médecins sounds fine.

If there's more than one, and you don't care which one, then it's "a". If you care which one then it's "the".

"Pass me a plate" - any plate will do. "Pass me the plate" - I want the specific plate which we were talking about.

What's interesting about the replies to this comment how readily people provide post-hoc justifications for language features that often have no essential rhyme or reason. The same is true for the prepositions which accompany verbs, which tend to vary by language, but for which every language's speaker will gladly offer you "rules" or "explanations" for when they fit. It's great evidence that we can be very good at something with no communicable understanding of what it is we actually know.

I was going to start by stating the difference is “a” is unspecific, “the” implies the subject is already known.

However as I thought more about it I realized it gets a little more complicated. I’m not academically studied in English, though I am a native speaker.

For example if you say, “Our town has a castle” - that’s a specific castle but you wouldn’t say “our town has the castle.”

Why? It has to do with what the listener knows. “Definite” means the subject is known to the listener. If I’m introducing a castle into the conversation that you don’t know, I’m talking about _a_ castle. Now that it’s introduced, I can tell you about _the_ castle.

It leads to some funny situations.

This one time I was at a company get-together and the CTO, whose son was just born, received some Peppa Pig merch.

I exclaimed (in English) "Peppa Pig is the shit!"

The HR lady stared at me as if I killed her father with an accordion.

When I was at Rice a quarter century ago, I took a 300-level linguistics class called Structure of English. Half a dozen of us sat around an oval table in a little room and I was the only one not majoring in linguistics. It was a delightfully geeky bunch. One of the students later worked on speech recognition at Microsoft. The professor was an older tall thin man who always wore suspenders and a bow tie.

I had always been good at grammar in high school, but this was a different world and I had no idea what I was in for. We spent the first two weeks discussing the differences between the and a, and the next two weeks on the differences between this and that, and the rest of the semester felt more abstract. It was quite illuminating for me.

I feel you. I live in Germany and we have many people whose mother tongue is a slavic language here and they all get it wrong to some degree.

I'd still like to encourage you to put some energy into getting it right because this mistake is very confusing for native speakers of a language that makes the distinction.

I cannot tell you how often I was listening to someone telling me a story about the thing where I sat impatiently waiting for them telling me which particular thing or person they ment only to realize they were not talking about something particular at all.

I struggle with it too, but my rule of thumb is that "the" signals the reader they should know what specific instance is referred to, whereas "a" introduces a new instance.

Same here. Every few years I try to go through https://englishpage.com/articles/index.htm to internalize more rules but it doesn't fully stick, and it's the only part of English that makes me self-conscious.

Just remmeber that "a" is short for "any". So do want the specific thing, or will any thing work?

don't worry too much. english is such a muddled tongue to begin with that there are many ways of saying something "correctly" and few if any of us know them all. anyone who quibbles over some fine verbal point is probably not someone whose opinion you should value!

that said I know in business communication this kind of thing can be less forgiving. i will say that grammar and syntax checking for non native speakers is one of the few very beneficial applications of LLMs.

This reminds me of “en” vs “ett” in Swedish. No rules - just gotta know

Just curious, what is your native tongue?

I have the opposite problem. I speak a non-English language (poorly) that hasn't got 'a' or 'the' so I end up shoehorning other words into the sentence to take their place, such as 'one [particular item]' for 'the' and 'some [item]' for 'a'. I likely sound like an idiot when I talk. Non native speakers of English have similar ticks.

But (in)definite articles aren't difficult, you're either talking about some member of a group or class of items without specifying which one (a), or you're talking about one particular example or instance that is being referenced in context (the).

I don't understand how languages can talk about things precisely without them. I guess they just use context, more or other words in their place, or structure sentences differently. English just feels convenient in this case, but obviously I am biased.

These are typical errors made by the native speakers. Most (every?) language has rules, which are more difficult for a native speaker to follow vs. a well-spoken foreigner.

Other examples in English are:

- who vs whom

- then vs than

- ask vs acks

I do this too - "thee actual" vs "thuh real" and such. I do expect it's to do with having a vowel sound of a certain kind at the beginning of the next work making you move your tongue in a certain way.

I grew up in New England.

My experience is that "thuh" is basically a lazy / informal pronunciation of that word.

But it's also by far the most common pronunciation. "Thee" would sound strangely hyper-formal, at least in my circles.

Edit: the sibling comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49770609) also rings true to me.

The official rule I learnt in my English (as foreign language) classes is vowel = thee and consonant = thuh. That's it.

But I noticed that native speakers deviate from this at least in two cases:

1. Use thee to emphasize the following noun

2. When searching for the noun to say, they often get it wrong because they say something like "uh, thee, thee, thee, uh, book" and never sweat it.

Source: I watched a lot of Monty Python as a kid and John Cleese does this all the time.

This is governed by the following word. "Thee" can also be used for emphasis anywhere.

> However, only some vowels

Pretty sure it’s all vowels isn’t it?

“Thee”: apple, evening, island, offer, underpass

“Thus”: any other words where you don’t need to avoid a glottal stop to differentiate the word.

And cherries were ceries from French, leading to the singular form cherry. Lots of neat little things like this.

I avoid making exceptions to the rule, but in the vernacular, people definitely break from it! You'll see e.g. "an historic event", usually justified because the first syllable is weak and close enough to being vowel-started.

FWIW "an Nvida employee" sounds better than me an "a Nvidia employee" because the latter has two vowels with no consonant separating them ... and I don't get repetition there because the vowels are different.

Both are being used and neither is incorrect. “An historic” used to be more prevalent in British English until around 1990, but “a historic” has become the standard choice now: https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=a+historic%2Ca...

Both occur, but "a historic" is standard choice in modern English.

Since most speakers pronounce the h, it takes "a" not "an".

Contrast to "an hour", where the h is silent.

An would always be wrong here, in the U.S. at least.

It depends on if you're speaking British or American English.

The British pronounce it as "istory," so they use "an" before.

Depends on whether or not you pronounce the H.

I've also noticed this but it sounds kind of infantile to me. It's a common pronunciation that a lot of children make seemingly by mistake and then eventually stop doing. When adults do this it sounds wrong, but I admit I have heard it.

No

A/an herb, for example.

Maybe this could be used to track how some spoken language changes over time in a region or across regions.