Ggthjy

Subsurf on a crown. How can I smooth some edges and keep others sharp?

How do you get out of your own psychology to write characters?

Find the smallest value of the function

Does an Eldritch Knight's Weapon Bond protect him from losing his weapon to a Telekinesis spell?

Stuck on a Geometry Puzzle

Why didn't Tom Riddle take the presence of Fawkes and the Sorting Hat as more of a threat?

"Starve to death" Vs. "Starve to the point of death"

What is the difference between "...", '...', $'...', and $"..." quotes?

What species should be used for storage of human minds?

What to do with threats of blacklisting?

Can a player sacrifice a creature after declaring that creature as blocker while taking lethal damage?

Coworker asking me to not bring cakes due to self control issue. What should I do?

What's this assembly doing?

Why didn't the 2019 Oscars have a host?

Categorical Unification of Jordan Holder Theorems

How are the system health extended events files rolling over?

How to write cases in LaTeX?

Boss asked me to sign a resignation paper without a date on it along with my new contract

How is this property called for mod?

Two different monitors with same resolution: text is a lot smaller on one of them

How to politely refuse in-office gym instructor for steroids and protein

Could a warlock use the One with Shadows warlock invocation to turn invisible, and then move while staying invisible?

Equivalent of "illegal" for violating civil law

What senses are available to a corpse subjected to a Speak with Dead spell?

Article. The word “Respect”

Article and no articleWhy isn’t there any article before this countable noun?Omitting the article before defining relative clauseIs it correct to use zero article in this sentence?Definite article vs indefinite article vs no articleDefinite article “the” usageArticle or No Article Before “Prison”What is correct: 'what are differences between' or/and 'what are the differences between'?Using of article 'the ' before professionArticle or no article

5

2

Why is there an article in the first example and not in the second?

Oxfordlearnersdictionaries says that:
[countable] a particular aspect or detail of something

He felt a grudging respect for her talents as an organizer.

and

He treats his grandparents with (a) great respect.

etc.

articles zero-article

share|improve this question

asked 10 hours ago

BoyepBoyep

464213

add a comment | 

5

2

Why is there an article in the first example and not in the second?

Oxfordlearnersdictionaries says that:
[countable] a particular aspect or detail of something

He felt a grudging respect for her talents as an organizer.

and

He treats his grandparents with (a) great respect.

etc.

articles zero-article

share|improve this question

asked 10 hours ago

BoyepBoyep

464213

add a comment | 

Why is there an article in the first example and not in the second?

Oxfordlearnersdictionaries says that:
[countable] a particular aspect or detail of something

He felt a grudging respect for her talents as an organizer.

and

He treats his grandparents with (a) great respect.

etc.

articles zero-article

share|improve this question

asked 10 hours ago

BoyepBoyep

464213

share|improve this question

asked 10 hours ago

BoyepBoyep

464213

share|improve this question

asked 10 hours ago

BoyepBoyep

464213

asked 10 hours ago

BoyepBoyep

464213

asked 10 hours ago

BoyepBoyep

464213

2 Answers
2

active

oldest

votes

7

This is one case where usage has changed a bit over time, but with or without the article are both fine...

It's obviously ridiculous to suppose that what people mean by the article/no article choice has somehow changed - it's entirely a stylistic choice. But if you want to swim with the tide of linguistic history, you can reasonably forget about including the article in your own utterances. Just don't go thinking that anyone who chooses otherwise is somehow "wrong".

---

Note that individual "abstract nouns" are different in this respect. For example, nobody would be likely to say I have fear of flying, and you'd very rarely encounter anything like The boss had an undue power over his secretary. But respect is more a two-way thing (not just if it's [a] mutual respect :)

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 10 hours ago

FumbleFingersFumbleFingers

45.5k155121

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think you're right in general, but grudging respect still seems to be quite a bit more common with the article than without, which accords with my "ear" for the phrase. I'm not sure there's a good explanation why other than idiomatic tradition.
  
  – 1006a
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @1006a: It seems that both you and Steve below still think there's some kind of semantic distinction involved - which I think is unlikely. As your chart clearly shows, there weren't even enough written instances of grudging respect to chart until about a century ago. By which time the article-less form had become dominant even with great respect, so with great (not grudging, I hope! :) respect I suggest the preferred version with grudging was simply following the "by-then-established" convention (whereas great actually had more "historical baggage" to overcome).
  
  – FumbleFingers
  6 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I agree with you—there's no semantic distinction involved. I haven't yet been convinced that there's always a logical way to determine which article, if any, is preferred in English with a given noun. (I recently read a book where the American characters kept talking about getting into the Juilliard, which was a strong tip-off that the author wasn't American—they're Australian—as we drop the article in the short form of the name even though it's in the full name). There's just "what sounds right", which as you've pointed out can shift. To my ear it's different for grudging vs great respect.
  
  – 1006a
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I may be mistaken, but I think the general tendency is for constructions to be simplified over time, which to my mind automatically sets the stage for a to be discarded in the present context. I further think that (particularly, post-WW2) AmE has tended to become more conservative (at least among "competent" speakers), whereas BrE has become more willing to accept change (which we have to do more and more anyway, simply because of increased AmE dominance across all Anglophone societies). This I think accounts for many things I now often just call "stylistic choice".
  
  – FumbleFingers
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  ...it may also be that AmE prefers to include certain "noise words" (optional prepositions, etc.) even if they were never particularly historically favoured anyway. That's the impression I get by comparing AmE and BrE corpuses for spent all of his money.
  
  – FumbleFingers
  5 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

4

Why there is an article in the first sentence is as FumbleFingers states; also:

Left by itself, respect is a noncount noun and cannot form a plural. This means respect can't be counted, just like weather is a noncount noun. Example: We don't say, "I have 13 respects for my Uncle an 93 for my Dad," or, "26 weathers will be arriving tomorrow." You either have respect for someone, or you don't. You can't count respect. You have weather. No article needed.

Confusion comes when respect has been made into a compound subject, like "grudging respect." For reasons Fumblefingers state, speakers of English treat respect as no longer general, but has become a specific kind of respect; a grudging respect. Like, some today say "We're in for a bad weather today," the article is not necessary, but people do it anyway today.

Rules for count nouns that can form a plural (like orange/oranges - an orange/the oranges) an article is required. "a" for consonants [a hotel; a car] and "an" for vowels [an elephant; an electric typewriter, etc., include those that sound like vowels {an L} sounds like "el" when spoken.]

Cheers!

Hope this helps.

share|improve this answer

edited 9 hours ago

answered 9 hours ago

Steve B053Steve B053

2124

New contributor

Steve B053 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Well, it's certainly true that the article is far less likely to be included in have [a] grudging respect - but that's at least partly because that particular adjective has become much more common recently (so it would tend to follow the modern "no article" form anyway). But you could just as easily contrast a great respect with a grudging respect, in that they're both adjectivally-modified. In which context I must just say that I don't think I've ever encountered have a scant respect for [someone/something].
  
  – FumbleFingers
  9 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think its regional (States). Quite common for us on this side of the pond to state "I have a scant respect for you, you no good, mumble fumbling buffoon," and no one stops to retort: "Excuse me, I may resemble that remark; but please, by all means, drop the article." Nice post, BTW.
  
  – Steve B053
  9 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Well, that's 36 times I've seen the "articled" form in the past minute (1 from your comment, and 35 more in Google Books! :) But it's still small beer compared to GB's estimated 2,520 results for article-less have scant respect for.
  
  – FumbleFingers
  8 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Interestingly, the preference is far less marked (though still present) with have [a] scant regard for... I'm thinking that's partly because that particular usage (with regard) has become much less common over the past century or two, so it's more skewed towards including the article because that was the general tendency in Victorian and earlier English.
  
  – FumbleFingers
  8 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I'm not, and you are correct once again! Cheers!
  
  – Steve B053
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

Your Answer

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "481"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f198198%2farticle-the-word-respect%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

7

This is one case where usage has changed a bit over time, but with or without the article are both fine...

It's obviously ridiculous to suppose that what people mean by the article/no article choice has somehow changed - it's entirely a stylistic choice. But if you want to swim with the tide of linguistic history, you can reasonably forget about including the article in your own utterances. Just don't go thinking that anyone who chooses otherwise is somehow "wrong".

---

Note that individual "abstract nouns" are different in this respect. For example, nobody would be likely to say I have fear of flying, and you'd very rarely encounter anything like The boss had an undue power over his secretary. But respect is more a two-way thing (not just if it's [a] mutual respect :)

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 10 hours ago

FumbleFingersFumbleFingers

45.5k155121

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think you're right in general, but grudging respect still seems to be quite a bit more common with the article than without, which accords with my "ear" for the phrase. I'm not sure there's a good explanation why other than idiomatic tradition.
  
  – 1006a
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @1006a: It seems that both you and Steve below still think there's some kind of semantic distinction involved - which I think is unlikely. As your chart clearly shows, there weren't even enough written instances of grudging respect to chart until about a century ago. By which time the article-less form had become dominant even with great respect, so with great (not grudging, I hope! :) respect I suggest the preferred version with grudging was simply following the "by-then-established" convention (whereas great actually had more "historical baggage" to overcome).
  
  – FumbleFingers
  6 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I agree with you—there's no semantic distinction involved. I haven't yet been convinced that there's always a logical way to determine which article, if any, is preferred in English with a given noun. (I recently read a book where the American characters kept talking about getting into the Juilliard, which was a strong tip-off that the author wasn't American—they're Australian—as we drop the article in the short form of the name even though it's in the full name). There's just "what sounds right", which as you've pointed out can shift. To my ear it's different for grudging vs great respect.
  
  – 1006a
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I may be mistaken, but I think the general tendency is for constructions to be simplified over time, which to my mind automatically sets the stage for a to be discarded in the present context. I further think that (particularly, post-WW2) AmE has tended to become more conservative (at least among "competent" speakers), whereas BrE has become more willing to accept change (which we have to do more and more anyway, simply because of increased AmE dominance across all Anglophone societies). This I think accounts for many things I now often just call "stylistic choice".
  
  – FumbleFingers
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  ...it may also be that AmE prefers to include certain "noise words" (optional prepositions, etc.) even if they were never particularly historically favoured anyway. That's the impression I get by comparing AmE and BrE corpuses for spent all of his money.
  
  – FumbleFingers
  5 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

7

This is one case where usage has changed a bit over time, but with or without the article are both fine...

It's obviously ridiculous to suppose that what people mean by the article/no article choice has somehow changed - it's entirely a stylistic choice. But if you want to swim with the tide of linguistic history, you can reasonably forget about including the article in your own utterances. Just don't go thinking that anyone who chooses otherwise is somehow "wrong".

---

Note that individual "abstract nouns" are different in this respect. For example, nobody would be likely to say I have fear of flying, and you'd very rarely encounter anything like The boss had an undue power over his secretary. But respect is more a two-way thing (not just if it's [a] mutual respect :)

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 10 hours ago

FumbleFingersFumbleFingers

45.5k155121

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think you're right in general, but grudging respect still seems to be quite a bit more common with the article than without, which accords with my "ear" for the phrase. I'm not sure there's a good explanation why other than idiomatic tradition.
  
  – 1006a
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  @1006a: It seems that both you and Steve below still think there's some kind of semantic distinction involved - which I think is unlikely. As your chart clearly shows, there weren't even enough written instances of grudging respect to chart until about a century ago. By which time the article-less form had become dominant even with great respect, so with great (not grudging, I hope! :) respect I suggest the preferred version with grudging was simply following the "by-then-established" convention (whereas great actually had more "historical baggage" to overcome).
  
  – FumbleFingers
  6 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I agree with you—there's no semantic distinction involved. I haven't yet been convinced that there's always a logical way to determine which article, if any, is preferred in English with a given noun. (I recently read a book where the American characters kept talking about getting into the Juilliard, which was a strong tip-off that the author wasn't American—they're Australian—as we drop the article in the short form of the name even though it's in the full name). There's just "what sounds right", which as you've pointed out can shift. To my ear it's different for grudging vs great respect.
  
  – 1006a
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I may be mistaken, but I think the general tendency is for constructions to be simplified over time, which to my mind automatically sets the stage for a to be discarded in the present context. I further think that (particularly, post-WW2) AmE has tended to become more conservative (at least among "competent" speakers), whereas BrE has become more willing to accept change (which we have to do more and more anyway, simply because of increased AmE dominance across all Anglophone societies). This I think accounts for many things I now often just call "stylistic choice".
  
  – FumbleFingers
  5 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  ...it may also be that AmE prefers to include certain "noise words" (optional prepositions, etc.) even if they were never particularly historically favoured anyway. That's the impression I get by comparing AmE and BrE corpuses for spent all of his money.
  
  – FumbleFingers
  5 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

This is one case where usage has changed a bit over time, but with or without the article are both fine...

It's obviously ridiculous to suppose that what people mean by the article/no article choice has somehow changed - it's entirely a stylistic choice. But if you want to swim with the tide of linguistic history, you can reasonably forget about including the article in your own utterances. Just don't go thinking that anyone who chooses otherwise is somehow "wrong".

---

Note that individual "abstract nouns" are different in this respect. For example, nobody would be likely to say I have fear of flying, and you'd very rarely encounter anything like The boss had an undue power over his secretary. But respect is more a two-way thing (not just if it's [a] mutual respect :)

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 10 hours ago

FumbleFingersFumbleFingers

45.5k155121

share|improve this answer

edited 6 hours ago

answered 10 hours ago

FumbleFingersFumbleFingers

45.5k155121

answered 10 hours ago

FumbleFingersFumbleFingers

45.5k155121

answered 10 hours ago

FumbleFingersFumbleFingers

45.5k155121

4

Why there is an article in the first sentence is as FumbleFingers states; also:

Left by itself, respect is a noncount noun and cannot form a plural. This means respect can't be counted, just like weather is a noncount noun. Example: We don't say, "I have 13 respects for my Uncle an 93 for my Dad," or, "26 weathers will be arriving tomorrow." You either have respect for someone, or you don't. You can't count respect. You have weather. No article needed.

Confusion comes when respect has been made into a compound subject, like "grudging respect." For reasons Fumblefingers state, speakers of English treat respect as no longer general, but has become a specific kind of respect; a grudging respect. Like, some today say "We're in for a bad weather today," the article is not necessary, but people do it anyway today.

Rules for count nouns that can form a plural (like orange/oranges - an orange/the oranges) an article is required. "a" for consonants [a hotel; a car] and "an" for vowels [an elephant; an electric typewriter, etc., include those that sound like vowels {an L} sounds like "el" when spoken.]

Cheers!

Hope this helps.

share|improve this answer

edited 9 hours ago

answered 9 hours ago

Steve B053Steve B053

2124

New contributor

Steve B053 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Well, it's certainly true that the article is far less likely to be included in have [a] grudging respect - but that's at least partly because that particular adjective has become much more common recently (so it would tend to follow the modern "no article" form anyway). But you could just as easily contrast a great respect with a grudging respect, in that they're both adjectivally-modified. In which context I must just say that I don't think I've ever encountered have a scant respect for [someone/something].
  
  – FumbleFingers
  9 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think its regional (States). Quite common for us on this side of the pond to state "I have a scant respect for you, you no good, mumble fumbling buffoon," and no one stops to retort: "Excuse me, I may resemble that remark; but please, by all means, drop the article." Nice post, BTW.
  
  – Steve B053
  9 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Well, that's 36 times I've seen the "articled" form in the past minute (1 from your comment, and 35 more in Google Books! :) But it's still small beer compared to GB's estimated 2,520 results for article-less have scant respect for.
  
  – FumbleFingers
  8 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Interestingly, the preference is far less marked (though still present) with have [a] scant regard for... I'm thinking that's partly because that particular usage (with regard) has become much less common over the past century or two, so it's more skewed towards including the article because that was the general tendency in Victorian and earlier English.
  
  – FumbleFingers
  8 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I'm not, and you are correct once again! Cheers!
  
  – Steve B053
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

4

Why there is an article in the first sentence is as FumbleFingers states; also:

Left by itself, respect is a noncount noun and cannot form a plural. This means respect can't be counted, just like weather is a noncount noun. Example: We don't say, "I have 13 respects for my Uncle an 93 for my Dad," or, "26 weathers will be arriving tomorrow." You either have respect for someone, or you don't. You can't count respect. You have weather. No article needed.

Confusion comes when respect has been made into a compound subject, like "grudging respect." For reasons Fumblefingers state, speakers of English treat respect as no longer general, but has become a specific kind of respect; a grudging respect. Like, some today say "We're in for a bad weather today," the article is not necessary, but people do it anyway today.

Rules for count nouns that can form a plural (like orange/oranges - an orange/the oranges) an article is required. "a" for consonants [a hotel; a car] and "an" for vowels [an elephant; an electric typewriter, etc., include those that sound like vowels {an L} sounds like "el" when spoken.]

Cheers!

Hope this helps.

share|improve this answer

edited 9 hours ago

answered 9 hours ago

Steve B053Steve B053

2124

New contributor

Steve B053 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Well, it's certainly true that the article is far less likely to be included in have [a] grudging respect - but that's at least partly because that particular adjective has become much more common recently (so it would tend to follow the modern "no article" form anyway). But you could just as easily contrast a great respect with a grudging respect, in that they're both adjectivally-modified. In which context I must just say that I don't think I've ever encountered have a scant respect for [someone/something].
  
  – FumbleFingers
  9 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I think its regional (States). Quite common for us on this side of the pond to state "I have a scant respect for you, you no good, mumble fumbling buffoon," and no one stops to retort: "Excuse me, I may resemble that remark; but please, by all means, drop the article." Nice post, BTW.
  
  – Steve B053
  9 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Well, that's 36 times I've seen the "articled" form in the past minute (1 from your comment, and 35 more in Google Books! :) But it's still small beer compared to GB's estimated 2,520 results for article-less have scant respect for.
  
  – FumbleFingers
  8 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  Interestingly, the preference is far less marked (though still present) with have [a] scant regard for... I'm thinking that's partly because that particular usage (with regard) has become much less common over the past century or two, so it's more skewed towards including the article because that was the general tendency in Victorian and earlier English.
  
  – FumbleFingers
  8 hours ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  
  I'm not, and you are correct once again! Cheers!
  
  – Steve B053
  6 hours ago
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 2 more comments

Why there is an article in the first sentence is as FumbleFingers states; also:

Left by itself, respect is a noncount noun and cannot form a plural. This means respect can't be counted, just like weather is a noncount noun. Example: We don't say, "I have 13 respects for my Uncle an 93 for my Dad," or, "26 weathers will be arriving tomorrow." You either have respect for someone, or you don't. You can't count respect. You have weather. No article needed.

Confusion comes when respect has been made into a compound subject, like "grudging respect." For reasons Fumblefingers state, speakers of English treat respect as no longer general, but has become a specific kind of respect; a grudging respect. Like, some today say "We're in for a bad weather today," the article is not necessary, but people do it anyway today.

Rules for count nouns that can form a plural (like orange/oranges - an orange/the oranges) an article is required. "a" for consonants [a hotel; a car] and "an" for vowels [an elephant; an electric typewriter, etc., include those that sound like vowels {an L} sounds like "el" when spoken.]

Cheers!

Hope this helps.

share|improve this answer

edited 9 hours ago

answered 9 hours ago

Steve B053Steve B053

2124

New contributor

Steve B053 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

share|improve this answer

edited 9 hours ago

answered 9 hours ago

Steve B053Steve B053

2124

New contributor

Steve B053 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 9 hours ago

Steve B053Steve B053

2124

New contributor

Steve B053 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

answered 9 hours ago

Steve B053Steve B053

2124