A hospital or hospital

Question

BBC political correspondent Shaun Ley said in the weeks before her death Ms Mowlam had suffered a fall before being admitted to hospital and then a hospice.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/4126986.stm
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Admitted to hospital and then a hospice.

Is the above correct? Shoudn't it be a hospital?

Goldmund · Accepted Answer

Dear Rotter,

In British English the article may be omitted. Therefore you may say «go to hospital», «in hospital», «discharged from hospital», and so on.

It is not however idiomatic to omit the article before «hospice».

Do not ask me to explain it.

Kind regards,

Goldmund

Philip · Answer

GoldmundDear Rotter,

In British English the article may be omitted. Therefore you may say «go to hospital», «in hospital», «discharged from hospital», and so on.

It is not however idiomatic to omit the article before «hospice».

Do not ask me to explain it.

Similar to American English: "in jail", "to jail". These refer to incarceration. However, I could go "to the jail" to visit someone and find deplorable conditions "in the jail". Other examples exist: "in/in the school, to the school", "home/at home". Goldmund has expressed it correctly..."do not ask me to explain it".

Khoff · Answer

In American English, it would be "a hospital" or "the hospital."

Pieanne · Answer

I think one goes to hospital to be treated, but to the hospital to visit someone, or to work, of course.

MrPedantic · Answer

If we call school, work, prison, and hospital 'places of incarceration', can we make a rule that says 'if the verb relates directly to the incarcerated party, we may drop the article'?

e.g.

I visited him in hospital.

I went to the hospital to visit him.

I met her at school.

I met her at the school.

He's been in prison for 6 months.

We haven't been to the prison for 6 months.

MrP

Khoff · Answer

If we call school, work, prison, and hospital 'places of incarceration', can we make a rule that says 'if the verb relates directly to the incarcerated party, we may drop the article'?

e.g.

I visited him in hospital.

I went to the hospital to visit him.

I met her at school.

I met her at the school.

He's been in prison for 6 months.

We haven't been to the prison for 6 months.

This may all be fine in British English, but in the U.S. we do not say "in hospital" (unless we are pretending to be British). If you don't like the "incarceration" rule, you can just say that if you are there for the intended purpose of the institution, you omit the article, but if you just happen to be there for other reasons you need the article. This rule works fine for school and prison. (Although I don't think your "school" examples do a very good job of illustrating the difference. How about "I met her at school; we were in the same class." vs. "I met her at the school; she was the secretary and I was delivering supplies.")

Actually, it occurs to me that in the U.S. we do make the same distinction (purpose vs. location) for hospitals, but instead of using "no article"/"article" we use "in the"/"at the":

I was in the hospital for five days after my surgery.

I was at the hospital yesterday to visit my Grandmother.

May I just add that I am very happy to have found a whole community of people who are willing to listen to this kind of discussion?

MrPedantic · Answer

Likewise!

(As long as we don't move on to people's ailments...Or dreams...)

MrP

A hospital or hospital

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions