an hirrelevance?

I was pulled up on the weekend re: my throwaway comment on the stupidity of 'an' before a word beginning with 'h'. My response then (off the top of my head - in truth I hadn't given the whole concept too much thought) was that if h is a consonant, let's treat it like one - if we don't drop our hs (in fact even if we do) we have no reason to insert an n in there, we're not, you know, Dutch. Well, I will still go along with that. I would also like to add that if a- an makes sense, why don't we have the- then? Or some other consonant after the 'e' in 'the' which stops people from getting confused? Why not 'theq'? 'Q' doesn't get enough usage as is. And here starts a campaign (I'm sure there have been plenty) to stop putting u after q. Imagine how much space, paper, ink, time would have been saved over the years if we'd just stopped putting the u after q years ago. If an economic rationalist could make an argument for the 'man hours' spent putting u after q, we'd have had it outlawed for us yonks ago.

I will also take the opportunity to say what a stupid language English is: it's full of the most ludicrous inconsistencies. It's not beautiful or rich, it's a nonsense pain in the arse - or at least if it's rich it's rich like rich dirt. I hate it, and I hate having to think in it. Another good reason to learn Korean (as if I needed more than I have already). Here's to full Korean conversion of my thinking by 2010. Aah, cleansing Korean.