Revising Neil Armstrong’s Quote: One small step backwards

Tearfree discovered this week that grammarians, a caste of people possibly more annoying than nutritionists – and I say this as a lover of language – have had their knickers in a knot for decades over Neil Armstrong’s moon-landing quote which they claim is grammatically incorrect and which can, apparently, now be corrected.

Thanks to her father, who made her stay up late and drive to the hotel nearest our cottage to watch the moon walk on the grainiest TV screen ever, Tearfree actually witnessed the historic moment in question and she has always been rather taken with Armstrong’s quote: “One small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.”

She finds it inexplicable that certain “grammarians” maintain, it should have been: “One small step for A man, one giant leap for mankind.”

First of all, that sounds awful. The insertion of the indefinite article destroys the rythym. It is absolutely, hands down, a change for the worse.

What’s more, there is nothing wrong with the first version. Man without an article is not as be, these ill-informed grammarians maintain, nthing more than a synonym for mankind. Tearfree just hauled out her OED and there it is under definition 2: “In abstract or generic sense, without article: the human creature regarded abstractly and personified as an individual; human beings collectively; the human race or species; mankind.”

So, there was absolutely nothing wrong with what Armstrong said, which was just one small step for the human creature, one giant leap for mankind. The grammarians have, as usual, in their can’t-see-the-forest-for-the-trees way not only gotten it wrong but come up with a “fix” that sounds clunky and awful

Alas, Armstrong, probably brutalized at some point by some ill-informed English grammar teachers, has always insisted he said “a man,” showing, once again, that some people just don’t know what’s best either for themselves or for mankind's quotation history.

Tearfree's sticking with what she heard the first time around and she recommends you do the same.

Update: Nitpicking lawyer XRLQ accuses Tearfree of "defend(ing) the indefensible." Sorry fella, but I'm not about to advice on issues literary from a guy who calls himself XRLQ.

Meanwhile the wannabe quote-changers keep harping on about how "one small step for A man" means something different from one small step for man. But Tearfree's point is that in this context, it absolutely does not.

Finally, a distinguished linguist from a famous university south of the border agrees with Tearfree in private corresponcence that neither quote is wrong but notes that Armstrong's wishes are important. Tearfree sees his point and says, ok, record both versions for posterity -- with a big asterisk.