In terms of function, yes it is. Yet, the, a and an are always placed before nouns thereby specifying 'things' (whether tangible or abstract). Thus, it denotes whether a 'thing' / 'article' is specific (definite) or non-specific (indefinite).
I don't separate the article (the, a , an) from the noun or qualified noun as the two work together.
What do you think?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but
"the, a and an are always placed before nouns thereby specifying 'things' (whether tangible or abstract)" sounds wrong.
To me, this could mean two things i) all nouns are preceded by "
the,
a and
an" or ii) "
the,
a and
an" are always followed by a noun.
As a counterexamples to i), I'd cite plurals ("I like apples" - the zero article), and abstract terms - 'happiness, love, life, beauty ..." ; and nouns preceded by other determiners such as "these, those, that, this ..."
As a counterexamples to ii), I'd cite nouns which are preceded by adjectives: "the big brown dog." I'll concede on this point that they are eventually followed by nouns.
I might also have misinterpreted
'things' (whether tangible or abstract).
Are you saying that nouns always specify things, and hence all abstract nouns refer to things? Or are you only referring to
some abstract nouns, which happen to be things, and hence take an article?
I guess it must work for you in class, but I like the idea of a noun having a grammatical independence from its article.