Informally, both can be used.
Formally/officially/in a written document, you use the article "the" when you have already defined the noun (e.g., which hospital) before, or when your audience already knows which hospital you are talking about (i.e., from the context).
Usage of articles and prepositions is, I think, more or less beyond logic.
a. I wake up in the morning.
b. *I wake up in morning.
c. I wake up in the night.
d. *I wake up in night.
e. I wake up at night.
f. *I wake up at the night.
This seems to be a question about prescriptive grammar versus descriptive grammar. As the creator you can decide how you want your word (or acronym, or initialism) to be pronounced, but don't be surprised if the public end up pronouncing it however they feel it should be pronounced. Look at the case of gif - the creator expected it to be pronounced with a ...
For acronyms, choose "A" or "AN" based on the pronunciation of the first letter
The United Nations is abbreviated by the acronym "UN", in which the two letters are spoken separately, U and N. The U is pronounced "yoo" in English, so the preceding article would be "a", even though U is itself a vowel.
The choice of article depends on the pronunciation of U,...
In a comment, Benjamin Hartman wrote:
It's a typo. It's possible that the author originally wrote "an institution" and then inserted "flawed," forgetting to change the "an" to "a." It's also possible that the author originally used a different adjective that started with a vowel sound and then later changed it to "flawed" but forgetting to change the ...
They are all grammatically correct but they have slightly different meanings. This is inevitably a bit subjective but I would say the difference is in which bit is the main information and which bit is the additional information:
ruins of a medieval castle built by the Polish king Casimir the Great
ruins of a medieval castle built by Casimir the Great (...
Notwithstanding anything else, it depends solely on and is governed by the rules for articles as applicable anywhere -- the context and the semantics. All three are grammatically correct and make sense, only they mean different things.
meta: OP better add some (more) research effort.
Usually, it would be correct to use the definite form. We know that we're talking about a specific Polish King, whose name was 'Casimir the Great'. When you know that you are referring to a specific person or item, or something that is unique (like the Sun) you would use "the". Unless we know that there are a ton of 'Casimir the Great's, we would use "the".
Both sentences are correct. They express different ideas. The sentences revolve around the use of the word "nearest." In the first sentence, "nearest" is functioning as a predicate adjective. In the second sentence "nearest" is functioning as a noun which is being modified by the article "the."
It is possible to omit "to" and still have a grammatical ...
A mountain & on her head.
Normally you will use on head if it's something like a responsibility because its more vocal than literal that those responsibilities fall.
A mountain of family responsibilities had already descended on her head.
On for the sentence as written.
Reason: “Descend in” implies that the problems are already in her head and are moving. I think you mean that the problems are coming to her and collecting in her head. If you want to emphasize that the problems are in her head, I suggest
...already accumulated in her head.
or, if you want to keep “descended”