Is there any differece between 'the English King' and 'the England's King'? Somehow I feel they are different...
- Anybody can ask a question
- Anybody can answer
- The best answers are voted up and rise to the top
closed as not a real question by Matt E. Эллен♦, Mehper C. Palavuzlar, FumbleFingers, Mahnax, simchona♦ Apr 25 '12 at 17:59
It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
"The England's King" is incorrect - names of countries are (with a few exceptions) not preceded by the definite article.
Assuming you mean simply "England's king", the meaning is in most cases the same as "the English king" (or indeed, "the king of England").
There may however be some differences (my historical knowledge is somewhat lacking). For example, George III was not English by birth, so could not accurately be termed "English king." And there may have been some British colonies that had an English king, where it would be irrelevant whether he was also the king of England (or indeed, of Great Britain or The United Kingdom, but then we're getting into another topic).
The first might describe his ethnicity, the second (without ‘the’) his political position, but the true meaning of each would only be clear from the context.