New answers tagged definite-article
I play piano?? This is I understand an American usage and is unacceptable in British or Australian English. I play strings I play drums This is the usual option to omit the (indefinite) article - it means you play instruments in this category but doesn't mean you play all stringed instruments (or whatever), but that you play some (and the implication is a ...
If you're grateful for any hint (and if that will excuse my guessing) my guess is that it's that Latin doesn't have an article. You could substitute the Latin name into the sentence: Morbillivirus is transmitted by... Measles is a proper name, a noun; not an adjective. We're not saying "The green virus is ..."
The basic problem is that "Bachelor of Engineering" isn't a "title" in an idiomatic English sense, at least in American English (UK/Aussie commenters, feel free to disagree). As a native speaker, I would be more likely to say: In 1995, I graduated with a bachelor's degree in Engineering (B. Eng.) from the University of... or In 1995, I obtained a ...
There is no article in "Oh Lord!" "Oh Lord!" is what's called vocative and it should probably be spelled as O not Oh ("O Lord!"). When used in the phrase "oh, the horror!" it's an interjection. Note that there's a comma of difference too: it's not "Oh, Lord!" and not "oh the horror!"
I always took it to be one of those phrases that represents a partial utterance, as in "Oh, the horror that this invokes...". You are not addressing "horror" directly or evocatively; it's not a name or a title. I get the same impression from the famous "Oh, the humanity" quote. By comparison, if we say "Oh, Brother" or "Oh, Lord", that would be more in an ...
I think it is difficult to compare "Oh Lord" or "Oh Brother" with "Oh the horror". The "horror" is not a person, it describes a state. The interjection in "Oh the horror" gives the phrase a equivalent meaning to "Oh what a horror".
Interesting. This use looks ok, but I can't explain why grammatically. I think it is fine because in this sense they implication is infection. If the describe the actual virus, the definite article should be used. The measles virus has a capsule.. But, measles manifests by fever and rash. Disclaimer: I recall nothing about measles.
In the first example, we know there is only one set of upper classes, so we use "the" before it. If it is unclear which people you are talking about in high society, you can omit the "the" before people. Omitting "the" changes the level of clarity you have on the topic.
Proper nouns with compulsory articles included loosely follow a few patterns, but are a matter of case-by-case determination, and often case-by-case debate. In the end, the rule for each name simply needs to be memorized, and no matter how thoroughly you do so, expect to be disagreed with at least some of the time. One type of proper noun that might include ...
Books, when not referred to by title, are in the category of count nouns in English: intuitively, discrete items that can be readily counted. (Contrast mass nouns: rice, sand, water.) The "standard" varieties of English1 require determiners in front of most uses of count nouns. The and a are the most common determiners, but other words can play the role. ...
It is a general rule that in the position of the article (the, a/an) you can only use one sort of "article-words". You can say 1 my little dog or 2 the little dog, but can't use two article words in the article position. So *the my dog is wrong. The sense of this rule is clear. When you use an article word such as "the, this, my" you make a selection of what ...
You textbook is grossly incorrect. Neither of those sentences is correct unless you have strangely named items that require books. To dissect this problem look at the sentence more carefully: Would you say: This is the Tim. This is the me. (My is the possessive form of me) If the answer is no, then you would likewise never use the possessive ...
One would normally just say "both of you" for both subject and object. Rarely, and much less formally, one might say "the both of you" for emphasis, but this should be avoided in Standard English.
I think the term the movies has become idiomatic, and in that sense, it is generic of movies in general; but it may be a mistake to call this a universal rule. Generally speaking, the generic plural comes anarthrous (no article), and the generic singular comes indefinite (with the indefinite article a), although in rare instances the definite generic ...
In most cases, you'd be right: the definite article indicates that the following noun has been introduced previously or is in some other way within the semantic ‘scope’ of the discourse. This is a somewhat special case, though, since the movies (apart from just being the definite plural of ‘movie’ as in the movies I rented last week are overdue) has a ...
I'm sure others will post more erudite answers, but examples are I hate the thieves / bastards / cows / dogs. I like the cats. It occurs where we treat a collection as one thing.
It is not a mistake; it is dialog. Holden Caulfield was not written to sound like a perfect adolescent with perfect grammar, not the character's style.
Top 50 recent answers are included