If only there were a network of computers
hosting all of mankind’s knowledge.
Oh, wait, there is such a network, now. We even have access to it with convenient handheld devices, an innovation that has permanently ruined the sport of bar bets.
If only those computers didn’t also host
so much nonsense.
Wait, what? You mean that you can’t count on the accuracy of what you find online? Say it isn’t so.
Sigh. Where to begin? Maybe with why I was looking at a site that claimed to be teaching the proper use of articles to folks learning English as an additional language.
Fast-backward to a conversation several years ago about excising (the) extraneous definite articles from (the) text produced by (the) technical experts whose first language was (the) English. I was talking to someone whose first language was not (the) English, and his head almost exploded as I casually mentioned my article-deleting practice.
What?
You don’t need an article
for general nouns?
Oh, oh. I could see his world of English knowledge moving beneath his feet, and not in a good way.
Sometimes, the best thing to do is to back away slowly, and that’s what I did. I couldn’t think of any way to explain–both clearly and quickly–why what I was doing didn’t, in fact, transgress the Rules of English™ he had so painfully learned. And it was, after all, just a passing conversation: I wasn’t training an editor or teaching English, so I let it go.
But it niggled, you know? I knew intuitively when to delete (the) articles inserted in (the) text I received from (the) writers, and when not to, but I couldn’t explain it. So, one day I decided to ask the hive mind about the rules for using definite articles in (the) English, and the universe rewarded my curiosity, my attempt to improve myself, with this:
Um, no, no, and no again.
If a proper or abstract uncountable noun is used in a general sense, no article is needed; for example:
-
-
- Diamond is an expensive material. (OK – “Diamond” is hardly abstract but in this usage it is uncountable.)
- Knowledge is (the) power. (Guys – sauce for the goose, and all that.)
- Calcutta is known as the City of Joy. (OK – “Calcutta” is a proper noun and, although I fail to see what it would mean to use it in a general sense, it certainly does not want an article, definite or otherwise. But “City of Joy” wants capitals. I mean, while we’re here.)
-
What did I learn from my wee foray? Well, not why “Calcutta” doesn’t need an article but “City of Joy” does. And not how to explain my intuitive editing of (the) articles for (the) enhanced readability.
On the other hand, articles aside, I did learn that anyone who can write “article need not to be used before the noun” should not be trusted alone with English students of any level, or trusted to explain abstract uncountable rules used in general sense.
And I learned–again–that knowledge is, indeed, the power: In this case, the power to sort out the wonderful that the internet indubitably provides, from the awful, which it also provides in (the) heaping helpings. And I learned–again again–to be careful when reading things where I do not, in (the) fact, have the knowledge to distinguish wonderful from awful.
The trick is to have the wit to do more checking and not take for granted all that we read. ‘Cause it ain’t necessarily so.
Tom
Tom – Indeed, there’s a new skill required: assessing the credibility of an unknown-to-you source. Or, at least, it’s not an entirely new skill but it has acquired new importance.
I got introduced to your subject by a former news reporter, as a means of shortening text. “You don’t need all those definite articles,” she said, striking them out with a big black pencil. “See? Juat by taking them out, you’ve shortened that paragraph by a whole line!”
Unfortunately, learning to delete definite — or, for that matter, indefinite — articles AS A GENERAL RULE is no more helpful than leaving them in. The only proper solution is to know English so well that you can recognize when your use is jarring, and when it isn’t.
Jim T – Yes, there may not be a way to turn the judgement into a rule (or set of rules). Examples help, but situations are so numerous . . .
I read somewhere that in the next fifty years, i.e., unknown but inevitable time period, English will fracture into five languages. More or less what happened to Latin. Rules are only guidelines. I have finally given up on the topic of “all right”, which was drummed into me in school, vs “alright”, which is so widely used that probably even retired teachers don’t remember the issue. “Alright” does seem alright most of the time.
Judith – Interesting about the fracturing. I guess when you consider how many people speak English worldwide, it shouldn’t be as big a surprise as it first seems. I’m with you on all right, but you’re also right that there’s no fighting it. On the other hand, I feel perfectly entitled to continue to do it the old-fashioned way.
All I have to say is that I am very glad I was born into an English speaking country and did not have to learn it as a second language…..
(I admit that trying to learn French taught me some English grammar)
Jim R – Ah, yes, the happy accident of birth! At all, I guess, and exactly where and how as well. I think a lot of us learned English grammar by learning another language.
Isabel – and if you really want to introduce confusion, introduce acronyms. For example:
* The Department of National Defence is sending troops troops …..
* DND is sending troops to …..
* The DND is sending troops to …..
I have seen the last one appear in Canadian newspaper articles, but it looks strange to me.
John – 🙂 It looks odd to me, too. The ex-military folks that I met at work always referred to it in conversation as just “DND”, so maybe that affected my written conventions. But I expect you could find someone to argue the case for the “the”. Even compellingly.
Next up? That word “that”, when is it needed? Mostly not, but still.
For me, it’s jarring to hear “him” replace “he”… as in, “Him and Tom are are going to …” instead of, “He and Tom are going..” I don’t correct (anymore), but I’m bruised inside from the punches I’ve pulled. (Wish I had said that, but its source is anon.)
Barbara – A delightful quip!