0
Handtalk Posted 15 years ago
Grammar

An/The orange on the table is rotten.

Hello teachers,

I have a question on articles.

Suppose there is an orange on a table. A boy picks up the orange and finds out that it's gone bad. Then, the boy might (or might not) say the followings:

1. Mom, the orange on the table is rotten.

2. Mom, an orange on the table is rotten.

(pls be sure that there is one and only one orange on the table.)

Are both statements possible?

If so, what are the difference in meanings?

And for #1, are there more than one interpretations?

Thanks.
  

Top answer

Normally, when you say "The orange on the table is rotten" you mean that there is only one orange on the table and that it is rotten. There could be other oranges, but they are not on the table. If you say "An orange on the table is rotten" You mean that there are several oranges on the table, but only one of them is rotten.

  • Normally, when you say "The orange on the table is rotten" you mean that there is only one orange on the table and that it is rotten.
  • There could be other oranges, but they are not on the table.
  • If you say "An orange on the table is rotten" You mean that there are several oranges on the table, but only one of them is rotten.
  • " Hope this helps.
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

18 Answers
0
Normally, when you say
"The orange on the table is rotten"
you mean that there is only one orange on the table and that it is rotten.
There could be other oranges, but they are not on the table.


If you say
"An orange on the table is rotten"
You mean that there are several oranges on the table, but only one of them is
0
Thank you for the reply, Doctor D.

For the first sentence, "The orange on the table is rotten", you mentioned there could be other oranges.

In that respect, would adding commas like sentence #2 below change the meaning?

1. The orange on the table is rotten.

2. The orange, on the table, is rotten.

Could you explain the difference?

Thanks.
0
handtalkwould adding commas like sentence #2 below change the meaning?
No. Adding commas would just turn it into an incorrectly punctuated sentence.
0
handtalkA boy picks up the orange and finds out that it's gone bad.
Then it's not on the table anymore. He says, "Mom, this orange is rotten".

If he puts it back on the table, then he can say that the orange on the table is rotten.

CJ
0
Thanks for the reply CalifJim.

Well, suppose the orange is still on the table Emotion: smile ,then the boy says "The orange on the tabl
0
Try:

The orange that is on the table is rotten.
0
Well, suppose the orange is still on the table Emotion: smileOK
0
Thanks Doctor D.

"The orange that is on the table is rotton." seems to serve my needs. (This sentence seems to have the meaning of #2)

But then, I thought about using "which" in the place of "that", for I learned that "that" is interchangeable with "which".

Strangely though, I feel the sentence "The orange which is on the table is rotten." has the meaning of #1
0
Thanks CalifJim.

So, "The orange on the table is rotten." is a simple statement, no implication of comparing.

hmmm... difficut...

Then, Is there difference in these sentences below?

"The orange on the table is rotten.

"The orange that is on the table is rotten.

"The orange which is on the table is rotten.

handtalk
0
In American English, "that" is used for restrictive clauses and "which" for non-restrictive clauses. British English, I am told, does not always make this distinction.


"The orange on the table is rotten."
Yes, you are pointing to a rotten orange. Nothing more about oranges can be deduced.

"The orange that is on the table is rotten. "

Related Questions