0
Henry74 Posted 14 years ago
Grammar
Article/zero article
Hi again,
I'm having a hard time understanding how exactly [the?] zero article works; mostly, I believe, because in my native language articles are almost always mandatory.
Here are a couple of examples I have recently come across (I will underscore the place where I feel an article in my head, and I will indicate which article at the end of the paragraph):
1) (This is from Wikipedia's page on how to write a Wikipedia page.) The lead section [...] is the section before the table of contents and the first heading. [...] The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview. It should define the topic, establish context, [...]. The emphasis given to __ material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic. (THE material).
2) (This is from a grammar blog. The author is discussing the difference between error and variant, and he's telling how linguistis are more prone to read errors as variants when they are geographically or ethnically-related) But if it's just some random collection of speakers, then even linguists are inclined to think they are looking at __ error rather than __ variation.
(AN error... A variation).
Both examples are rather puzzling for me, especially the second. From the perspective of my language, it feels like error has become a person or a divinity, he looked through the abyss and saw the face of Error. I'm not trying to mock you, I'm just trying to give you a feeling for how it sounds to me, so that maybe, somewhere in what I said, you can find a lever to help me change perspective. Dispite the number of grammar books that I have read on the subject, I still fell like I am missing something at the core of the matter.
Thank you for your invaluable help.
H.
I'm having a hard time understanding how exactly [the?] zero article works; mostly, I believe, because in my native language articles are almost always mandatory.
Here are a couple of examples I have recently come across (I will underscore the place where I feel an article in my head, and I will indicate which article at the end of the paragraph):
1) (This is from Wikipedia's page on how to write a Wikipedia page.) The lead section [...] is the section before the table of contents and the first heading. [...] The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview. It should define the topic, establish context, [...]. The emphasis given to __ material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic. (THE material).
2) (This is from a grammar blog. The author is discussing the difference between error and variant, and he's telling how linguistis are more prone to read errors as variants when they are geographically or ethnically-related) But if it's just some random collection of speakers, then even linguists are inclined to think they are looking at __ error rather than __ variation.
(AN error... A variation).
Both examples are rather puzzling for me, especially the second. From the perspective of my language, it feels like error has become a person or a divinity, he looked through the abyss and saw the face of Error. I'm not trying to mock you, I'm just trying to give you a feeling for how it sounds to me, so that maybe, somewhere in what I said, you can find a lever to help me change perspective. Dispite the number of grammar books that I have read on the subject, I still fell like I am missing something at the core of the matter.
Thank you for your invaluable help.
H.
Top answer
Whether or not the article is put in is often decided by euphony and rhythm - as though the sentence were being spoken. ", gives a kind of "slurring" effect to the sentence, so the "the" was left out. " ("at an", "than a var"), gives the sentence a kind of clumsiness on the tongue, and so the articles were left out.
- Whether or not the article is put in is often decided by euphony and rhythm - as though the sentence were being spoken.
- ", gives a kind of "slurring" effect to the sentence, so the "the" was left out.
- " ("at an", "than a var"), gives the sentence a kind of clumsiness on the tongue, and so the articles were left out.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
3 Answers
0
Whether or not the article is put in is often decided by euphony and rhythm - as though the sentence were being spoken. In the first example - the sentence means the same thing with or without the "the" - having two "t's" in succession, "...given to the material in...", gives a kind of "slurring" effect to the sentence, so the "the" was left out.
Similarly, in the second example, the s
Similarly, in the second example, the s
00
The reason the article is omitted is because in some sense we are not referring to any particular object - that is, when we say "The emphasis given to material in the lead..." we are referring to any material, or even the abstract concept represented by the word material. Similarly, when we say "...even linguists are inclined to think they are looking at error rather than variation.
00
Thank you both for you reply.
@CSnyder
I'll try to think of it that way. In fact, I believe my first example is now clear to me.
The reason why I couldn't understand it was because I was reading it as The emphasis given to | material in the lead. Once I switched to The emphasis given to material | in the lead, I realized this was in fact a phrase that I t
@CSnyder
I'll try to think of it that way. In fact, I believe my first example is now clear to me.
The reason why I couldn't understand it was because I was reading it as The emphasis given to | material in the lead. Once I switched to The emphasis given to material | in the lead, I realized this was in fact a phrase that I t
0
Related Questions