0
Ant_222 Posted 15 years ago
Grammar

"[?]Reason behind [?]usage" (articles)

Hello, everybody

Let me humbly start this question by quoting myself:

«As a non-native, I like to find reason behind usage [of a language]»

I can't be more specific than to ask why the definite article is needed before "reason" and "usage" in the above sentence.

I as comparative example, here is a quote in which a similar pattern is used without an article and I don't know what it has that my own sentence lacks that makes this same pattern with zero articles correct:

«It is precisely the capacity to feel keenly the rational and the universal and to see reason behind passionate phenomena that makes one an artist in the first place.»

Thank you in advance,
Anton
  

Top answer

As a non-native, I like to find reason behind usage [of a language] . -- The article is not needed before either of those uncountable nouns. -- In this sentence, 'capacity' is made specific by the following infinitive clause, while 'rational' and 'universal' are both adjectives used as pronouns.

  • As a non-native, I like to find reason behind usage [of a language] .
  • -- The article is not needed before either of those uncountable nouns.
  • -- In this sentence, 'capacity' is made specific by the following infinitive clause, while 'rational' and 'universal' are both adjectives used as pronouns.
  • 'Reason' is again non-count.
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.

4 Answers
0
As a non-native, I like to find reason behind usage [of a language]. I can't be more specific than to ask why the definite article is needed before "reason" and "usage" in the above sentence.-- The article is not needed before either of those uncountable nouns.

It is precisely the capacity to feel keenly the rational and the universal and to see reason behind pas
0
Mister MicawberThe article is not needed before either of those uncountable nouns.
Thanks for the feedback. I originally wrote this in my first post to:



where CalifJim corrected it by adding the two definite articles. Maybe I am missing some subtlety that is lost without the full context? Hmmmm.

Guess I had better hope (and wait) fo
0
I see his correction, and it is because he is considering that you were speaking of the specific reason and usage under discussion in the thread.
0
Mister MicawberI see his correction, and it is because he is considering that you were speaking of the specific reason and usage under discussion in the thread.
This answers my question. Even in that thread it was the general principle that I had in mind. Thank you.

Anton

Related Questions