Some/the plural

Question

Hi, I need help here!Situation 1: two friends spend an afternoon in a park. "When it got hot, they sat down in the shadow and . . .i) ate snacks they had brought with themii) ate some snacks they had brought with themiii) ate the snacks they had brought with themI think all three can be used. (i) and (ii) mean the same thing anyway, and this might be the choice of those who do not think that an afternoon in a park is a picnic. "The snacks" might be more natural for those who think that such an outing usually involves snacks.Situation 2: "Mary got back from a trip to an exotic land. She wants to show us . . .i) souvenirs she bought during her trip."ii) some souvenirs she bought during her trip."iii) the souvenirs she bought during her trip."Same story, I think for some a trip somewhere exotic automatically means souvenirs and "the" is better, but zero article and "some" make sense too.Can I get an opinion from a native speaker? I am sorry if my explanation above is gibberish or hard to understand.

Teechr · Accepted Answer

Anonymousiii) ate the snacks they had brought with them

That implies they ate all the snacks.

Anonymousiii) the souvenirs she bought during her trip."

That implies she wants to show all the souvenirs.

Anonymous · Answer

Thanks, teechr,

So I can either drop the article if I just want to imply "some" and use it if I want to imply "the", did I get that right?

it doesn't sound unnatural to you?
"They ate snacks they had brought with them"

Teechr · Answer

AnonymousSo I can either drop the article if I just want to imply "some" and use it if I want to imply "all"; ~~"the",~~ did I get that right?

Yes, but see correction.

Anonymous~~it d~~ Doesn't the following sound unnatural to you?

Anonymous"They ate snacks they had brought with them."

Not, it doesn't sound unnatural to me.

BarbaraPA · Answer

That's interesting. I find the the first ones in both groupings to sound unnatural.

Different ears hear things differently.

Anonymous · Answer

teechrYes, but see correction.

Sorry, I am still learning.

teechrNot, it doesn't sound unnatural to me.

Thank you.

CalifJim · Answer

Anonymousi) ate snacks they had brought with them

I find this difficult to interpret. We know which snacks they are. If they brought (the) snacks with them, those are the only snacks they could possibly be eating.

It's not a question of "any snacks". That's what those snacks were when they first brought them. They brought snacks (It doesn't matter which snacks.) when they went to the park. Later, they are known as the snacks they brought to the park. (Specified.)

Anonymousi) souvenirs she bought during her trip."

Same idea. First, during her trip, she bought souvenirs. (It doesn't matter which souvenirs.) Later, they are the souvenirs she bought during her trip. (Now we specify which souvenirs they are.) At least that's how I see it.

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

CalifJimI find this difficult to interpret. We know which snacks they are. If they brought (the) snacks with them, those are the only snacks they could possibly be eating.

CalifJimSame idea. First, during her trip, she bought souvenirs. (It doesn't matter which souvenirs.) Later, they are the souvenirs she bought during her trip. (Now we specify which souvenirs they are.) At least that's how I see it.

Yes, but if there hasn't been any previous mention of any snacks that were brought, isn't "the snacks" a bit off?

For example, if I come up to you and I say "Mister CalifJim, I will now show you the books I had bought for you". Obviously, it's only those books that I bought for you. But you will ask "Oh? You bought me books?" (Why would you buy me books?)
Maybe because in my examples there is already a context? It makes sense to have snacks on a long day in a park and to buy souvenirs while traveling?

CalifJim · Answer

AnonymousYes, but if there hasn't been any previous mention of any snacks that were brought, isn't "the snacks" a bit off?

No. The explanatory relative clause takes the place of a previous mention.

Anonymous if I come up to you and I say "Mister CalifJim, I will now show you the books I ~~had~~ bought for you"

OK. Then I say "Thank you". Nothing unusual there.

AnonymousBut you will ask "Oh? You bought me books?"

I might ask that, yes. No "the" because the focus is on your book-buying, not the specific books you have bought and given me.

AnonymousMaybe because in my examples there is already a context?

Yes. Decisions about the use of articles are always very strongly tied to context.

The context may be the real world situation OR the words themselves as said or written.

AnonymousIt makes sense to have snacks on a long day in a park and to buy souvenirs while traveling?

Yes.

CJ

Anonymous · Answer

Thank you for explaining all this.

What I meant to say in my books example is that I wouldn't say, "Mister CalifJim, I am going to show you the books I bought for you" because you have no previous knowledge of any books, which would make you ask why I bought them in the first place. So I would probably say "Mister CalifJim, I am now going to show you SOME some books that I bought for you". But zero article before plural noun is like "some", hence my point. Hence my idea to use zero article.
I am not sure if I have expressed myself clearly.

Khoff · Answer

Anonymous two friends spend an afternoon in a park. "When it got hot, they sat down in the shadow and . .

I know this is not what you're asking about, but usually we would say they "sat down in the shade."

Generally we would only use "shadow" if it was important to indicate which shadow they were sitting in. "As they travelled through the desert, the only shade they could find to rest in was the shadow of their own truck."

Some/the plural

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions