In the first two cases and the last case I agree. In the third case, "(The) Infrastructure was terrible", I would include the article. Without it, the sentence feels a bit deficient to me.
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
DorisPaoGPY,What if I wrote:Infrastructure in Jakarta is poor.Is that OK? Since I have a definite place now, is it be less deficient even without the article?Perhaps so, but I think I would still personally use the article.
DorisPaoBy comparison, in Congo, infrastructure was poor . . .Infrastructure was poor, the road network . . . (a book about India)Interesting. Maybe some people are beginning to think of "infrastructure" as a non-count noun.
CalifJimInteresting. Maybe some people are beginning to think of "infrastructure" as a non-count noun.Well, isn't it? You can't have "two infrastructures".
DorisPaoWell, isn't it? You can't have "two infrastructures".Hmm. I thought you could. But regardless, you're right to bring this up because I was going in the wrong direction on this one. "the" is used with both countable and uncountable nouns, so I don't know what I was thinking.
DorisPaowhat hope is there for us?Indeed! It's hard to say. It seems that all of you have to stay more awake than I do.