the monster or a monster

Question

Hi,The two sentences below, are they different in meaning? Kindly elaborate.Please assign a name to the monster that you are about to draw.Please assign a name to a monster that you are about to draw.

Mister Micawber · Accepted Answer

No difference in meaning. In the first sentence, the writer realizes that a defining clause is to follow the word monster.

BarbaraPA · Answer

Well, there's a slight difference. When you say "the monster" there must already be some mutual, prior understanding that there is going to be a monster. You would have already referred to it. "Today, we're going to draw monsters. Give a name to the monster you are about to draw."

When you say "a monster," it is the first time you are giving the information that there will be a monster in the drawing.

Anonymous · Answer

Hi,

In line with your reasoning stated, I wish to inquire you whether "the " before "public funds" is necessary (if so, why?) when this is the starting sentence of an article.

... said yesterday that it would begin next week an investigation of the public funds given to ...

Also, how would use differently the words, "fund" and "funds"?

Mister Micawber · Answer

Since funds in the sentence is plural, the definite article is not necessary; however, it certainly can be used, even if this is the opening sentence of an article. As I stated above, the public funds need not refer to a previous mention-- it is defined by the following nonfinite clause (given to...).

Fund has two common financial meanings: (1) a reserve of money formally set aside for some purpose; and (2) (in the plural) assets in the form of money. You can speak of a specific fund or funds (the Save-the-Children Fund, the Red Cross Fund), or you can speak of money possessed in general (I have no funds at the moment; could you buy me dinner?). In your example, public funds are probably the latter.

Anonymous · Answer

Hi,

Thank you all for your extended explanation, but let me encumber you with what possibly could be a burdensome task, or perhaps not, I don't know. My inqury starts with the fact that my inbility to clearly categorize or differentiate what is a defining clause or not under various ambiguous (at least to me) situations.

Ex. of serveral clauses of phases that could "defining", thus warranting an input of "the" in front of a noun in focus, like "public funds."

1. an investigation of the public funds given to teachers.

(OK, surely defining enough, I think.)

2. an inverstigation of the public funds set aside for a personal use.

(Looks like warranting a "the".)

3. an investigation of the general-use funds.

(OK, here, not just any funds, but a general-use funds, and thus, "the" is requred.)

4. an investigation of (the) public funds which/that are available for general use.

(here, the clause, "which/that are available for general use" doesn't seem to be defining but rather adding or serving the main words, "public funds." In this case, the "the" might be done without.)

In summary, if the first three examples are correct and affirm my meager ability to discern the case in point, the 4th one is the kind that causes me most troubles. Can you help me to solidify my understanding

of the 4th kind?

Mister Micawber · Answer

The fourth should be the most straightforward-- it is a restrictive (defining) clause by virtue of the that and the lack of a preceding comma, not to mention the fact that there is no other information presented which could define these public funds.

Compare:

4a-- There will be an investigation of (the) public funds which/that are available for general use. (Either is possible.)
4b-- There will be an investigation of the Floodgate Fund and the Osamu Fund, which are available for general use.

The article can be done without in 4a only because funds is plural. Compare the singulars:

4c-- There will be an investigation of the public fund which/that is available for general use. (defining)
4d-- There will be an investigation of the Floodgate Fund, which is available for general use . (non-defining)

Please note that we were originally discussing-- as I recall-- whether the definite article could be used without previous mention. The following is equally possible: There will be an investigation of a public fund which/that is available for general use.

Anonymous · Answer

Thank you for your extended and expansive explanation, but one thing seems to be unclear.

On your primary explanation part, you went on to say, "..., not to mention that the fact there is no other information presented which could define thess public funds", and in corollary, "the" is required for the

4th example. That conclusion seems, from what I gather, to be not in line with the stmt you made afterward - the article can be done w/o in 4a because funds is plural.

Can you rectify that and one more thing, can you give me some examples of having other information presented in the writing to cause it (?) to be defined and thus, making it necessary to have "the" in front of it (?) ?

the monster or a monster

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions