0
DorisPao Posted 10 years ago
Grammar

The rain

Hi!!
I am reading these essays by an American professor of English and I came across this sentence:
"Often I walked in rain".
It looks funny without "the" before "rain". Even if no rain has been previously mentioned. Shouldn't it be "Often I walked in the rain"? But he is a professor.
Is this correct English to say:
"I walked through rain". "I walked through snow."
Or do I follow the "no article for the first mention, the definite article once you mention it again"?
Thanks!!
  

Top answer

It's an unusual and very literary kind of sentence. My advice is not to consider it until you feel that your overall grasp of English is very good. Clive

  • It's an unusual and very literary kind of sentence.
  • My advice is not to consider it until you feel that your overall grasp of English is very good.
  • Clive
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.

12 Answers
0
It's an unusual and very literary kind of sentence.
My advice is not to consider it until you feel that your overall grasp of English is very good.

Clive
0
Thanks for your answer, but I am sorry: I don't quite follow you.
You say that it's "unusual and very literary", but it's not incorrect then?
If I tell my friend, "Two weeks ago I had a great walk. I walked in snow". If no snow has been mentioned and my friend, who is living in another country, doesn't know that it snowed two weeks ago. Is "in snow" okay? Or do I say "in the snow"?
0
Oh, and if I can't say "I walked in snow", can I say "I walked in heavy snow"? Or is it still "in the heavy snow?"
Sorry about all the questions, I just want to get it right.
0
This would be correct in certain contexts. You might look at this type of sentence as akin to sentences like:

Often I walked in silence.

Often I walked in sorrow.

Often I walked in thought.

Often I walked in darkness.

Often I walked in contemplation.
0
The sentences: "Two weeks ago I had a great walk. I walked in snow.", would be okay within a certain context. "I walked in heavy snow." would also be correct in certain contexts. These types of sentences, especially the first one, are literary-poetic in style. The speaker or writer is trying to sound out-of-the-ordinary. "I walked in the (heavy) snow." would be used in a more everyday type o
0
I am even more confused now. Let me reframe the question.
1. I tell my friend, "Two weeks ago I had a great walk. I walked in snow". If no snow has been mentioned and my friend, who is living in another country, doesn't know that it snowed two weeks ago. Is "in snow" okay? Or do I say "in the snow"?
2. What about modifying the noun? "Heavy snow". If I have not mentioned any heavy snow, do
0
The sentence "I walked in snow." is literary-poetic in style and would not be used in a letter to a friend in another country telling him what you're doing. This has nothing to do with whether or not snowing was mentioned previously. It you're writing an everyday type of letter to a friend you'd say: "It's snowing here, and two weeks ago I had a great walk in the snow."

When you add t
0
Perhaps I am wrong, but I think that this has something to do with the preposition "in". When used before some nouns (e.g. natural phenomena), you should use the definite article. In this case, you forget the use-the-definite-article-for-previously-unmentioned-nouns rule. For example:
1. I walked in the snow.
2. I walked in the rain.
3. Sharks live in the water.
0
XerxesAs for your second question - when you modify these nouns, yes, you follow the usual rule. So.1. I walked in heavy snow.2. I walked in pouring rain.3. This species lives in salty water.
An additional note. Obviously, if this quality of the snow being heavy, for example, has already been mentioned, then you slip the definite article when mentioning it for
0
Actually, ignore my "in (the) water example. It's actually perfectly fine to say, "sharks live in water", etc. But everything else I said still stands.

Related Questions