110. Nouns without “the” or “a”

The use of the “zero” article depends on both grammar and meaning

THE PROBLEM OF NOUNS WITHOUT “the” OR “a”

Occasionally English speakers use a noun without either of the articles the/a(n). Some grammar books call this the use of the “zero” article. A common error by speakers of other languages, even when they have a very advanced command of English, is making a wrong choice concerning the zero article – either omitting the or a(n) when one of them is necessary, or adding one of them when they are both incorrect. This is a particularly likely error among speakers of a mother tongue that does not use articles at all, but it affects most learners of English on some occasions. It is illustrated more than once in the grammar test posts of this blog (see 138. Grammar Command Test 1 (Correcting)).

Part of the reason for the error is undoubtedly differences between English and other languages regarding the use of articles with nouns. However, I am sure that a more important reason is the complicated nature of the English rules, which involve not just meanings but also grammar (as defined in 100. What is a Grammar Error?). In this post I wish to clarify the separate influences of grammar and meaning on the use or non-use of a zero article.

.

THE LINK BETWEEN GRAMMAR AND THE ZERO ARTICLE

Grammar influences the choice of an article before a particular noun through the grammatical category that the noun belongs to. One of these categories is “proper” nouns – nouns which usually begin with a capital letter regardless of their position in a sentence (see 62. Choices with Capital Letters). If we know that a noun is of this type we will also know that it is fairly likely to need a zero article, with exceptions identifiable from their meaning (see 47. Article Errors with Proper Nouns).

Other nouns (sometimes called “common nouns”) are usually categorised as either “countable” or “uncountable”. These are slightly misleading names, since some common nouns that dictionaries say are countable represent things that are not obviously able to be counted, and vice versa (see the Guinlist posts on Noun Countability Clues). A key difference is that “countable” nouns can be made plural and “uncountable” ones cannot.

An ability to correctly classify individual common nouns as countable or uncountable is the main grammatical requirement for accurate use of the zero article. This is because the zero article is not equally possible with singular nouns of both kinds: it is quite often needed with uncountable nouns, but rarely with singular countable nouns, which must usually have a(n) or the. This rule means that making the wrong decision about the countability of a singular noun can result in either an uncountable noun being incorrectly used with an article or a countable one being incorrectly used without one.

Putting effort into recognising the countability of nouns is well worth it because it assists other grammar choices too, especially that between singular and plural noun forms. This is because the plural form is common with countable nouns expressing generic meaning – in sentences where no single particular time is being referred to –  but the singular form is normal with uncountable nouns doing so. As a result, if an uncountable noun is wrongly thought to be countable, it could easily be put into an impossible plural form.

Here is a list of uncountable nouns that have sometimes in my experience been used as if they were countable – either with a(n) instead of a zero article, or in the plural – by speakers of other languages than English. I have included some countable nouns among them; readers are invited to decide which these are.

(1) access, (2) accommodation, (3) advice, (4) applause, (5) chaos, (6) damage, (7) drop, (8) equipment, (9) eye-contact, (10) feedback, (11) furniture, (12) guidance, (13) (home)work, (14) information, (15) infrastructure, (16) knowledge, (17) luggage, (18) mail, (19) music, (20) news, (21) progress, (22) punctuation, (23) research, (24) revision, (25) software, (26) system, (27) transport, (28) travel, (29) vocabulary, (30) wealth, (31) legislation.

The countable nouns here are the seventh and twenty-sixth. Some of the uncountable ones are easily mistaken as countable because they resemble countable ones in meaning, e.g. luggage/bags (see 250. Synonym Pairs with Contrasting Grammar 1 #7). Others, like legislation, have a form (-ation) that in other nouns allows countable usage (see 280. Alternative Meanings of Action Nouns, #1).

Nouns with variable countability can themselves give problems. See, for example, contact in 214. Grammar Command Test 2 (Correcting), and numerous words in the Guinlist posts on Noun Countability Clues.

The statement above that singular countable nouns “must usually” have a(n) or the implies there are some exceptions. Most importantly, there are various alternatives to a(n) or the that can be used with any countable noun. Consider:

(a) … dictionary is a useful tool for language learning.

The noun dictionary here is singular and countable, which means that not having another word in front is a grammar error. The error can be corrected by writing either the or a in the indicated space, but these are not the only possibilities. One could, for example, use this instead. Grammarians combine articles and expressions that can replace them into a single grammatical class called “determiners”.

However, not all determiners can accompany a singular countable noun. Some are only an alternative to the before uncountable and/or plural nouns. With enough, for example, we can say enough money/books but not *enough dictionary (see 189. Expressing Sufficiency). Much and many are even more restricted: the former accompanies only uncountable nouns, the latter only plural ones (see 98. “Very”, “Much” and “Very Much”). Determiners that can go before a singular countable noun include a(n), each, either, every, neither, no, the, this, that, what(ever), which(ever) and whose, as well as the possessive adjectives her, his, my, our, your etc.

Because other determiners can replace the or a(n), a more accurate rule for singular countable nouns is that they must usually have an appropriate determiner. Yet even with this formulation there are still some minor exceptions. The following types of countable noun usually have no determiner at all:

1.  Transport nouns after by (e.g. by car – see 73. Prepositions for Saying How).

2. Nouns before human names (e.g. singer Madonna – see 77. Apposition, #2).

3. Nouns after sort/type/kind of… (see 162. Writing about Classifications).

4.  Nouns in a few idioms (e.g. at hand, on foot – see 164. Fixed Preposition Phrases).

5. Most nouns in abbreviated sentences (see 158. Abbreviated Sentences).

Institution nouns – hospital, jail, school etc. – are so commonly countable that their occasional use in a non-countable way (e.g. without an article so as to mean “participate in” – see 235. Special Uses of “the”, #4) can seem to be breaking the countable noun rules. However, they may actually be uncountable in such uses.

.

THE LINK BETWEEN MEANING AND THE ZERO ARTICLE

With singular countable nouns, we do not have to think about meaning to make a decision about the zero article: the fact that they are countable and not plural – grammatical properties – rules it out. Meaning only determines the choice between the and a or another determiner. With uncountable and plural nouns, however, meaning does have to be taken into account in order to decide whether or not to have the zero article. Two meanings require the zero article, while one requires the (or equivalent determiner).

The two meanings of the zero article with uncountable and plural nouns are the same as the two that singular countable nouns can have with a(n). The first is “generic”, as defined in these pages in 89. Using “the” with General Meaning”. Here is a generic use of a:

(b) A dictionary is a useful tool for language learning.

This is not about any particular dictionary but refers to the general class of dictionaries. The other meaning of a(n) might be called “non-generic (unidentified)”. It may be illustrated like this:

(c) A dictionary was located in the Reference Section.

This is about a particular dictionary, but it does not suggest the reader can identify which one, in the way that the dictionary would.

Now compare the way plural and uncountable nouns respectively express these same two meanings with the zero article:

GENERIC

(d) Dictionaries are a useful tool for language learning.

(d) Technology is a useful tool for language learning.

NON-GENERIC (UNIDENTIFIED)

(f) Dictionaries were located in the Reference Section.

(g) Technology is available for language learning this week.

Thus, to sum up, the zero article (or, more precisely, the absence of a determiner) is always wrong before singular countable nouns but sometimes right before plural and uncountable nouns, depending on the meaning that they have. This can be expressed in diagram form as follows:

The meaning that makes the zero article wrong with plural and uncountable nouns is one that is usually expressed by the: non-generic but “identified” rather than “unidentified”, as in this example:

(h) Parts of the brain have been mapped but the knowledge leaves many questions unanswered.

Here, the knowledge is non-generic because it is not all knowledge – only knowledge of parts of the brain – and it is “identified” because the idea of brain maps has already been mentioned earlier. A zero article is not possible before knowledge with this meaning because it would mean all knowledge (generic).

An even more common error than omitting a necessary the before a plural or uncountable noun is adding the when the meaning is generic. English (unlike many other languages) nearly always has a zero article for generic plural and uncountable nouns, reserving the for its non-generic use. Repetition of these nouns with generic meaning makes no difference: the normal need for the with repeated nouns does not apply. Even singular countable nouns rarely use the to express generic meaning, preferring a(n) – though exceptions are more common (see 89. Using “the” with General Meaning).

.

PRACTICE EXERCISE (ZERO ARTICLES)

Say which of the underlined nouns in the following text have no determiner. Then identify the determiner that each of the other nouns has. Answers are given below.

Some people think that it is better if English teachers speak English as their first or native language. However, this belief very quickly raises all sorts of problems. Not speaking English as a first language brings numerous benefits for anybody who eventually succeeds in becoming an English teacher. Two of the major strengths that non-native English speakers usually have, which compensate for any “foreign” ways of pronouncing or writing English, are a much better ability to explain English grammar, and a much better understanding of just what it is like to be a learner of English as a Foreign Language.

.

Answers

Nouns with No Determiner (all plural/uncountable with generic meaning): teachers, English, problems, speakers, grammar.

Determiners: their … language; this … belief; a … language; an … teacher; the … strengths; any … ways; a … ability; a … understanding; a … learner.

109. Placing an Adjective after its Noun

.

English has various features that might lead speakers of other languages to incorrectly place an adjective after its noun

ADJECTIVE POSITIONS IN ENGLISH

The main adjective positions in English are either just before the noun they describe or after it with a link verb like BE in between. Most adjectives can go in either of these positions, but a few may go in only one (see 184. Adjectives with Limited Mobility). Various other adjective positions are also possible ( (see 283. Lesser-Known Features of Adjectives, #2). Here, I wish to consider the possibility of placing an adjective directly after its noun without a linking verb in between.

This is an aspect of adjective use that is generally covered in mainstream coursebooks. As a result, in order to follow the Guinlist policy of not simply repeating what can be found elsewhere, I am going to approach the topic by analysing an error – a particular example of an adjective placed wrongly after its noun – that I recently encountered in a tourist guidebook from the Portuguese-speaking world. I wish to show how the error is probably caused by the way English works, rather than (or as much as) by “transfer” or “interference” from Portuguese, which, like other Romance languages, usually places adjectives after rather than before nouns.

.

AN ERROR OF ADJECTIVE POSITIONING

The following sentence illustrates the guidebook error that I encountered (the adjective underlined):

(a) *The region has cultural behaviours typically Portuguese.

The correct English way to say this is either to place typically Portuguese before cultural behaviours or to leave it where it is with which are in front. The main reason for suspecting that English may be partly to blame for the error is that most other adjectives used by the writer of (a) were actually in the correct positions.

So what is it about English that might have caused this particular error? Two main causes suggest themselves: the existence in English of special adjectives that always follow their noun, and situations that make it necessary for any adjective to follow its noun.

Adjectives that must Always Follow their Noun

It is possible that the writer of (a) simply thought Portuguese belonged to the small group of English adjectives that must always follow their noun. Some of these have only one meaning, e.g. below (as in the diagram below – see 74. Sentence Lists 3: Bullet Points) and immemorial (only found in time immemorial). Others vary in their meanings and only follow their noun when expressing a particular one of the possibilities. Examples are present meaning “not absent” (the members present), proper meaning “main” (the building proper), general meaning “with general responsibility” (the Superior General), and responsible meaning “in charge” (the person responsible).

A very small number of adjectives allow a free choice about their position. Available is one example, e.g. the time available/the available time.

Yet confusing Portuguese with any of these adjective types seems quite unlikely. One would surely not have great difficulty remembering that the large group of nationality adjectives combines with nouns in the normal way.

.

Situations where any Adjective must Follow its Noun

There seem to be three main situations that require any adjective to go directly after its noun in English instead of in the usual front position.

1. Describing a Pronoun Ending in -body/-one/-thing/-where

These pronouns (e.g. someone, anywhere, everything) always need any partner adjective to come after them. This means the position of …typically Portuguese in sentence (a) would become correct if has cultural behaviours… before it was replaced by is somewhere…. This feature of English, however, does not seem a likely explanation of the error in (a), since the presence or absence of one of the four pronouns seems easy to remember and appreciate.

.

2. Acting as an Object Complement

Complements are nouns (or equivalent) or adjectives (or equivalent) that are linked by a special kind of verb to an earlier noun, which they either equate to or describe. They are of the “subject” kind when the earlier noun is separated from them by the linking verb, and of the “object” kind when the earlier noun is the linking verb’s object placed immediately before them (see 220. Features of Complements).

Here is an example of an adjective placed after its noun because it is an object complement:

(c) Columbus CONSIDERED the islands extremely beautiful.

In this sentence, the verb considered (meaning “believed”) needs the complement (extremely) beautiful after its object islands: without it the sentence would be as ungrammatical as one with no object after an object-requiring verb (like said) or no adverb after an adverb-requiring verb (like put). And the reader would be left wondering what exactly Columbus believed.

A major difference between ordinary adjectives describing a noun and object complement ones is that the former combine with the noun into what grammarians call a “noun phrase”, whereas the latter do not. The words in a noun phrase all work together to fulfil a single sentence role, such as subject, object or complement, whereas an object and its complement fulfil separate sentence roles (“object” and “object complement”: see 253. Descriptive Wording after Nouns 2, #2). This difference helps perhaps to explain why an adjective can follow its noun when it is an object complement.

Sentence (b) once again looks like (a). The only grammatical difference is that has in (a) is not a verb that needs or even allows an object complement whereas considered in (b) is. Could it be that the error in (a) has been caused by the writer incorrectly believing that HAVE allows an object complement in the way that CONSIDER does? For a list of verbs that are like CONSIDER, see 92. Verbs with an Object + “As”.

.

3. Making a Phrase with Words Added after

The role of an adjective in a sentence is not always performed by a single word: sometimes a group of words – known as an “adjective phrase” – is used instead. The words extremely beautiful in (b) are an example. Adjective phrases do not have to include an adjective: a preposition and its partner word(s) can be adjective-like as well (one could, for example, say of extreme beauty in (b) – see 84. Seven Things to Know about Prepositions, #2). However, it is adjective phrases containing an adjective that are relevant here. They comprise a central adjective plus one or more other words that make its meaning more precise.

Some adjective phrases of this kind have the extra wording before the adjective and some have it after. Words placed before are mainly adverbs, especially of “degree” like a little, quite, very and extremely (see 194. Adverbs that Say How Much). Words placed after an adjective may begin with a to verb (e.g. easy to understand – see 83. Adjectives before a “to” Verb), or a preposition (e.g. content with the outcome – see 111. Words with a Typical Preposition), or that (as in hopeful that all will succeed – see 153. Conjunction Uses of “that”), or a question word (e.g. uncertain whether…). For a comparison of all these possibilities, see 203. Expanding an Adjective with Words after it.

It is words placed after an adjective in an adjective phrase that usually make it necessary for the adjective to go after its noun rather than before. Consider the lone adjective in the following sentence:

(c) Important information was stored separately.

Here important by itself is in the normal position before its noun information. However, if it becomes a phrase with words added after it, such as important to keep, it must usually be repositioned after the noun (or, less formally, partly before it and partly after, e.g. important information to keep – see 2. Interrupted Structures). The only situation where the whole adjective phrase does not have to move is when it is surrounded by commas.

On the other hand, if wording added to important is before it, e.g. vitally important, placement directly after the noun is not possible: we would have to add which was.

This rule about adjectives could easily underlie the error in (a), where typically is combining with the adjective Portuguese to make a phrase. One possible explanation is that the writer is simply confusing the two types of adjective phrase, incorrectly thinking that typically Portuguese is the kind that has to go directly after its noun when in fact it is the kind that usually goes in front.

Another, perhaps more likely, explanation centres on the fact that adjective-ending phrases like typically Portuguese can follow their adjective provided which + BE is added in between. This is a highly unusual use of which + BE: in practically every other type of context, which + BE can be dropped (see 192. When BE can be Omitted, under “Omission with Relative Pronouns”). Could it be that the writer of sentence (a) had been led by the normal ability of which + BE to be dropped in English (as well as in Portuguese) into thinking that it always could?

There is a third possible explanation too. Although adjectives cannot directly follow their noun when they have modifying words before them, participles can. For example, if sentence (d) is expanded not with vitally important but with the participle phrase previously obtained, these words easily go either before or directly after information (see 52. Participles Placed just after their Noun). It could be that the writer of (a) confused adjectives preceded by modifying words with participles of the same kind. After all, some adjectives, such as interesting and educated, look like participles, and have probably evolved from them (see 245. Adjectives with a Participle Ending).