There are some cases where the matter is not so clear cut.
We don't use 'the' for liquids (as general nouns) unless we make reference to it or it is known.
For example, milk is white (bez the) whereas, the milk on the table is off.
Even one country can vary. Holland but, the Netherlands. This leads me on to another nice point, many Poles don't use 's' where/when they should. I hear things like 'the Budapest' or 'the Gliwice'. The reason? Their teacher told them that there was only one Gliwice or one Budapest. Still, we don't follow that logic when it comes to most place names. For example, The Vatican is an exception.
Anyway, back to the point about articles. With the Netherlands, we are specifically referring to certain, known lands as one collective. Holland exists as one unit.
The indefinite articles, though having apparently simple application as shown by Wrocław above, have complications.
Let's take the case of delict (tort in English and NOT tort in Polish). Some would say that delict is delict but others argue that a delict has been committed. Also, some crimes create complications. Is it a rape or just rape? This leads on to other points. Non-natives users of English often are very logical in their thinking. For example, 'I'm going to eat a dinner' can be heard. Native speakers, however, would prefer to either use no article (I'm going to eat dinner now) or use a personal pronoun (I'm going to eat my dinner now). However, a dinner seems to fit with the rules (one of something and dinner is a countable noun, e.g school dinners).
A proof is another classic one. We just say proof or a piece of proof. The same with evidence. Also, an advice is wrong. A piece of advice is correct. Or, more generally, just advice. Likewise, advices is also wrong.
I could say more but I'll wait for any responses or questions.
This goes out, not only to Poles (or others) wishing to learn English correctly, but also Polish teachers of English who think they know English article use correctly. Time and again, I've found that they need help too.
You can have collective and proper nouns which don't require a or the.
Many Poles say, the Poland. Poland doesn't need the as it's a proper noun. Much in the same way as we don't say the Greg but just Greg.
There are rules, yes, but many times you have to feel it. You can also just change the contruction of something, e.g Jamie's room or the room of Jamie's.
I can help you with this but it is a sticky issue for native speakers too.
Watch this. Cats are felines. The cats in the UK are bigger. The basic rules to start from are that a/an (the indefinite articles) are singular. These articles are general and not as specific as the.
A chair is brown, for example The chair (which I am looking at, thus a specified object) is beige.
With individual mountains, we don't use the. Mount Everest, Gierlak, Ben Nevis and Snowdonia for example. For mountain chains, we do. Examples include The Alps, The Himalayas, the Pyrenees and The Rocky Mountains.
Also, for a collective species, we use the to signify this. The lion is a brave animal. We are not talking about one lion which we may be looking at at that moment, more about the lion as a species of big cat. Usually, we'd just say 'lions are brave'.
After reading all this, I'd hate to learn English as a second language!
In reply to Seanus, proof, evidence and advice are examples of compound (uncountable) nouns, so you can't directly use them with with the articles a/an, however you can easily use the definite; the evidence, the advice. As you said, you can use them in conjunction with a piece of. The same with liquids, you can never have a milk, a water, but a drop of/a glass of or simply the milk/water is great.
I guess non-Latin-based languages are much simpler for not having these articles.
I was teaching compound nouns tonight and you are wrong. A compound noun is, for example, bookcase which is formed from 2 nouns, book and case. Many people say a proof but I think it's awkward. I know that you can't use evidence with an. An evidential requirement is ok for example.
Hehe, I wasn't trying to contradict you, just adding to what you said. And you're right about compound nouns, I just thought for a minute that it was another term for uncountable nouns; no idea why. :)
That's OK, I had had 4 beers and was getting tired so may have come across as snappy. I'm happy to answer any questions here as Polish students, and many others, make a pig's ear of article use. Even the teachers have many doubts, the Polish ones I mean.
The English definite article: an interesting idea altogether ! I once asked an Englishman to tell a name of a town used with "the". He didn't say "the Vatican", he said "le Havre". I said "the Hague" !
How would you say: "On the far side is Ujazdowski Castle" or "On the far side is the Ujazdowski Castle" ?
With great difficulty is the answer. There is a lesson at my school on this point. I plough through quite quickly, but thoroughly, and we barely scrape the surface. There are many exceptions with no rhyme nor reason.
I suggest praying, maybe divine intervention will help ;)
Some things in language are literally unpredictable. Why do you say 'w' with some things and places, and 'na' with others? How can you match a perfective Polish verb with its imperfective counterpart? How can you tell which words are feminine and masculine? There are general rules to help you most of the time, as there are with the English articles, but there are always exceptions and things you just have to learn as they are
I don't think any Slavic languages use a/the. I guess it all the depends on the context of what is said.
Bulgarian does have sort of articles similar to the Danish language case
it is guessed that it is due to Turkic influence (Turkic not Turkish - Bulgars where nomad Turkic tribe who came from Black Sea Steppes to present day Romania and Bulgaria around 7th century (anybody correct me if I am wrong) they became slavicized quite soon)
Generally, I believe there are "hidden" reasons behind what we call exceptions in language. They are exceptions because language has changed, yet the old, logical and easily explicable forms survive, but are called "exceptions". (One example of this is that we say "we Wrocławiu", but we say "w Krakowie" in Polish, although both are masculine names of towns ending in -w.) Reasons for exceptions may be thus historical or may find their causes in our ancestors' "mentality", one that we don't share any longer. I believe that the ancestors of English people had perhaps their own reasons to put the before names of rivers or mountain chains, while they did not do so with names of towns or individual mountains (I would very much like to discuss it some other time). An example of ancestors' mentality would be using names of countries or regions in Polish. If we go back to the 10th century, we discover that only the names of the then neighbours of Poland are used either with "na" or in plural or both together. Names of the rest are typically in singular and preceded by "w" in the locative case, as in "w Anglii, we Francji, w Rosji". If we travel clockwise from the north-east, we would find names with the "na" preposition and in the singular : na Litwie (na £otwie per analogiam), na Rusi, or na Ukrainie, na Słowacji; then the plural appears and the na is continued : na Węgrzech (a neighbour of Poland those days), na Morawach, then the na is abandoned : w Czechach, although na £użycach (!), w Niemczech, and w Prusach.
Interestingly enough, the "outer" regions of Poland are treated in the same way, as neighbours of Poland. In the language, Poland confines itself only to Wielkopolska and Małopolska (which was in fact quite true in the 10th century), so we have : na Mazowszu, na Śląsku, na Pomorzu, na Kaszubach, na Kujawach.
[It is my own hypothesis, however, so it is subject to challenge.]
Interestingly, in Finnish they have a similar w/na situation. The difference is that they use locative suffixes instead of prepositions. Some places use 'ssa/in' while others use 'lla/on'. Joensuussa/in Joensuu, and Tamperella/on (in) Tampere. No Finnish person I've asked can explain why, you just have to memorise which places use which locative suffixes.
Happily in English we never say on with any town, city or country.
It is generally insignificant but sometimes an article really helps and is needed. I still can't get over the fact that some say 'a chairs' or 'a books'. Are the fundamentals left out here?
I plough through quite quickly, but thoroughly, and we barely scrape the surface. There are many exceptions with no rhyme nor reason.
An interesting case is why we say "I'm going to Stary Rynek" - but we also say "I'm going to theOld Market Square" - even when talking about exactly the same place.
Or Tower Bridge when it could easily be The Tower Bridge. Yorkshiremen complicated it further. Look at Peter Kay. 'I was going up motorway, listenin to radio, browsin tinternet', LOL
The definite and indefinite articles to aid Polish users of PF
I have noticed that the level of writing amongst Poles here is generally of a high quality. However, I have noticed misuse of the indefinite articles, 'a' and 'an', and the definite article, the.
OK, here's the first test:
The tiger is orange and black
Is it referring to one tiger or many tigers here??
Is it referring to one tiger or many tigers here??
It depends. If the discourse is one in which both the speaker/writer and the listener/reader know which particular tiger is being referred to, then you need an article. If we are talking about tigers in general, i.e. as a species, then the article is also needed (in this case you could also say "tigers are orange and black".
I'll try first*. There are two meanings: A. The species of tiger is orange and black B. If you've been already talking about one specific tiger before, you are referring to that one tiger.
(Note: Correct sequence of tenses, too, and my English in general, please).
I go to church = I'm a religious person attending Holy Masses on Sundays I'm going to the church on Sunday? = I will go to our local church this Sunday.
AS, that's right but you should use 'who attends' instead of 'attending'. Attending suggests a purpose and temporary activity.
The local church, the one I know. Exactly!
Avoid singular for generalisations? Not necessarily. You could say that 'a miner is a brave person'. It refers to any miner and generalises that it's true, that it is the case.
