Is it the definite article?
So, to reiterate, when it comes to when to use the “the”, the only universal rule is this:
Some rules (such as the two you’ve given) might hold 95%+ of the time, but unfortunately there may be weird and arbitrary exceptions that you’ll just have to learn.
Is it capitalization?
Because a cursory look at the Wikipedia page for capitalization also reveals that it is not without its quirks.
For example:
planets and other celestial bodies: “Jupiter”, “the Crab Nebula”; and “the Earth”, “the Sun”, or “the Moon” should be capitalized according to the International Astronomical Union based on its manual of style, but style guides may suggest differently.[19]
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalization_in_English
Is it the fact the way something is written almost has no bearing on how it’s pronounced?
Please tell me your thoughts.
I always thought the celestial bodies thing was just another case of proper nouns. Jupiter is always capitalized because it’s a proper name.
But “the Moon” can be either. “the Moon” is the proper name of Earths natural satellite so should be capitalized, but “the moon” is a description of any planetary body’s natural satellite so should NOT be
Similar for “the Sun”. “the Sun” is the proper name of Earths star, but “the sun” is any solar system’s star. I like that in so much science fiction they’ve figured this out and use a distinct proper name, “Sol”
deleted by creator
One I always find weird is how often we reuse the exact same word with the same spelling and pronunciation to mean wildly different things. For example, the word ‘jam’ can mean:
- a fruit preserve
- to play music
- heavy traffic
- a door that won’t open
- to cram something into something else
- a difficult situation
Or ‘saw’, which can be to look at something in the past tense or to cut wood. The word ‘run’ apparently has over 600 different meanings!
We also have contronyms, which is when a word also means the opposite of itself. For example ‘dust’, which can mean to add dust or remove it. Or ‘left’, which can mean remaining (“I only have three left”) or departing (“They left.”)
A door can get jammed on the door jamb
Chinese would like a word
Or ‘left’, which can mean remaining (“I only have three left”) or departing (“They left.”)
I remember learning Spanish in school. Discovering the difference between “dejar” and “irse” drove this home for me. Dejar - to leave [a thing somewhere.] Irse - to leave [a place.] (“Salir” also works for the latter meaning, but it can mean more of “to go out.”)
“Ella se fue y dejó el libro en la mesa.” (“She left and left the book on the table.”)
Speaking of “driving (a point) home,” I’d say one of the weirdest/most interesting quirks of English is how many idioms we rely on.
Probably spelling, but there’s one quirk in English that makes it so you can build the arguably weirdest sentence in any language. Here’s the short version and explanation for people unaware of the 3 meanings of the word (which I’ll use 3 different spellings to make it easier to understand):
Buffalois a city in USA- a
buffalois another name for an animal also known as a bison - To
BUFFALOmeans to bother, or bully.
So a
Buffalo buffalois a Bison from the city of Buffalo. If a Bison from Buffalo were to bother another Bison from Buffalo, you get the common example of this phrase which isBuffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalowhich means Buffalo bison BOTHERS Buffalo bison. You can add an extra Buffalo at the start to make it a headline of a newspaper telling you where this happened, but that only gives youBuffalo, Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo…But we can make it better. See, in English you can add specifiers to a noun, the way we’re doing with Buffalo to specify this is a Bison from Buffalo, but the specification can be a full sentence. For example if we wanted to say that specify that the bison is known to bother other bisons you can call him a “bison bully” bison, or even if he’s from Buffalo and only bullies other bisons from Buffalo he’s a Buffalo “Buffalo bison bully” bison, or a Buffalo “Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO” buffalo.
Cool, so if a Bison from Buffalo known for bullying other bisons from Buffalo is bullying yet another Buffalo bison you can say that a “Buffalo Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo”… But what if the bison it’s bullying is also known to bully other bisons from buffalo? Then
Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffaloBut our bison might actually EXCLUSIVELY bully bisons that bully other bisons, so he’s a Buffalo bison BULLY BULLY, and if he’s from the city of Buffalo he’s a Buffalo Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO BUFFALO. So if our heroic bison made a mistake and bullied another Bison who only bullies bullies then:
Buffalo Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO BUFFALO buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO BUFFALOAnd you can keep making the sentence infinitely long by specifying that tach bison in the story is a Buffalo bison Bully bison.
Chinese has something a bit like this too: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lion-Eating_Poet_in_the_Stone_Den
You can verb pretty much any noun you like and get away with it, when used in such a manner the verbnoun takes on the typical action of the noun.
“Gunned down” is an example.
It’s possible to do so in other languages as well, we rarely need to because we have other words for things though.
In my experience, nouns and verbs are generally strictly separate concepts in Romance languages, making this not viable, although there are exceptions.
You might not be a native to Roman languages, but it’s very easy to “vebify” a word for natives just like you would in English.
Tell me a noun you think can be verbed in English but not in Roman languages and I’ll give you an example of how it looks like.
The disparity between written English and its pronunciation. Identically written words represented with vastly different sounds, and no real and consistent system whatsoever.
I agree. I like it (the spelling often shows the history of the word, relationships between words) but for an allegedly phonetic system it’s nonsense. Not sure it’s worse than French, but Spanish is so phonetic I can read aloud stuff I don’t even understand!
I learned to read as I was learning to talk, more like a language than a skill - kids learning in school are taught phonics, and I would despair if that was how I was taught.
Once. Really? The word Wonss is spelled Once?
Mandatory reference here: The Chaos (Poem)
I think what is exceptional for English is that negation and forming a question require a modal verb. You can say “I love apples” but not “*I not love apples”, nor “*Love I apples?”. This is rare in a language. (An exception for negation could be “Apples, I love not”, but this does not sound like everyday speech.)
That officially you have “whom” on the books, but then if anyone uses it, they are seen as weird.
Per formal linguistics, it’s “respectively”.
Like: Bob, Alicia, and Siobhan are a teacher, plumber, and electrician, respectively.
We know this means Bob is a teacher and Siobhan is an electrician, but trying to write rules for how English works that account for this usage is thorny.
German has this too, “beziehungsweise”, but it replaces the “and” instead of being added to it. It is common enough that it’s usually abbreviated “bzw.”.
Personally I definitely think it’s the pronunciation, which is… self explanatory. Other languages have weird grammar rules too, but even French pronunciation is more consistent 😭
Which makes it funny when I hear fellow English speakers knock on French spelling. At least I can reasonably assume what a written French word is supposed to sound like. English doesn’t give us that luxury.
Im just going to say “The English themselves” , and leave it at that.
It’s that familiar feeling…how do you say…?
It’s that it’s being driven by influencers and popularity, and not being improved incrementally according to consistent rules and patterns.
Other languages have steering committees; we have vapid tiktok influencerati trash steering the evolution of English.
Fucking hell.
Some countries have organisations that supposedly dictate the use of some official language, the French being a notable example, but whether anybody listens to them is a whole other story and frankly I think that’s probably for the best. Languages have always been influenced organically by the cultural forces at play, they serve and reflect the speakers not the other way around. They need to adapt to the experiences and lives of people that are using them and no steering committee is going to be able comprehend nor account for the totality of that. Maybe they’re useful for like helping a publication produce a style guide since they can defer to something “official” but that’s about it.
