Steve Hayes
2025-01-26 15:23:58 UTC
On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 20:23:32 +0000, bryan_styble
when a noun becomes a name (a proper noun), specific instead of
general.
Some other examples:
The Transkei and the Ciskei, and the Transvaal.
People living to the west of the Kei river called the land on the
eastern side of the river "the Transkei" and the land on their side of
the river becamew "the Ciskei". It wasn't a definite area of land. No
one knew or cared how far the Transkei streched beyond the river. Some
might think of it as being only to the next river, while others might
think of it as stretching further. When, however it becomes a legal
entity, which had laws applying to it and not to other places, then
there is a need to define boundaries more carefully and it became
known as "Transkei" without the definite article.
The same applied to "the Transvaal" -- at first it was applied to the
area north of the Vaal River by people who approached it from the
south, Then at various periods it became a legal entity, most notably
when from 1902-1910 it was a British Colony and from 1910-1994 a South
African Province. Now it's simply a vague area again, but with more
populous and important cities being to the north of the river rather
than to the south of it, the term has dropped out of use.
Nowadays "trans" and "cis" are mainly applied to the river sex. Those
whose sex and gender are on the same side of the river are "cis" and
those whose sex is on one side of the river and whose gender is on the
other side are "trans".
In the case of Ukraine it doesn't much matter. Within and immediately
outside Ukraine people mostly speak Ukrainian and Russian, and neither
language has a definite article. But Ukrainian nationalists tend to be
a bit touchy about it because they think English-speaking people who
speak of "the Ukraine" are disrespecting Ukraine's independence.
Another example is the place known to people who didn't live there as
"the Ivory Coast" -- so named by people who didn't live there because
at the time it was their principal export. No one cared how far inland
it stretched until it became a legal entity, with laws applying to it
and nowhere else. Now it prefers to be known as Côte d'Ivoire.
Another example, from Jewish and Christian theology is "Satan". In
Hebrew, especially, it is a noun rather than a name. The satan was
originally a kind of prosecutor or plaintiff in a law court, someone
who brought and prosecuted a case against someone else. It was only
later, and particularly in Christian theology, that it came to be used
as a proper name for one partcular occupant of the office, but in
English usage the cognate word derived from Greek retains the definite
article. In the usage of English-speaking Christians, it is "Satan"
and "the devil", and not "Devil" and "the satan".
Congrats...as you convinced me on this "to-The-or-not-to-The" issue!
I.e., it indeed sounds erroneous (not to mention pompous), even when
that lacking-The usage IS correct. (So yeah, I guess I'll start saying
The Village People and The Titanic, although it may take months to shed
that since-childhood verbal habit.)
Meanwhile, what's the deal with that handful of independent states
around the planet where convention dictates a The? I'm thinking of The
Sudan and The Ukraine (once upon a time), and The Netherlands even
today. And speaking of Holland, why does everyone say The Hague?
(Because it's a mere CITY for Heaven's sake!)
So, who was the guy who all of a sudden decided and decreed it was no
longer proper to say "The Ukraine"?
TV-comic-turned-Freedom-Fighter-Head-of-State Zelinskyy, or just some
nameless bureaucrat?
Louis, do you in your ever-erudite ways have any insight to offer us all
as to what precisely which factors govern this inclusion of the
(superfluous) The, or lack thereof?
One of the criteria for inclusion or omission of "the" seems to beI.e., it indeed sounds erroneous (not to mention pompous), even when
that lacking-The usage IS correct. (So yeah, I guess I'll start saying
The Village People and The Titanic, although it may take months to shed
that since-childhood verbal habit.)
Meanwhile, what's the deal with that handful of independent states
around the planet where convention dictates a The? I'm thinking of The
Sudan and The Ukraine (once upon a time), and The Netherlands even
today. And speaking of Holland, why does everyone say The Hague?
(Because it's a mere CITY for Heaven's sake!)
So, who was the guy who all of a sudden decided and decreed it was no
longer proper to say "The Ukraine"?
TV-comic-turned-Freedom-Fighter-Head-of-State Zelinskyy, or just some
nameless bureaucrat?
Louis, do you in your ever-erudite ways have any insight to offer us all
as to what precisely which factors govern this inclusion of the
(superfluous) The, or lack thereof?
when a noun becomes a name (a proper noun), specific instead of
general.
Some other examples:
The Transkei and the Ciskei, and the Transvaal.
People living to the west of the Kei river called the land on the
eastern side of the river "the Transkei" and the land on their side of
the river becamew "the Ciskei". It wasn't a definite area of land. No
one knew or cared how far the Transkei streched beyond the river. Some
might think of it as being only to the next river, while others might
think of it as stretching further. When, however it becomes a legal
entity, which had laws applying to it and not to other places, then
there is a need to define boundaries more carefully and it became
known as "Transkei" without the definite article.
The same applied to "the Transvaal" -- at first it was applied to the
area north of the Vaal River by people who approached it from the
south, Then at various periods it became a legal entity, most notably
when from 1902-1910 it was a British Colony and from 1910-1994 a South
African Province. Now it's simply a vague area again, but with more
populous and important cities being to the north of the river rather
than to the south of it, the term has dropped out of use.
Nowadays "trans" and "cis" are mainly applied to the river sex. Those
whose sex and gender are on the same side of the river are "cis" and
those whose sex is on one side of the river and whose gender is on the
other side are "trans".
In the case of Ukraine it doesn't much matter. Within and immediately
outside Ukraine people mostly speak Ukrainian and Russian, and neither
language has a definite article. But Ukrainian nationalists tend to be
a bit touchy about it because they think English-speaking people who
speak of "the Ukraine" are disrespecting Ukraine's independence.
Another example is the place known to people who didn't live there as
"the Ivory Coast" -- so named by people who didn't live there because
at the time it was their principal export. No one cared how far inland
it stretched until it became a legal entity, with laws applying to it
and nowhere else. Now it prefers to be known as Côte d'Ivoire.
Another example, from Jewish and Christian theology is "Satan". In
Hebrew, especially, it is a noun rather than a name. The satan was
originally a kind of prosecutor or plaintiff in a law court, someone
who brought and prosecuted a case against someone else. It was only
later, and particularly in Christian theology, that it came to be used
as a proper name for one partcular occupant of the office, but in
English usage the cognate word derived from Greek retains the definite
article. In the usage of English-speaking Christians, it is "Satan"
and "the devil", and not "Devil" and "the satan".
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk