5

He bought the house with a big backyard. This combination tells the listener which specific house he bought.

He bought a house with a big backyard. This combination tells the listener what kind of house he bought, but not the specific house he bought.

I always thought that I can say "the house with a big backyard" whether the listener knows about the house or not.

But in the previous question regarding articles, I received an answer saying ""the" won't work if the listener does not have any information about the house before hearing about it", and said one should use "a" if the listener does not have any background information about it.

So I realized that "a" and "the" are entirely governend by whether the listener already knows it or not, not whether you are trying to specify the item or not.

I was living happily with this knowledge, until another question came into my mind.

Take a look at this conversation:

John: What did you do yesterday?

Sam (a prosecutor): I was hearing a reason a murderer killed the victim being justified.

John did not know anything about the trial, and "reason the murderer killed the victim" is new information to him. John did not know about it till Sam told him. Thus, in this case, use of indefinite article should be natural.

But it doesn't sound natural. It sounds strange.

My gut tells me that "the" should be used in that case, even though the idea is introduced for the first time, and the listener knew nothing about it.

I think the only time that "a" can be used in this sentence with "reason" is if there were more than one reason. But there was only one reason.

But why can I not use "a" in that case? Or is it actually possible?

(the dialogue is made up)

EDIT: I found a valid instance;

(2) That wasn’t a reason I left Pittsburgh, it was the reason.

From https://msu.edu/~abbottb/support.htm

whitedevil
  • 643
  • 1
  • 11
  • 24
  • RE: So I realized that "a" and "the" are entirely governend by whether the listener already knows it or not. Not exactly. I've discussed this some in this previous post. – J.R. Jul 25 '16 at 17:04
  • @J.R. Thank you. But I couldn't find a reason to use "the" in the dialogue above in your answer. – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 17:07
  • Where is this conversation from? I can understand it but it doesn't sound natural to me, either.... I'd be more likely to use "the" in both places ... or, if there were multiple reasons for the murder, I'd say "one of the reasons" instead of just "a reason". – Catija Jul 25 '16 at 17:32
  • I think "the reason" sounds a little better than "a reason", but there could be more than one reason, so a isn't necessarily incorrect! Or maybe this happens a lot - maybe Sam hears this kind of argument all the time, so he's thinking, "Oh, yet another reason a killing is justified." – stangdon Jul 25 '16 at 17:33
  • @stangdon Exactly my thought. But there was only one reason. And your second example was not the meaning i was trying to convey. But that is brilliant! – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 17:34
  • @Catija The dialogue is made up. I thought "a" should be fine because this reason is introduced for the first time. But with noun "reason", this logic is shattered. – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 17:35
  • I'm not an English teacher... I'm only a native speaker but I've never understood the "first time introduced" explanation... It may make sense in some instances but I don't think it's a very strong "rule"... And many English rules are subject to many, many exceptions... – Catija Jul 25 '16 at 17:38
  • @Catija First time introduced explanation is quite easy. For example, you wouldn't say "Daniel bought the house with a big backyard" to a person who knew nothing about the set of the houses Daniel was considering. It should be "a house". – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 17:40
  • Sorry... I "get it" but I don't get why it seems to be taken by learners as the "end all-be all" rule. As J.R.'s post shows, there are many, many other rules for whether to use "a" or "the", so dependency on this one rule is a bad thing for learners to focus on. – Catija Jul 25 '16 at 18:56
  • @Catija The ones in J.R.'s post I know about. They are used, but not as much as this "mentioned already" or "already known" usage. – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 18:57
  • My point is that you're focusing on this rule in a place where one of the other rules is the appropriate rule. – Catija Jul 25 '16 at 18:59
  • @Catija Hmm? What is that other rule? That will answer my question! – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 19:00
  • They're listed in J.R.'s other answer already... "the reason" is a unique thing in the same way "I just bought the house of my dreams" is a unique thing... Even if I'd never told you that I bought a house, the fact that this is a very special house makes it unique. You would never say "I bought a house of my dreams" because that implies that you have more than one dream house. – Catija Jul 25 '16 at 19:03
  • @Catija Do you consider a reason unique? I think what he means by unique is that there is only one such a thing, like the sun. – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 19:05
  • No. It's unique in that it's the only reason, which you've already said in your question. The reason I did this is _____. It's the reason. If there are multiple reasons, then it's "one of the reasons" or "a reason". Perhaps there's a special "rule" with reason but I find it much more common to hear "the reason" (even if it's not a singular reason) rather than "a reason" unless you're specifically emphasizing that the reason is one of many. – Catija Jul 25 '16 at 19:07
  • @Catija In the sentence "A woman who fell 10 metres from High Peak was lifted to safety by a helicopter", this woman is extremely unique beyond anything. But she is introduced for the first time and the audiences did not know about her, so indefinite article is used. – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 19:08
  • @Catija Perhaps...perhaps there is a rule with reason... articles freak me out. – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 19:11
  • Like I said... I don't know if it's a rule or not... but I almost never hear people use "a reason" unless they're specifically emphasizing that the reason is one of many. – Catija Jul 25 '16 at 19:12
  • @Catija I found this: And even when the descriptive content is not sufficient to determine a unique referent relative to the whole world, there are examples where the content may determine a unique referent in context. In these cases too the definite article may be used, even if the addressee is not assumed to know who or what is being talked about. An example is given in (9). (9) Sue is mad because the realtor who sold her house overcharged his fee. https://msu.edu/~abbottb/def&inde.pdf Unique, very much so, no? – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 19:49
  • @Catija I guess finding the boundary is up to the learner, distinguished through numerous practices. – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 19:51
  • 2
    Because you have a bunch of native speakers who are writing their best guesses as to article usage in English, which is one of the most complicated aspects of our language. The use of articles comes natural to us, but few native speakers even know, for example, that the indefinite article can refer to specific referents. The answers about articles you get here on ELL and even on ELU are mostly going to be the blind native speaker leading the blind non-native speaker so that they both fall into a pit. An alternative is to read... (continued) – Alan Carmack Jul 25 '16 at 20:54
  • 1
    ...some articles written by professionals who know something about the topic. I suggest you start with this article by Barbara Abbott on definite and indefinite articles. If you do not understand the point she is making at first, keep reading, it becomes clearer. She has many illustrations of how different explanations for the use of the definite article, while sometimes okay, fail miserably to explain some everyday examples. If after reading this, you have questions, post one here. You can also email me directly at alancarmack at gmail dot com. – Alan Carmack Jul 25 '16 at 20:58
  • @AlanCarmack Thank you! Articles are so complicated, it makes my head spin. – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 21:00
  • 1
    I just now saw that you reference a link to the same B. Abbott in your post. She is one of the good ones; there are others. The main thing is that a speaker uses the definite article when he thinks his listener can identify which referent he is talking about. Else, he uses the indefinite article. (But speakers are not bound to this gereralization, and do not stick to it.) In addition, there are many exceptions that do not fit this generalization. And this is why no "unified theory" in the use even of just the definite article has yet been offered by a linguist that takes into account all uses. – Alan Carmack Jul 25 '16 at 21:03
  • possible duplicate of https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/85074/use-of-article-the and https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/32222/indefinite-vs-definite-article – Giambattista Jul 25 '16 at 22:01

2 Answers2

2

I'll try to keep my answer short and sweet because this is the kind of topic you can spend hours on end talking about.

When we talk about things using the, there's typically, what I'd call, a personal history record associated with the object being talked about. And the information the record holds is unique and very specific to that particular object. Think of it as a short life story of the object. For example, if you were to say the following to one of your friends:

I bought the house with a big backyard yesterday.

while you really meant this (and that's the correct way to say it when talking about things in general):

I bought a house with a big backyard yesterday.

That the in front of house would immediately tell your friend that there was some specific information associated with the house and that would naturally elicit questions like: What? What house exactly are you talking about? I had heard you were going to buy a house, but you never told me that you had already decided which one you would buy. The one painted green or the brick one? Maybe the one on the corner? Which one exactly? There are many houses that are being sold right now.

I was hearing a reason a murderer killed the victim being justified.

That one technically is correct (though, "I was hearing the justification for why the murderer killed a victim" is probably more natural to say for a native speaker) because he's speaking about things in general. The surrounding words are just extra fluff. They're like qualifier-words. Compare that with this:

I bought a big, red car being sold for real cheap.

big, red and being sold for real cheap are just adjectives (being sold for real cheap is not really an adjective, but bear with me) describing the kind of car you bought. They're really nothing but qualifiers that describe how large the car was, what color it was and how exactly it was being sold, but the car itself lacks a personal history to tell the world about. It's still a car in general.

I hope now this clears things up a little bit for you. If you've still got questions, leave them down below in the comments section and I will make changes or corrections to my answer. Maybe not today though.

Michael Rybkin
  • 37,600
  • 29
  • 167
  • 310
  • For the 1st example (depending on the context), you could say I bought the house with the* big backyard yesterday.? And to add to your answer, which is mostly spot on, wouldn't you refer to the phrase being sold for real cheap* as being attributive? – Giambattista Jul 25 '16 at 21:55
  • "I bought the house with the big backyard yesterday" -- yes, you could say that, but I just wasn't planning on going through all possible combinations. 2. attributive, not attributive -- what's in a name? Doesn't matter what you call it, the point is that those are just descriptive words.
    • – Michael Rybkin Jul 25 '16 at 22:00
  • Sorry I wasn't nit-picking at your answer; I just wanted to add to it. The reason I mentioned the house with the big backyard is because you were discussing specificity. You're so right about it being a topic tfor which hours could be spent discussing it. As for attributive, I just threw that out there because you were explaining why the phrase is acting like an adjective modifying car. – Giambattista Jul 25 '16 at 22:08
  • Alright... but doesn't "a reason a murderer killed the victim" sound unnatural to you? Would you use it? Because it does to me. – whitedevil Jul 25 '16 at 22:33
  • @whitedevil insomuch as a and one are generally interchangeable, I'd agree with Cookie Monster. Perhaps if you re-read it, substituting one for a, it might not sound so odd to you? – Giambattista Jul 25 '16 at 23:49
  • @Giambattista If not more strange, it sounds unnatural. I have no doubt that this is grammatical, but it doesn't sound idiomatic. – whitedevil Jul 26 '16 at 00:04
  • @whitedevil Maybe it's a matter of dialect. I suggested swapping a with one because the example only works if there is more than one reason.If there were only one reason, then it would have to be the. I'm not saying that it doesn't strike me as slightly odd; I'm just pointing out how it could theoretically be work. – Giambattista Jul 26 '16 at 00:12