preposition + the
0
should “the” be omitted when it is used along with the prepositions: in, on, across, etc.? Like in the following sentences, and I'm speaking generally:
1) some birds live in mountainsthe mountains
2) some plants live deep in waterthe water
3) birds fly over plainsthe plains
grammar expressions
asked 13 hours ago
Mohammad AL-ShiyabMohammad AL-Shiyab
144
add a comment |
0
should “the” be omitted when it is used along with the prepositions: in, on, across, etc.? Like in the following sentences, and I'm speaking generally:
1) some birds live in mountainsthe mountains
2) some plants live deep in waterthe water
3) birds fly over plainsthe plains
grammar expressions
asked 13 hours ago
Mohammad AL-ShiyabMohammad AL-Shiyab
144
It can be removed, but not should be omitted.
– mama
13 hours ago
thanks, mama, you mean that it sounds more common to keep it; like when I say "birds fly over the plains". Do you get the general idea of birds flying over nature plains? So it's not necessary to omit "the".
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
13 hours ago
Using an article or not has nothing to do with prepositions. Any article or no article can occur after any preposition, depending on the context.
– John Lawler
8 hours ago
add a comment |
0
0
0
should “the” be omitted when it is used along with the prepositions: in, on, across, etc.? Like in the following sentences, and I'm speaking generally:
1) some birds live in mountainsthe mountains
2) some plants live deep in waterthe water
3) birds fly over plainsthe plains
grammar expressions
asked 13 hours ago
Mohammad AL-ShiyabMohammad AL-Shiyab
144
should “the” be omitted when it is used along with the prepositions: in, on, across, etc.? Like in the following sentences, and I'm speaking generally:
1) some birds live in mountainsthe mountains
2) some plants live deep in waterthe water
3) birds fly over plainsthe plains
grammar expressions
grammar expressions
asked 13 hours ago
Mohammad AL-ShiyabMohammad AL-Shiyab
144
asked 13 hours ago
Mohammad AL-ShiyabMohammad AL-Shiyab
144
edited 13 hours ago
Mohammad AL-Shiyab
asked 13 hours ago
Mohammad AL-ShiyabMohammad AL-Shiyab
144
asked 13 hours ago
Mohammad AL-ShiyabMohammad AL-Shiyab
144
asked 13 hours ago
Mohammad AL-ShiyabMohammad AL-Shiyab
144
144
It can be removed, but not should be omitted.
– mama
13 hours ago
thanks, mama, you mean that it sounds more common to keep it; like when I say "birds fly over the plains". Do you get the general idea of birds flying over nature plains? So it's not necessary to omit "the".
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
13 hours ago
Using an article or not has nothing to do with prepositions. Any article or no article can occur after any preposition, depending on the context.
– John Lawler
8 hours ago
add a comment |
It can be removed, but not should be omitted.
– mama
13 hours ago
thanks, mama, you mean that it sounds more common to keep it; like when I say "birds fly over the plains". Do you get the general idea of birds flying over nature plains? So it's not necessary to omit "the".
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
13 hours ago
Using an article or not has nothing to do with prepositions. Any article or no article can occur after any preposition, depending on the context.
– John Lawler
8 hours ago
It can be removed, but not should be omitted.
– mama
13 hours ago
It can be removed, but not should be omitted.
– mama
13 hours ago
thanks, mama, you mean that it sounds more common to keep it; like when I say "birds fly over the plains". Do you get the general idea of birds flying over nature plains? So it's not necessary to omit "the".
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
13 hours ago
thanks, mama, you mean that it sounds more common to keep it; like when I say "birds fly over the plains". Do you get the general idea of birds flying over nature plains? So it's not necessary to omit "the".
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
13 hours ago
Using an article or not has nothing to do with prepositions. Any article or no article can occur after any preposition, depending on the context.
– John Lawler
8 hours ago
Using an article or not has nothing to do with prepositions. Any article or no article can occur after any preposition, depending on the context.
– John Lawler
8 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
0
The absence of the article, the so-called "zero-article", can be used to refer to the noun in general as mode or manner:
Some plants grow on land while others are aquatic and grow in water.
The article "the" can cast the noun it specifies as something everyone knows about, something ubiquitous, not as a particular instance:
We must not speak loudly in the library.
In the city, children often play in the street.
Some plants grow on the land and others in the water.
And the plural can refer to the noun generally:
Airplanes have monitors that warn pilots to pull up when flying too low over mountains.
answered 12 hours ago
TRomanoTRomano
15.1k21943
Thanks a lot, I think I get it now. Please correct me if I'm wrong; Some hawks live high in the mountain, and those hawks fly over plains to hunt mice. also, they can fly over rivers to feed on fish that live in the river.
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
12 hours ago
Your sentence is quite good. But I would suggest one change. When speaking of mountains that begin as lower foothills and then rise to greater heights the further into them you go, we would say high in the mountains. Plural, "mountains". The meaning is: farther into the mountain range where the mountains rise to greater heights. And when we wish to refer to a specific location on a single mountain, we would use singular "mountain" and "on": The hut was situated high on the mountain.
– TRomano
11 hours ago
ok, good I'll use " high in the mountains ", bear with me, please. is there any thing thing wrong by saying; there are a lot of fish species that live in the river that live in rivers. (generally speaking)
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
9 hours ago
In that particular example, species that live in rivers (plural without article) is the better choice, since species that live in the river doesn't have the meaning "river species". It is not always possible to give an absolute rule that works in every instance. While In the city, children often play in the street is an idiomatic generalization about urban life, and does not refer to any particular city or any particular street, Many fish live in the river is not an idiomatic generalization about river species, at least not without further context, since river is not ubiquitous
– TRomano
9 hours ago
... or universal. But we could say In the jungle, many species live in the canopy since all jungles have a tree canopy. But we can't say In the jungle, many species live in the river since not all jungles have a river. The statement would be idiomatic if it were referring to a particular jungle with a river.
– TRomano
9 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f484802%2fpreposition-the%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
0
The absence of the article, the so-called "zero-article", can be used to refer to the noun in general as mode or manner:
Some plants grow on land while others are aquatic and grow in water.
The article "the" can cast the noun it specifies as something everyone knows about, something ubiquitous, not as a particular instance:
We must not speak loudly in the library.
In the city, children often play in the street.
Some plants grow on the land and others in the water.
And the plural can refer to the noun generally:
Airplanes have monitors that warn pilots to pull up when flying too low over mountains.
answered 12 hours ago
TRomanoTRomano
15.1k21943
Thanks a lot, I think I get it now. Please correct me if I'm wrong; Some hawks live high in the mountain, and those hawks fly over plains to hunt mice. also, they can fly over rivers to feed on fish that live in the river.
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
12 hours ago
Your sentence is quite good. But I would suggest one change. When speaking of mountains that begin as lower foothills and then rise to greater heights the further into them you go, we would say high in the mountains. Plural, "mountains". The meaning is: farther into the mountain range where the mountains rise to greater heights. And when we wish to refer to a specific location on a single mountain, we would use singular "mountain" and "on": The hut was situated high on the mountain.
– TRomano
11 hours ago
ok, good I'll use " high in the mountains ", bear with me, please. is there any thing thing wrong by saying; there are a lot of fish species that live in the river that live in rivers. (generally speaking)
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
9 hours ago
In that particular example, species that live in rivers (plural without article) is the better choice, since species that live in the river doesn't have the meaning "river species". It is not always possible to give an absolute rule that works in every instance. While In the city, children often play in the street is an idiomatic generalization about urban life, and does not refer to any particular city or any particular street, Many fish live in the river is not an idiomatic generalization about river species, at least not without further context, since river is not ubiquitous
– TRomano
9 hours ago
... or universal. But we could say In the jungle, many species live in the canopy since all jungles have a tree canopy. But we can't say In the jungle, many species live in the river since not all jungles have a river. The statement would be idiomatic if it were referring to a particular jungle with a river.
– TRomano
9 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
0
The absence of the article, the so-called "zero-article", can be used to refer to the noun in general as mode or manner:
Some plants grow on land while others are aquatic and grow in water.
The article "the" can cast the noun it specifies as something everyone knows about, something ubiquitous, not as a particular instance:
We must not speak loudly in the library.
In the city, children often play in the street.
Some plants grow on the land and others in the water.
And the plural can refer to the noun generally:
Airplanes have monitors that warn pilots to pull up when flying too low over mountains.
answered 12 hours ago
TRomanoTRomano
15.1k21943
Thanks a lot, I think I get it now. Please correct me if I'm wrong; Some hawks live high in the mountain, and those hawks fly over plains to hunt mice. also, they can fly over rivers to feed on fish that live in the river.
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
12 hours ago
Your sentence is quite good. But I would suggest one change. When speaking of mountains that begin as lower foothills and then rise to greater heights the further into them you go, we would say high in the mountains. Plural, "mountains". The meaning is: farther into the mountain range where the mountains rise to greater heights. And when we wish to refer to a specific location on a single mountain, we would use singular "mountain" and "on": The hut was situated high on the mountain.
– TRomano
11 hours ago
ok, good I'll use " high in the mountains ", bear with me, please. is there any thing thing wrong by saying; there are a lot of fish species that live in the river that live in rivers. (generally speaking)
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
9 hours ago
In that particular example, species that live in rivers (plural without article) is the better choice, since species that live in the river doesn't have the meaning "river species". It is not always possible to give an absolute rule that works in every instance. While In the city, children often play in the street is an idiomatic generalization about urban life, and does not refer to any particular city or any particular street, Many fish live in the river is not an idiomatic generalization about river species, at least not without further context, since river is not ubiquitous
– TRomano
9 hours ago
... or universal. But we could say In the jungle, many species live in the canopy since all jungles have a tree canopy. But we can't say In the jungle, many species live in the river since not all jungles have a river. The statement would be idiomatic if it were referring to a particular jungle with a river.
– TRomano
9 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
0
0
0
The absence of the article, the so-called "zero-article", can be used to refer to the noun in general as mode or manner:
Some plants grow on land while others are aquatic and grow in water.
The article "the" can cast the noun it specifies as something everyone knows about, something ubiquitous, not as a particular instance:
We must not speak loudly in the library.
In the city, children often play in the street.
Some plants grow on the land and others in the water.
And the plural can refer to the noun generally:
Airplanes have monitors that warn pilots to pull up when flying too low over mountains.
answered 12 hours ago
TRomanoTRomano
15.1k21943
The absence of the article, the so-called "zero-article", can be used to refer to the noun in general as mode or manner:
Some plants grow on land while others are aquatic and grow in water.
The article "the" can cast the noun it specifies as something everyone knows about, something ubiquitous, not as a particular instance:
We must not speak loudly in the library.
In the city, children often play in the street.
Some plants grow on the land and others in the water.
And the plural can refer to the noun generally:
Airplanes have monitors that warn pilots to pull up when flying too low over mountains.
answered 12 hours ago
TRomanoTRomano
15.1k21943
answered 12 hours ago
TRomanoTRomano
15.1k21943
answered 12 hours ago
TRomanoTRomano
15.1k21943
answered 12 hours ago
TRomanoTRomano
15.1k21943
15.1k21943
Thanks a lot, I think I get it now. Please correct me if I'm wrong; Some hawks live high in the mountain, and those hawks fly over plains to hunt mice. also, they can fly over rivers to feed on fish that live in the river.
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
12 hours ago
Your sentence is quite good. But I would suggest one change. When speaking of mountains that begin as lower foothills and then rise to greater heights the further into them you go, we would say high in the mountains. Plural, "mountains". The meaning is: farther into the mountain range where the mountains rise to greater heights. And when we wish to refer to a specific location on a single mountain, we would use singular "mountain" and "on": The hut was situated high on the mountain.
– TRomano
11 hours ago
ok, good I'll use " high in the mountains ", bear with me, please. is there any thing thing wrong by saying; there are a lot of fish species that live in the river that live in rivers. (generally speaking)
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
9 hours ago
In that particular example, species that live in rivers (plural without article) is the better choice, since species that live in the river doesn't have the meaning "river species". It is not always possible to give an absolute rule that works in every instance. While In the city, children often play in the street is an idiomatic generalization about urban life, and does not refer to any particular city or any particular street, Many fish live in the river is not an idiomatic generalization about river species, at least not without further context, since river is not ubiquitous
– TRomano
9 hours ago
... or universal. But we could say In the jungle, many species live in the canopy since all jungles have a tree canopy. But we can't say In the jungle, many species live in the river since not all jungles have a river. The statement would be idiomatic if it were referring to a particular jungle with a river.
– TRomano
9 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
Thanks a lot, I think I get it now. Please correct me if I'm wrong; Some hawks live high in the mountain, and those hawks fly over plains to hunt mice. also, they can fly over rivers to feed on fish that live in the river.
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
12 hours ago
Your sentence is quite good. But I would suggest one change. When speaking of mountains that begin as lower foothills and then rise to greater heights the further into them you go, we would say high in the mountains. Plural, "mountains". The meaning is: farther into the mountain range where the mountains rise to greater heights. And when we wish to refer to a specific location on a single mountain, we would use singular "mountain" and "on": The hut was situated high on the mountain.
– TRomano
11 hours ago
ok, good I'll use " high in the mountains ", bear with me, please. is there any thing thing wrong by saying; there are a lot of fish species that live in the river that live in rivers. (generally speaking)
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
9 hours ago
In that particular example, species that live in rivers (plural without article) is the better choice, since species that live in the river doesn't have the meaning "river species". It is not always possible to give an absolute rule that works in every instance. While In the city, children often play in the street is an idiomatic generalization about urban life, and does not refer to any particular city or any particular street, Many fish live in the river is not an idiomatic generalization about river species, at least not without further context, since river is not ubiquitous
– TRomano
9 hours ago
... or universal. But we could say In the jungle, many species live in the canopy since all jungles have a tree canopy. But we can't say In the jungle, many species live in the river since not all jungles have a river. The statement would be idiomatic if it were referring to a particular jungle with a river.
– TRomano
9 hours ago
Thanks a lot, I think I get it now. Please correct me if I'm wrong; Some hawks live high in the mountain, and those hawks fly over plains to hunt mice. also, they can fly over rivers to feed on fish that live in the river.
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
12 hours ago
Thanks a lot, I think I get it now. Please correct me if I'm wrong; Some hawks live high in the mountain, and those hawks fly over plains to hunt mice. also, they can fly over rivers to feed on fish that live in the river.
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
12 hours ago
Your sentence is quite good. But I would suggest one change. When speaking of mountains that begin as lower foothills and then rise to greater heights the further into them you go, we would say high in the mountains. Plural, "mountains". The meaning is: farther into the mountain range where the mountains rise to greater heights. And when we wish to refer to a specific location on a single mountain, we would use singular "mountain" and "on": The hut was situated high on the mountain.
– TRomano
11 hours ago
Your sentence is quite good. But I would suggest one change. When speaking of mountains that begin as lower foothills and then rise to greater heights the further into them you go, we would say high in the mountains. Plural, "mountains". The meaning is: farther into the mountain range where the mountains rise to greater heights. And when we wish to refer to a specific location on a single mountain, we would use singular "mountain" and "on": The hut was situated high on the mountain.
– TRomano
11 hours ago
ok, good I'll use " high in the mountains ", bear with me, please. is there any thing thing wrong by saying; there are a lot of fish species that live in the river that live in rivers. (generally speaking)
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
9 hours ago
ok, good I'll use " high in the mountains ", bear with me, please. is there any thing thing wrong by saying; there are a lot of fish species that live in the river that live in rivers. (generally speaking)
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
9 hours ago
In that particular example, species that live in rivers (plural without article) is the better choice, since species that live in the river doesn't have the meaning "river species". It is not always possible to give an absolute rule that works in every instance. While In the city, children often play in the street is an idiomatic generalization about urban life, and does not refer to any particular city or any particular street, Many fish live in the river is not an idiomatic generalization about river species, at least not without further context, since river is not ubiquitous
– TRomano
9 hours ago
In that particular example, species that live in rivers (plural without article) is the better choice, since species that live in the river doesn't have the meaning "river species". It is not always possible to give an absolute rule that works in every instance. While In the city, children often play in the street is an idiomatic generalization about urban life, and does not refer to any particular city or any particular street, Many fish live in the river is not an idiomatic generalization about river species, at least not without further context, since river is not ubiquitous
– TRomano
9 hours ago
... or universal. But we could say In the jungle, many species live in the canopy since all jungles have a tree canopy. But we can't say In the jungle, many species live in the river since not all jungles have a river. The statement would be idiomatic if it were referring to a particular jungle with a river.
– TRomano
9 hours ago
... or universal. But we could say In the jungle, many species live in the canopy since all jungles have a tree canopy. But we can't say In the jungle, many species live in the river since not all jungles have a river. The statement would be idiomatic if it were referring to a particular jungle with a river.
– TRomano
9 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f484802%2fpreposition-the%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
It can be removed, but not should be omitted.
– mama
13 hours ago
thanks, mama, you mean that it sounds more common to keep it; like when I say "birds fly over the plains". Do you get the general idea of birds flying over nature plains? So it's not necessary to omit "the".
– Mohammad AL-Shiyab
13 hours ago
Using an article or not has nothing to do with prepositions. Any article or no article can occur after any preposition, depending on the context.
– John Lawler
8 hours ago