ATEG Archives

May 1997

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
A Question about the generic use of articles
From:
"M. Gaidos" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 14 May 1997 16:16:37 -0700
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (13 lines) 
   Hello to all of you. I have recently read in a 'Communicative Grammar
of English' book that one can say:
    1. The tiger is in danger of becoming extinct.
    2. Tigers are in danger of becoming extinct.
  BUT ONE CANNOT--Or Should NOT--SAY:
    3. A tiger is in danger of becoming extinct.
 This deals with the generic use of articles and with differences between
definite and indefinite, singular and plural objects. I just cannot seem
to perceive the ungrammaticality of the third sentence. Why is it
ungrammatical--really? Can anyone help me with this one?
    Thank You in advance.
    Monica.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2