Editor for this issue: <>
Re: the 400 highway names in Ontario. As a long-time resident of South-western Ontario, I agree with Ian Mackay that it's only 400 highways that can take the definite article (or highways with names 'the QEW'). but for me the 401 absolutely must have the article while other 400 highways, may or may not. I've always assumed this is simply because until quite recently the 401 was the only highway (within the meaning of the act), all others so designated being little more than back roads.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
A Yucateco once asked me why English-speakers persistently say "the Yucatan." I replied that I thought it was short for "the Yucatan peninsula." He found it somehow patronizing, just as various contributors to Linguist report. He thought of Yucatan as a state (one doesn't say "the Morelos") or a region, not as a land mass defined by its coasts. Fran KarttunenMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Several comments for this thread: On multi-language morpheme duplication, Calvin Trillin, in one of his food books, reserves his utmost contempt for "Continental Cuisine" served at places with names like "The La Casa de la Maison House." Re The Yukon: One of the functions of the definite article seems to be to communicate remoteness. I think The Yukon, The Amazon (a region, not the river), The Arctic are constructions that exemplify this. I would say that "the Moon" also gets its article this way, whereas "Mars", etc. are not really perceived as places. This might help explain why a Punjabi (etc.) would prefer "I come from Punjab." Re Colonial interpretation: Possible, but hard to discriminate from the remote interpretation. Also compare "The Netherlands." (etc.?) Re The 405 (etc.): The definite article can serve as an in-group marker (this must be a consequence of something Grice said.) If in fact there is more than one city we might be talking about, and I say "the city," you've got to be in my group to know what I'm talking about. Someone commented that the definite article in this context sounded "trendy." Cf. rowers at Oxford referring to "the race", etc. > From: Ian MacKay <IMACKAYMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueacadvm1.uottawa.ca> > My experience in the American midwest (Ohio to be precise) is that you > don't use the definite article with interstate highway numbers, though the > the use of the "I" is variable. So (in Cincinnati) one might say "Take 75 > north for 60 miles" or "Take I 75 north for 60 miles." Here's another bean for this pot: In Denver, locals might take (I) 70 east for 60 miles, but in Philadelphia we are more likely to take 95 north for an hour. Will Dowling (will
franklin.com)
A while ago someone made the claim that the definite article is not used with lake names. A notable exception is The Great Salt Lake (of Utah), which is the official name. In regular conversation it is referred to as The Lake (and, yes, I wouldn't be the least surprised if Chicagoans referred to Lake Michigan in the same way, etc.). I think that it is also called The Salt Lake at times. To my knowledge it is NEVER called Salt Lake, probably because Salt Lake refers to the city (Salt Lake City) or to the metropolitan area contained in the Salt Lake Valley. Here are some example sentences from The Salt Lake Tribune, Saturday, November 21, 1992 A2. "Friday's storm buried some Salt Lake areas under 12 inches of snow." (Caption of a picture showing traffic near the University of Utah in Salt Lake City.) "William Alder, meteorologist for the National Weather Service, said an otherwise routine storm picked up energy as it passed over the relatively warm waters of the Great Salt Lake." Marianna Di Paolo dipaoloMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueanthro.utah.edu
A quick and belated note regarding the use of definite articles: One other case I can think of where a country name which previously involved the definite article and does no longer involves Argentina, which was at one time (in some circles, at any rate) referred to as The Argentine. I can't say that the latter ever had any negative associations -- it just seems old fashioned (and British). Another case of a cross-linguistic redundancy: In the late period of the heyday of long distance railroad passenger service in the United States the Santa Fe Railway had a train between Chicago and Los Angeles called *El Capitan* which was commonly referred to as 'The El Capitan' (and perhaps even more commonly, among afficionadi, as 'The El Cap'). In re the discussion regarding what place gets to call itself The City: In outstate Minnesota the Twin Cities metropolitan area is commonly referred to as The Cities. (P.S. to Alice Faber: No, no, no, The City is a part of London. Everybody knows that!) Two curiosities: I've noticed that historians tend to refer to what I grew up calling The Magna Carta simply as Magna Carta. In the opposite direction, it seems to be the practice of classicists to refer to certain Greek dramas with names preceded by articles even where it seems inappropriate -- e.g. *The Medea*. Always wondered about that. Michael KacMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
It's common for every big city to be called "The City" by people who
live nearby. In New York, "The City" tends to mean Manhattan, even
for people who live in the other boroughs.
An interesting historical case is Istanbul, whose name comes from
the Greek phrase "eis ten poli" ("to the city" -- first "e" is epsilon,
and second "e" is eta). That phrase tended to be pronounced "istimboli"
and with dissimilation "istamboli". So when the Turks changed the name
from Constantinople to Istanbul, they simply changed from a name with
an obvious Greek derivation to one with a nonobvious Greek derivation.
While we are talking about articles with proper names, how about
"The Donald" for Donald Trump? I have also heard "The X" with the
names of other people who are especially prominent or eccentric.
John Sowa
Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue