"the"

English is an especially challenging language for the non-native speaker to master. For one thing, a great many words derived from French (thanks to the Norman invasion of England in 1066) have non-standard spellings and pronunciations that follow no clear rule, and must be learned on a case by case basis. I'll be discussing some of them presently. On the other hand, there are some very simple and familiar words that everyone can easily spell and pronounce, which are, nevertheless, surprising difficult to master. Foremost among these is one of the simplest of all, the very ordinary and commonplace word: "the". Time after time I see this word appearing where it should not appear, or else being left out where it should be put in. As a native English speaker, I have no problem deciding whether or not to use "the," but I've noticed to my surprise that a great many non-native speakers find that decision extremely difficult.

As an example, here is a passage from an essay by one of my favorite contemporary writers, the Slovenian philosopher and social commentator, Slavoj Zizek: "I couldn't help noticing how all the best Marxist analyses are always analyses of a failure ... Like, why did Paris Commune go wrong?" Zizek is a brilliant thinker and extremely engaging lecturer and author, with an excellent grasp of English and several other languages. Nevertheless, even someone as intelligent and highly educated as he can stumble badly over certain words. Can you spot his mistake? The phrase "Paris Commune" refers to a very specific event in history, and as a noun phrase with a specific referent, must be preceded by "the."

Here's another example from Zizek, only this time he inserts two "the"s where they aren't wanted: "The fact that a cloud from a minor volcanic eruption in Iceland—-a small disturbance in the complex mechanism of life on the Earth—-can bring to a standstill the aerial traffic over an entire continent is a reminder of how, with all its power to transform nature, humankind remains just another species on the planet Earth."

This sentence is more complex, and one of the errors is not so simple to correct. First of all, the phrase "life on the Earth," while not technically incorrect (since he is referring to a specific thing, the planet we all live on), is stylistically awkward, because "life on Earth" is a very common idiomatic expression and thus will always sound more "natural" to English and American readers. The phrase "can bring to a standstill the aerial traffic over an entire continent" has more serious problems. The noun phrase "aerial traffic" is non-specific, since it refers to aerial traffic in general, and should therefore not be preceded by "the." Additionally, the wording of the entire phrase is awkward, as will be clear when I rewrite it thus: "can bring aerial traffic over an entire continent to a standstill."

Here are some more incorrect passages from Zizek, followed by my corrections:

". . . this ascension was legitimized by the promise to amend the underprivileged situation of Serbia within the Yugoslav federation, especially with regard to the Albanian "separatism.""  ". . . the promise to amend" is correct only if there was a prior reference to a specific promise. Otherwise, "a" should be used instead. "Albanian separatism" is non-specific in this context, so it's incorrect to precede it with "the." In a different context, on the other hand, where the reference was to a specific type of Albanian separatism, then "the" would be expected, as in the following: ". . . especially with regard to the Albanian separatism of that era." The entire phrase should be rewritten as follows: ". . . this ascension was legitimized by a promise to amend the underprivileged situation of Serbia within the Yugoslav federation, especially with regard to Albanian "separatism."" 

"The story of NATO as the enforcer of the respect for human rights is thus only one of the two coherent stories that can be told about the recent bombings of Yugoslavia . . ." NATO is a specific entity, thus the use of "the" preceding "enforcer" is correct. But "respect for human rights" is a concept, not a specific thing, so it is not correct to precede it with "the." The first phrase should read: "The story of NATO as the enforcer of respect for human rights . . ." Even better would be "the enforcer of human rights." The word "respect" isn't really necessary and clutters the sentence.

"The second story concerns the other side of the much-praised new global ethical politics in which one is allowed to violate the state sovereignty on behalf of the violation of human rights." "State sovereignty" is, once again, a concept, not a specific thing, so the "the" should be omitted: "The second story concerns the other side of the much-praised new global ethical politics in which one is allowed to violate state sovereignty on behalf of the violation of human rights."

I use Zizek as an example because it's important for everyone to understand that even the most intelligent, best educated and articulate writers can make such mistakes. Zizek is a first-rate author, whose work I greatly admire, so if he is capable of making such errors, anyone can. My intention is not to point the finger of blame, but to help good writers deal with very tricky aspects of the English language -- so tricky that even a writer as good as Zizek can stumble over them.

I'll have more to say about the word "the" -- and that other innocent looking English article: "a" (or "an") -- next time.