Omission of definite article

Wed Jan 20 21:21:44 UTC 2010

Thanks, Damien! Very interesting reading. I've yet to hear "at table,"
and none of my Irish friends find it acceptable, but perhaps we're not
very high-class? ;) If it's said here, I would guess that it's an
Anglo-Irish construction.

I wish I had joined this post BEFORE I submitted my paper. You've all
been so helpful!

ks

On 1/20/10, Stone, William <w-stone at neiu.edu> wrote:
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster:       "Stone, William" <w-stone at NEIU.EDU>
> Subject:      Re: Omission of definite article
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I think Damien hits the nail on the head here, particularly in his =
> general comments. I was raised speaking non-standard southern British =
> English, and my understanding was always that the definite article was =
> always dropped when referring to primary purpose. Thus, if you were at =
> church, you were at a service, but if you were at the church you might =
> be cleaning. The duration was irrelevant. The same applied to school, =
> hospital, prison, university etc. (with varying prepositions). It was =
> most common with 'to'. It was always clear why one went to (*the) =
> university, prison, or school rather than for how long. And he's right =
> again, neither the middle classes nor the working classes would never =
> say 'at table'.=20
> =20
> Dr. William J. Stone=20
> Associate Professor=20
> TESL Program=20
> Northeastern Illinois University
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: American Dialect Society on behalf of Damien Hall
> Sent: Wed 1/20/2010 4:17 AM
> To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Omission of definite article
>
>
>
> A few quick reactions to things brought up in this thread yesterday, =
> from
> my (Standard Southern) British English perspective.
>
> AT TABLE
>
> 'At table': certainly BrE, as Charles notes, but only upper-class these
> days I think. I don't dine with the upper-class very often, but one
> relevant piece of experience might be from evening dining at Oxbridge
> colleges, where there is (always? Or if not, then almost always) a table
> set aside for teaching and research staff: it's known as High Table (in =
> old
> Colleges, it is usually in fact on a rostrum) and one dines / is 'at =
> (*the)
> High Table'.
>
> Kelli, didn't you say you were at Trinity College, Dublin? Is it the =
> same
> there, do you know? The place does, after all, have historic links with
> Oxbridge: it's twinned with Oriel College, Oxford, IIRC, and it's =
> classed
> as one of the ancient / great universities of the British Isles (along =
> with
> Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, and are there others?), who give each other
> certain reciprocal privileges like dining and a night's accommodation =
> per
> term or something.
>
> In people's homes, I would be very surprised if 'at table' were used, =
> and I
> would suspect the people using it of upper-class pretensions unless they
> were in fact demonstrably upper-class.
>
> IN (THE) BED
>
> 'In (the) bed': 'in bed' for people is certainly also BrE; I don't know
> anyone who would say 'in the bed', but then my circle of friends doesn't
> extend all the way around this country. I would also have to say 'in =
> bed'
> whether the person was doing the regular in-bed activity of sleeping, or
> unusually in bed, as when they were ill.
>
> But all this is talking about people. Unlike Larry, I would find it very
> unnatural to say of a dog that he was 'in bed' (and even if talking =
> about a
> doggie-bed). If talking about a bed that was certainly the dog's (so =
> where
> he was meant to be sleeping), I'd have to say 'in his bed', I think; if =
> the
> dog was in a human's bed, there would still have to be some determiner: =
> 'in
> the bed', 'in our bed', etc.
>
> CATCH (A) COLD
>
> 'Catch (a) cold / (the) flu': For me there's also variability between
> 'catch cold' and 'catch a cold', but I think 'catch (get) a cold' is
> commoner here in general. I also think that 'catch (get) the flu' is =
> much
> commoner than the version without 'the': I wonder whether that's because
> we're now used to talking about certain specified types of flu which =
> differ
> yearly, from avian/bird flu to swine flu to, previously, Spanish =
> influenza.
> If you talk about getting _the_ flu, therefore, you're referring to
> something specified in previous discourse, not an unspecified thing?
>
> GENERAL COMMENTS
>
> There also seems to be something 'external', 'attacking', about 'a cold' =
> or
> 'the flu' that you can catch, so maybe it's the same with 'the hunger', =
> as
> Kelli suggests. I also still think that all of these ('in (the) =
> hospital',
> 'at (the) University', 'catch (a) cold', 'at (the) table') have =
> something
> to do with permanency, or with whether or not the state described is a
> 'recognised' state that a normal life can be expected to pass through.
> (Sorry, I'm not a semanticist, so I think I don't know the terms!) =
> Anyway,
> what I mean is that there are recognised cultural or regular habits of
> being 'in hospital' (everyone gets ill), 'at school/college/university'
> (many people do this), 'at table' (everyone eats), 'in bed' (everyone
> sleeps). By contrast, the versions with 'the' or other determiners in =
> them
> are more transitory or less culturally-recognised: 'in the hospital' if =
> you
> just happen to be there or work there but are not a patient; 'at the
> school' if you just happen to be there but are not a student; 'at the
> table' if you are using a dining-table to do something else, like work =
> or
> play a board-game (I couldn't say "He's working at table"); 'in the bed' =
> if
> you (or something) are there doing something not habitually done in a =
> bed.
>
> Damien
>
> --
> Damien Hall
>
> University of York
> Department of Language and Linguistic Science
> Heslington
> YORK
> YO10 5DD
> UK
>
> Tel. (office) +44 (0)1904 432665
>      (mobile) +44 (0)771 853 5634
> Fax  +44 (0)1904 432673
>
> http://www.york.ac.uk/res/aiseb
>
> http://www.york.ac.uk/depts/lang/people/pages/hall.htm
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org =
> <http://www.americandialect.org/>=20
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org