Constantin MANEA

English Morphology
– Nomina –

MORPHOLOGY. GENERAL NOTIONS

There used to be a time when nearly everything under the heading of ‘science of
language’ was known as ‘grammar’: the set of rules ordering sounds, constitutive parts of the word,
syntactic units, meanings and their history, or etymology, style, etc. In more recent years, there has
been progress in the study of language, which is above all a result of certain attempts to draw more
clear-cut differentiations between the various linguistic disciplines. Among those counts grammar.
Grammar is part of a larger interrelated whole, which, according to Rutherford (p. 189) 1, includes
discourse, semantics, and ‘grammaticization’ – ‘the process of achieving linguistics expression
through recourse to grammatical rules’. “There is no grammarless language” 2 – and one
should add that there is no learning a foreign language without studying
grammar…
Morphology deals with word-forms (see the etymology of the word itself: morphe “form”
+ logos “discourse; topic; science, discipline”). The combination of the latter into word-groups,
and sentences (syntactic patterns or syntagms) is called syntax.3 Morphology, like grammar itself,
may be:
a) historical (i.e. diachronic);4
b) descriptive (i.e. synchronic; it analyses facts occurring in actual speech);
c) normative (setting up rules, which are correct at a certain moment. This may be
paralleled with the distinction that the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure established between
speech (as a process) and language (as a system). Within the same context, it will be correct to say
that ‘normative’ and ‘descriptive’ are almost synonymous. On the other hand, compared grammar
aims at analysing and assessing whether there are significant similarities between two languages
and to what extent they are relevant – e.g. the compared grammar of the Romance or Germanic
languages.
Theoretical grammar is opposed to practical studies of grammar – meaning that essentials,
fundamentals of a language in point of functional status are opposed to the practical aspects giving
illustrations, glossaries, lists that describe that functioning. Those features are to be found together
– theoretical and practical, synchronic and diachronic (e.g. the notion of ‘Germanic’ or synthetic
genitive, or that of ‘analytic subjunctive’ – that is, hypothetical constructions with if, as opposed to
1
RUTHERFORD, V., in Forum, no. 1, January, 1991, p. 17.
2
R. Quirk et alii, A Contemporary Grammar of English, Longman, 1972
3
The dictionary definition of the word syntax is: “1) the branch of linguistics that deals with the grammatical
arrangement of morphemes, words and phrases in the (well-formed) sentences of a language, or of languages
in general, and also the totality of the facts concerning the grammatical arrangement of morphemes, words and
phrases in a specific language, or group of languages, e.g. the syntax of English; the syntax of Indo-European
languages. 2) a systematic statement of the set of rules governing the grammatical arrangement of words,
phrases and morphemes in a language, or an analysis of that specific arrangement”.
4
Diachronic means “having to do with, or studying the development / evolution of a phenomenon / an entity
through time; historical”. The term diachronic is contrasted with synchronic “concerned with the events,
phenomena or entities at a particular period / as they exist at one point in time, without considering historical
antecedents”.
the Past Tense Simple).
Comparison is a welcome side of any grammar (for pedagogical / didactic reasons with a
view to avoiding overlapping of sense, i.e. the ‘interference’ phenomenon (e.g. compare Rom. Sunt
student and English I am a student, or: I have been here for one hour and Sunt aici de o oră).
Theoretical principles and criteria are the very backbone that orders the whole of the
system in a description provided by a grammar. But these criteria and theoretical principles are to
be found in the very matter analysed – i.e. the practical aspects and samples that make up the body
under focus.
English has a simple (at first sight), yet very complicated grammar – especially its
morphology – when seen closer: idioms, idiomatic verbs, idiosyncrasies of pronunciation and
spelling having semantic-grammatical relevance, specific patterns – all of which is actually an
intricate combination of morphology, syntax, lexicon, registers and stylistic levels.
Recently, more modern approaches (especially post-structuralism, GTG, pragmatics,
discourse analysis) have shed further light on some aspects concerning a better understanding,
among others, of the English language and its grammar. They have been trying to better emphasize
the internal constituency as well as the way of functioning of the language units, determining more
and more accurate levels of description.
Unfortunately, structuralism and GTG have on the whole failed to grasp matters related to
meaning. Yet, they proved to be quite appropriate approaches when dealing with issues
characteristic of such highly analytic languages as English – in fact, this may be seen as a fit
explanation of the rapid advance of structuralist studies as applied to English grammar.
The late professor Leon D. Leviţchi considered three principal ways of ‘modernizing’ the
grammarian’s approach to the phenomena analysed: (1) A functional approach, which is applicable
to distinguishing among grammatical homonyms, of which English has a great deal – e.g. round,
which can function as a noun / adjective / adverb / preposition. Such a homonymous item can be
explained through conversion as well as poly-functionalism. Within the same context, one should
not mix up the diachronical and the synchronical planes of analysis. The ‘functional’ approach
primarily refers to the grammatical role played by a unit in a linguistic context. Distinction should
be made between function and nature (the ‘part’ performed by the respective unit) / as opposed to
‘origin’ – a matter of diachrony in fact (cf. semantic-grammatical derivation: e.g. the word
magnanimity, having a nominal function -it is a noun-, yet an adjectival nature -it designates a
quality).
(2) A many-sided approach: The ‘old’ / traditional grammar dealt with concepts that were
alien to the very essence of the morphological unit studied – e.g. the noun “denotes an object” or
“the adjective is placed by a noun”, etc. A relevant analysis has to see to it that the specific traits of
the morphological unit under analysis should be carefully studied and defined, as well as its
behaviour and functioning. A many-sided approach is in point as there is no linguistic phenomenon
which is only a grammatical / lexical / stylistic item. (See, in this respect, the notion of
‘grammatical synonymy’, as proposed, among others, by the late professor Leviţchi: e.g. the
adverb hardly and the verbs to fail, to deny are actually ‘concealed’ negations; or: the phrase as
clear as water should not be considered only as carrying mere grammatical information, but also
lexical and stylistic information, as it may be equated to the set phrase crystal-clear, which is a
lexical-grammatical item (a compound having superlative force), and also stylistically stronger
than its grammatical equivalent very clear. See also: (as) deaf as a post “completely or extremely
deaf”, or bone idle (also bone lazy) “extremely idle or lazy” (the original idea was that of “idle
through to the bone”). Stylistic facts (e.g. metaphors, similes, epithets) may again be analysed
starting from their grammatical (morphological) composition. Between the various compartments
of the linguistic system there are complex interrelations at work, among which:
 Grammar and lexicology: There is no valid well-constructed vocabulary without the
appropriate grammar that underlies it; good dictionaries are those which give examples (illustrative
of grammatical forms and relations).
The category of the English noun presents such items / particulars as can only be assigned
a meaning through specifications having a grammatical nature: e.g. a mass noun, for instance
butter, is qualified as having no ‘grammatical’ plural; it will be accompanied by special plural
formants – quantifiers and numeratives: a loaf of bread, a packet of China tea, a jar of jam, a ton
of silver; or they may be qualified according to their sort: kinds of wine / wool / wood, or varieties
of wine / wool / wood, etc.
Abstract nouns cannot be (usually) put in the plural: e.g. *loves (for Jake), but one can say
(a few / certain) streaks / instances of love; there is no *lucks, but strokes of luck, lucky strokes,
instances / cases / kinds of luck are all grammatically correct phrases. Expectations is a different
noun from expectation; (the) writings (are on the desk) does not have the same meaning as writing
is easy. The ‘irregular’ plurals are etymological forms (e.g. children, teeth, deer, swine, etc.) The
reasons why they have retained an irregular form are various: different original forms in
declension: e.g. brethren, children, oxen, while in words like teeth, geese, mice the reason was the
so-called Ablaut (i.e. “an alternation in the vowels of related word forms”), also known as I-
mutation. Etymology, when strictly considered, is related to the history of the language and
lexicology.
Lexicology, in its turn, rests on definitions provided by grammar: viz. grammatical regimen
/ functioning, (syntactic) context, e.g. anything “ceva” (when in negative-interrogative contexts) is
different from anything “orice” (having an indefinite meaning).
The gender in English is only a matter of syntactic marking and relevance: e.g. Fill’er up!
(i.e. the car). Don’t call dear Baby it! (from an angry mother). In this latter example, one can also
speak about stylistic relevance, i.e. upgrading through colloquial usage: She for cars, ships, etc.
will be opposed to downgrading: It for a baby / a (despicable / ignorable) human being. Conversion
– a lexical phenomenon – ranges certain nouns according to grammatical distributional and
combinative rules: a noun may originate in:  a preposition, e.g. But no buts.  an adverbial, e.g.
The ups and downs of her life.  an adjective, e.g. the dead and the poor;  an interjection, e.g.
ayes [aiz] and nays [neiz];  anything else (the name of a letter, figure, etc), e.g. Let’s dot our I’s
and bar our T’s!
 Grammar and phonetics:
Observation of phonetic rules is the guarantee that the message conveyed will be correctly
decoded – from a grammatical point of view, in our case. Any deviation, unless it is a gross
mistake, will imply an altogether new, different attitude as to the message, e.g. You are speaking
now! (=You are behaving after all!) You are being naughty! (Compare with the respective values
of: Are you being naughty? and: Are you naughty?). Also compare: You can do that; (with no
specific emphasising stress); You can do that. You can do that. You can do that.
 Morphology and syntax:
Morphology (or “the study of the forms of words, in particular inflected forms”) designates
the study of the rules implied by the modification of word-forms, as well as their (grammatical)
meanings, nature, value. In English, it may be said to be a mere appendix to syntax. English is a
highly analytic language – that is to say, not forms constitute the bulk of English grammar, but
combinations, including word order, that is syntax proper. In linguistics, the term analytic (or
analytical) denotes languages, such as English and Chinese, whose morphology is characterized by
analysis. Such languages tend not to alter the form of the words, but to use word order to express
grammatical structure. Chinese is also called an isolating language. Chinese and English are
maybe the best examples of analytic languages. Analytic(al) is contrasted with synthetic (and even
polysynthetic) and agglutinative. Synthetic languages are characterized by the use of inflections
rather than word order to express grammatical structure; so, their morphology is characterized by
synthesis. The terms agglutinative (and, sometimes, agglomerative) refer to languages that
typically express concepts in complex words consisting of many elements, rather than by inflection
or by using isolated elements; the morphology of such languages (e.g. Hungarian, Turkish, Korean,
Swahili) is characterized by agglutination, i.e. combining / putting together word elements in order
to express compound ideas. Some languages are rather synthetic (or more synthetic than analytic),
e.g. Latin, old / ancient Greek, German, Russian and Romanian (using longer, more complex
grammatical words) vs. English, Chinese (using shorter words); compare Romanian rămăseserăm
and English we had remained.
Syntactic criteria are used in order to define morphological units. This approach is
motivated by the (comparative) lack of endings in contemporary English. They were levelled as
early as the Middle English period (about AD 1200-1500). Modern English is characterized by lost
(or nearly lost) endings. Context is the rule when analysing English; everything must be
contextualized so that it might be assigned a meaning, e.g. context will prevail when a Romanian is
faced with the task of translating such a sentence using the Romanian present tense as: Eu merg la
şcoală, for which two possibilities arise: I am going to school – and: I go to (that) school (every
day). Context may function as a semantic framework in itself (i.e. when it comes to specific
collocations), e.g. we shall try to imagine a (fictitious) lexical unit belonging to the English
lexicon, having the spelling *brod and the phonetic form */brd/; English morphology being
predominantly analytic(al), or ‘syntactic’, one can imagine combinative forms (and collocations) of
the type: *I was brodding (something); *It was brodded; *John brods every day; *Can you brod?,
or *Give me the / my brod!
Consequently, a distinction between principal and secondary parts of speech can be drawn
according to the role played in the overall economy of expression in English (very much as in
Romanian, as a matter of fact). The outcome of this divide leads to establishing two large classes: 
Principal parts of speech: the Noun, the Verb, the Substitutes (Pronominal forms mainly); 
Secondary parts of speech: a) Determinatives (those elements lending precision to other words); b)
Modifiers (attached in order to modify the semantic value of other units, e.g. qualitative
adjectives); c) Connectives (linking elements); d) Non-syntactic elements (interjections,
affirmation, negation elements, etc.).

THE TRADITIONAL DEFINITION OF THE PARTS OF SPEECH

The definition that traditional grammarians formulated for the parts of speech uses notional /
conceptual terms (so, the criterion of meaning was essential in that respect). To this were added two
other criteria: a) syntactic function(s) held by that part of speech; b) inflectional variation (forms).
One of the best-known systems of defining the parts of speech goes as far back as the Greek and
Latin grammarians. Unfortunately, most of the (traditional) definitions, even those provided by
recent books, lack clarity with regard to what precisely is the basis of the respective definition (form
and form-changes, or meaning, or function in the sentence, or all of the above combined). The
Roman grammarian Varro distinguished four parts of speech: 1) which has cases (= Nomina); 2)
which has tenses (= Verba); 3) which has both cases and tenses (= participles); 4) which has neither
cases nor tenses (= particles). Unfortunately, that scheme only fitted Latin (and Greek), being rather
unsuitable to modern languages of Indo-European and other origins. The English linguist Henry
Sweet (1891) employed all the three criteria (viz. meaning, inflectional changes and syntactic
functions in a sentence), coming up to ten grammatical classes (or parts of speech), viz. noun,
adjective, pronoun, numeral, verb, verbals, adverbs, preposition, conjunction, interjection. He
described their FORM (or the inflectional changes undertaken in keeping with various contexts),
MEANING as well as FUNCTION. Here is an example of the manner in which Sweet defined the
parts of speech he delimited: The numerals one, two, three, etc, differ from the pronouns of number,
such as some, any, all, in expressing distinctions of discrete quantity definitely instead of
indefinitely. Numerals, being intended to give information, have nothing of the character of mark-
words about them. In form, however, they have all the characteristics of pronouns. They are
cardinals (one, two, three…) and ordinals (first, second, third…), a.s.o.

GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIES AND ‘LEXICAL CATEGORIES’

There is no general agreement as to the number of divisions identified as ‘parts of speech’.

The non-traditionalist linguistics schools / trends used various other terms referring to the same
notion, i.e. ‘part of speech’; the structuralist school – viz. Bloomfield5 – used the term ‘form class’
or ‘morpheme class’, while Noam Chomsky’s school 6 used the notion of ‘lexical category’ or
‘lexical item’ having the same meaning as the older term of ‘part of speech’ – which is
decreasingly employed and less favoured by grammar manuals / textbooks, practical methods and
treatises. The following discussion will attempt to give an answer to the questions: “1. What are the
lexical categories (parts of speech) available to linguistic theory in general and to a description of
the English language in particular? 2. Which is the level of grammatical description at which
lexical categories are adequately discussed? 3. What is the relationship between lexical categories
and the syntactic constructions in which they take part? 4. What relationships exist among lexical
categories and how can they be represented in our frame?” (apud Ioana Ştefănescu, English
Morphology, 2).
Traditional grammarians arrived at greatly differing classifications into parts of speech,
e.g. Otto Jespersen7 (1935) used as relevant criteria: Meaning; Inflectional variation; Syntactic
function discharged, coming to a five-member classification into: Substantive – Adjective – Pro-
noun – Verb – Particles (what are generally called adverbs, preposition conjunction, interjection).
Henry Sweet (1891) identified up to ten ‘parts of speech’. Using sub-categorization frames as an
identification procedure, the structuralist linguist Charles Fries arrived at as many as nineteen
categories (‘form classes’), etc.
There are several general ideas one has to bear in mind when identifying parts of speech:
1) Each lexical category seems to have a corresponding syntactic phrase (Which is a projection of
the respective lexical category), e.g. an NP has a noun (N) as its head. This syntactic information is
actually functional information. 2) The distributional information (encoded by the syntactic
distinctive features) has to be taken into account. 3) A set of such syntactic distinctive features
belong to grammar, thus defining the possible ‘lexical categories’ distinguishable in various
language. For English, this distinction will be made into:  Major lexical categories (Noun, Verb,
Adjective, Pronoun);  Minor lexical categories (Adverb, Particle, Article, Quantifiers, Degree
Words).

TRADITIONAL CRITERIA USED IN DEFINING LEXICAL CATEGORIES / PARTS OF

SPEECH

More traditional approaches to lexical categories / parts of speech relied on conceptual /

notional8 (i.e. meaning / semantic) definitions. The first criterion used in the above attempt at
defining lexical categories is that of distribution – thus, a syntactic one. Consequently, whether or
not lexical categories have meaning implies the existence of a relationship between syntax and
semantics.
Lexical categories (Noun, Verb, Adjective, Preposition, Adverb, etc.) do not correspond to
a semantic category – in fact, it is major syntactic categories that do (e.g. NP, VP,9 etc.); so, the
syntactic categories only are in a relation of correspondence with such semantic categories as:

5
Bloomfield, Leonard (1887–1949), American linguist, one of the founders of American structural
linguistics. His primary aim was to establish linguistics as an autonomous and scientific discipline. Notable
works: Language (1933).
6
Chomsky, (Avram) Noam (b. 1928), American theoretical linguist, noted for expounding the theory of
generative grammar. He also demonstrated that linguistic behaviour is innate, not learned, and that all
languages share the same underlying grammatical base.
7
Jespersen (Jens) Otto (Harry) (1860–1943), Danish philologist, grammarian, and educationist. He promoted
the use of the ‘direct method’ in language teaching with the publication of his theoretical work How to Teach a
Foreign Language (1904); other notable works: Modern English Grammar (1909–1949).
8
Notional means “(In linguistics and grammar): 1. (of a word) having lexical meaning; 2. another word for
semantic; 3. concerning or designating an approach to grammar which is dependent on the definition of
terminology (e.g. ‘a verb is a doing word’), as opposed to identification of structures and processes”.
9
NP stands for Noun Phrase, as VP stands for Verb Phrase, where the term phrase means “a small group of
words standing together as a conceptual unit, typically forming a component of a clause”.
events, states, individual objects, etc. In traditional grammar, the identification of the parts of
speech is based on the criterion of meaning, as older grammarians (and also philosophers)
conceived the language as reflecting the universe directly / in an unmediated way (as a sort of
‘picture’ – which goes against de Saussure’s assumption: “le découpage différent du monde fait par
la langue”; “l’arbitraire du signe linguistique”).
Traditionally, each part of speech is presented as having a characteristic meaning – which
is used as a heuristic10 criterion in the procedures that are applied to the body (or corpus) of
linguistic information in order to identify the parts of speech: e.g. E. G. Curme (1935) defines the
noun as “words used as the name of a living being or lifeless thing: Mary, John, cow, horse, dog,
house, tree, London, Chicago, virtue, etc.”
Traditional grammarians envisaged the following criteria / parameters as dividing criteria
in establishing the parts of speech: l) The meaning of the respective word; 2) The inflectional
endings characteristic of it. (The syntactic criterion was only accidentally used – viz. the function
that particular ‘class of words’ carried out in the sentence, another formal criterion besides the
conceptual criterion). Thus, the parts of speech were seen as grammatical and logic classes
reflecting the structure of reality / the universe. As a matter of fact, ‘parts of speech reflect (…) our
ability to compose that reality into formal patterns”. – Edward Sapir, 1921; 11 he doubted that the
criterion of meaning was a sufficient, all-encompassing one in explaining syntactical aspects.
Therefore, the parts of speech must be delimited by their formal / contextual characteristics
rather than through ‘meaning’. (Formal characteristics and the – logical – meaning of the parts of
speech are different matters: one can express the same content in different ways; the patterns into
which the materials provided by reality are arranged are all important, e.g. Mary has a lamb. = It is
Mary’s lamb / her lamb. = It belongs to Mary / to her. Meaning is ascribed to the syntactic
categories representing projections of the lexical categories that are heads of those syntactic
categories.
Inflectional variation is the last in the series of three criteria used for defining the
traditional parts of speech (viz.  meaning;  syntactic function;  characteristic inflectional
variation). The changes of form that a word in a linguistic context undergoes are materialized
through inflectional markers (for case, number, gender, person, etc). This correlation between a
certain part of speech and its characteristic inflectional markers is specific to each natural language
being studied by the respective grammars. Thus, nouns are sensitive to case alternations but never
to alternations according to aspect (only the verb is sensitive to that inflectional variation. Verbs
and nouns are not sensitive to comparison, unlike Adj. and Adv. (a false example would be, though:
She was more of a listener than I was).
Inflectional variation was traditionally seen as delimiting the parts of speech through
accidence (vs. ‘substance’, i.e. ‘meaning’). The grammatical categories were defined in terms of
paradigms (= lists of forms, descriptive sets meant to delimit a certain part of speech). Nouns are
thus delimited by inflection for: case, number, gender; Verbs: through tense, mood, aspect, person,
etc. The descriptions included the changes brought about by that variation: phonological,
morphological, e.g. (he) does, teeth, plays – played.12
The term CATEGORY was used in keeping with the scholastic system (Greek ‘attributing
properties’ to things). ‘Substance’ is opposed to ‘accidence’ (the term accidence is dated and means
“the part of grammar that deals with the inflections of words”; its origin is Latin – early 16 th
century: from late Latin accidentia (translation of Greek parepomena ‘things happening
alongside’), neuter plural of the present participle of accidere ‘happen’) – as the ‘grammatical
categories’ are those into which words have to fall. The term ‘category’ should be seen as
10
Heuristic means “enabling a person to discover or learn something for themselves”.
11
Sapir, Edward (1884–1939), German-born American linguistics scholar and anthropologist; one of the
founders of American structural linguistics, he carried out important research on American Indian languages
and linguistic theory.
12
Being a highly analytic(al) language, English has a drastically restricted number of grammatical endings /
inflections – i.e. only seven or eight of them (cats, Tom’s book, he asks, he painted / he has painted, written,
he is painting, bigger, the biggest, the tenth). Forms like whose, whom, ate, drunk, better, etc. belong to the
lexicon because they are irregular / highly unpredictable.
designating the characteristic infleetionai variation of a certain part of speech. (Thus, nouns are
characterized by the categories of: case, number, gender; the verbs: tense, mood, aspect, etc.)
Inherent vs. contextual categories: The list of ‘grammatical categories’ often exhibits
overlapping, e.g. number and person are characteristic both of Nomina (N, P) and Verba. This
overlapping is only apparent. In the pair: “He is going to school” – “They are going to school”, the
information about the plural meaning of they is inherent (belonging to the word itself), whereas the
distinction between are going and is going is done owing to the information provided by the
context (= the syntactic context); it is determined / triggered through the phenomenon of agreement
between the subject and the verb (the predicate of the sentence). Agreement, a syntactic
phenomenon, is actualized through specific markers (= grammatical morphemes). Similar
examples could be provided for the categories of gender, which in English is contextually
established in a majority of cases: She / Mary did a lot of practice, vs. the inherent instances, e.g.
boy / girl, king / queen, handsome / buxom, etc. The latter category includes items that will be
associated with the dictionary definition of the word in question: e.g. buck “the male of various
animals including the goat, hare, rabbit, kangaroo and reindeer”; it is not information acquired
through the context.)

THE NOUN

If traditional grammars used a purely semantic point of view in order to define the lexical
category of the noun (see Leon D. Leviţchi: “The noun denotes objects – beings, things, ideas,
feelings, actions states, qualities; it has a meaning of its own”), sometimes adding formal
(syntactic) precision (“in the morphological system of English it is a principal part of speech, being
largely on a par with the verb”) drawn mostly from a certain grammatical intuition rather than
statistical or other research work, those grammarians who are more concerned with form and
grammatical functioning (e.g. Thompson and Martinet, A Practical English Grammar, 2nd edition,
Oxford University Press, 1976) will begin the study of the noun in an abrupt way, mentioning the
‘kinds’ of nouns specific to English (“There are four kinds of nouns in English: 1. Common nouns
– dog, table, man; 2. Proper nouns – Tom, France, Madrid, Mrs Smith; 3. Abstract nouns - charity,
beauty, fear, courage, joy; 4. Collective nouns - swarm, team, crowd, flock, group”), which is a
rather arid classification in which semantic criteria (degree of abstraction or representativity /
individuality) are blended with semantic and formal features – ‘collective’ nouns entailing both the
idea of ‘grouping together of objects’, and the (syntactic) feature of (selective) agreement in
number, e.g. ‘Scotland’s rugby team is currently better than France(’s). They (= the team) have
scored heavily against Australia’.
Professor Leviţchi’s many-sided approach to ‘the category of English noun characterizes
that lexical category through semantic and formal (= inflectional) data (mentioning its grammatical
categories: “The noun has a number (a book – books), gender (boy – masculine; girl – feminine;
sky – neuter; teacher – common) and case (the man – Nominative, Dative or Accusative; to the
man – Dative; the man’s or of the man = genitive)”. The latter set of (formal) data are competed by
the mentioning of the relational (= syntactic) criterion operating in noun categorizing: “the
syntactic functions it discharges depend on the case in which it stands and so do the questions it
answers: who?, what?, whose?, to whom?, etc”.
The distributional (i.e. syntactic) criterion is resorted to in order to specify the functioning
of nouns (“The words in the series: book, house, writing, library, engineer, etc. are nouns only in
the conventional sense in which dictionaries give them; but in the actual usage of the language
(with certain exceptions, e.g. in a number of idiomatic phrases) they should be considered nouns
exclusively when they are accompanied by a determinative, e.g. a book, the house, (Ø) writing
(preceded by ‘the zero article’), this library, one man, three people, etc. It is only with a
determinative that a noun has a declension (e.g. a boy, of a boy, to a boy, etc.). The specific
determinative of a noun is the article.” Morphology and lexicology are brought together in an
attempt to demonstrate the twofold conditioning (semantic and formal) of the lexical category of
the noun in English by the lexical markers (indices) it bears (= suffixes); suffixes go on a par with
the various categories delimited according to the ideas of abstraction and individuality – grouped
under the heading of: “the idea of number”. Thus, proper nouns have no characteristic suffixes (e.g.
the Thames, the Grampians, the Red Sea, Peter, Mr Brown, etc.); the exceptions (family names
ending in -son: e.g. Johnson, Thompson, Atkinson; names of English counties ending in -shire: e.g.
Lancashire, Worcestershire; names of English towns and cities ending in -chester / -caster: e.g.
Lancaster, Leicester, Winchester, Doncaster; names of countries or English counties ending in
-land: e.g. the Netherlands, Finland, Greenland, Cumberland, Northumberland; family and place
names ending in -ton: e.g. Burton, Hampton, Brighton) being rather of interest to the etymologist
and historian as well as the lexicographer (viz. those specialists using information extracted from
the diachronical study of the language) than to the grammarian.
The major distinctions made are the following: common vs. proper; concrete vs. abstract;
countable vs. uncountable (their common features being that generally the common, abstract
uncountable nouns are more prone to receiving specific suffixes, the concrete and countable ones
being more easily converted (into another part of speech), e.g. to house [hauz], to don, etc.
(Exceptions are in plenty: e.g. agentive suffixes appearing with common, countable nouns derived
from verbs -e.g. farmer, doer, listener, teacher – or the suffix -ist: e.g. soloist, violinist, artist,
idealist, socialist, the suffix being appended to nouns denoting a profession, attitude, conception,
etc.)
Other nominal suffixes are: -ness, -hood, -dom, having an abstract meaning: roughness,
brotherhood, boredom. The suffixes -ing and -tion /-sion / -ion for verbal nouns, expressing an
action / state related to the respective verb: listening, reading, walking; competition, persuasion,
admission. The suffix -ism (which often parallels the suffix -ist) in nouns expressing the idea of
doctrine, current, trend, idea (l): e.g. idealism, idealist, capitalism, liberalism, nominalism,
quietism, etc.
A classification of nouns according to composition: 1. Simple Nouns: i.e. a word which
cannot be decomposed into parts of speech recognized as such: e.g. table, mother, water. (Such
words as those usually called ‘portmanteau words’, e.g. cablegram “a telegraph message sent by
cable”, electrocution “injuring or killing someone by electric shock”, brunch “a late morning meal
eaten instead of breakfast and lunch”, chunnel “Channel tunnel”, smog “fog or haze intensified by
smoke or other atmospheric pollutants”, smaze “a mixture of smoke and haze”, galumph “moving
in a clumsy, ponderous, or noisy manner”, etc. are no longer recognized as being compound nouns;
they are (recognized as) simple nouns / words: few persons could actually trace the history of such
a word like electrocution up to its initial component parts: electric(al) + execution; or galumph (a
portmanteau word, coined by Lewis Carroll (from gallop+ triumph).
2. (a) Compound nouns: e.g. pencilbox, schoolboy, schoolbag. Blackberry, etc. (this is a
matter of lexicology in actual fact; the constitutive parts, their nature and (logical / or semantic)
relations are extremely varied, e.g. possession: seashore or part-whole relationship: seaside;
purpose: dining-room; qualifications: blackboard, soap-stone; and no less their form (solid-spelt:
blackberry; hyphenated: dining-room; or as ‘separate’ words: dead weight).
The attributive elements are generally / nearly always placed first – compare workhouse
and housework; this pre-positional character of the attributive elements is to be traced back to the
habitual place of the adjectival elements: cf. a greybeard (“bătrân înţelept”) vs. (a) grey beard; a
text(-)book can be compared with the phrase a new book. The adjectives used in such compounds
are generally of the ‘relative’ type (‘relative adjectives’), e.g. ‘a golden ring’.
Some compounds have lost their analysable character: the lexeme they represent is at the
same time a (new) morpheme, functioning as such, e.g. a blueberry – is not necessarily blue; a
blackleg is not black, nor can one translate a blackboard into Romanian as “o scândură neagră”.
The predominantly analytical character of English may be said to be contradicted if we consider
the tendency to use the ‘synthetic’ or Germanic / shorter counterpart in such parallel occurrences
illustrating the genitival relation – by far the commonest with compounds: window-sill (= the sill of
the window), daybreak, schoolmaster, etc. The differences mainly arise in point of functional style
– as the tendency goes towards simplification: they are more concise; so, the compound form will
be preferred in scientific texts, news articles, official names of institutions etc., e.g. UNO (= the
United Nations Organization).
(b) According to derivation: This classification accounts for the parts of speech in which
the noun has its origin. Thus, some other parts of speech have turned into nouns, e.g. adjectives,
verbs etc., through conversion (a lexicological phenomenon). 1) Substantivization 13 may be
explained according to the results as well as the onset of the derivative process. Thus, there are: '/
wholly substantivized adjectives; ''/ partially substantivized adjectives. Ellipsis may be a process
leading to the formation of nouns, as well, e.g. a copper, a radio (set), a uniform (costume), an
American, a native, a characteristic (which have the respective plural forms, e.g. natives,
Americans, characteristics. The latter category is represented by occurrences to be found in set /
standardized phrases / idioms, such as: my betters, not in the least, at (the) most, in general, etc.
Every other part of speech can be substantivized: e.g. the past participle and the (short) infinitive of
verbs (the dead, the naked, the dying – cf. the rich); a go (“o încercare”); a start; adverbs and
adverbial particles: the ups and downs (of life); the ins and outs (of a problem), etc.
Lexicology studies deal with such questions – viz. devices through which nouns are
formed, as: affixation; contraction (a word or group of words resulting from shortening an original
form: ‘goodbye’ is a contraction of ‘God be with you’); abbreviation, i.e. a shortened form of a
word or phrase; deflection; backformation (i.e. a word that is formed from an already existing word
which looks as though it is a derivative, typically by removal of a suffix (e.g. laze from lazy and
edit from editor).

A CLASSIFICATION OF NOUNS ACCORDING TO THE IDEA OF NUMBER

The distinction traditionally established between those nouns designating ‘objects’ of

which there are a whole class as against those ‘objects’ seen as ‘unique’ (viz. whose individual
character / existence is stated through opposition to the rest of the ‘objects’ in the same notional /
conceptual category) is well-known.
Thus, there are: I. Common Nouns – denote one / more objects out of a class of objects /
things: a desk, a house; beings: a girl, a man; materials: water, stone, powder, oil; abstract entities:
love, reading.
II. Proper Nouns – designate names that are given to certain objects (mainly beings) in
order to be distinguished from other objects appertaining to the same class / notional category, e.g.
names of persons, animals, human communities (especially peoples), geographical names, names
related to certain historical events, names of celestial bodies, etc. (Examples: Shakespeare,
Achilles, Bill, Mr Smith, Motley, the Severn, France, the Netherlands the Renaissance, Venus,
Mars, the Moon). Some common nouns may be treated as proper nouns – the passage is ope rated
through personification – a type of metaphor adding the [+HUMAN] seme, e.g. Procrastination is
the thief of time. The interrelations between the two categories operate both ways: a) there are
common nouns which were turned through usage into proper nouns / names, being the nicknames,
and later on, names of persons, e.g. Mr Black, Smith, Taylor, Arkwright, Bottom, Green, etc. On the
other hand, family names, seen as collections of individuals belonging to the class designated by
that particular name, can be used in the plural when preceded by the definite article: Would you
like to meet the Johnsons? b) Some proper nouns have become common nouns (v. their spelling,
with non-capital letter at the initial; this restriction of meaning can be explained through
specialization in a certain field of activity, e.g.: eton (“Eton jacket (or coat): a black, waist-length
jacket with broad lapels, left open in front, as that worn by students at Eton College”), derby (hat)
(“a bowler hat; said to be from American demand for a hat of the type worn at the Epsom Derby”) ,
turkey, bedlam (“a scene of uproar and confusion; archaic: an asylum”), mackintosh / macintosh

13
The verb to substantivize (or to substantivise) ['sbstntivaiz] means “to make a word (other than a noun)
play the grammatical role of a noun in a sentence”. Substantivization is a case of lexical conversion (“a
derivative process / word-formation process which modifies the grammatical / contextual value of a word,
turning foir instance verbs into nouns, nouns into verbs, or adjectives into adverbs”); also called “change of
morphological / lexical class”, and even “zero-suffix derivation”.
(“a full-length waterproof coat”), limousine (“a large, luxurious motor car, especially one driven by
a chauffeur who is separated from the passengers by a partition”), guinea (“the sum of £1.05 (21
shillings in pre-decimal currency), now used mainly for determining professional fees and auction
prices”), china, sherry (“a fortified wine originally and mainly – or only – from the Jerez region of
southern Spain, often / usually drunk as an aperitif” < alteration of archaic sherris, interpreted as
plural, from Spanish (vino de) Xeres ‘Xeres (wine)’ – Xeres being the former name of Jerez “a
town in Andalusia, Spain; it is the centre of the sherry-making industry; full name: Jerez de la
Frontera”), tommy (“a British private soldier – pet form of the given name Thomas; from a use of
the name Thomas Atkins in specimens of completed official forms in the British army during the
19th century”), (a) jeep (= GP) (“a small, sturdy motor vehicle with four-wheel drive, especially
one used by the military; ORIGIN: Second World War (originally US): from the initials GP,
standing for general purpose, influenced by ‘Eugene the Jeep’, a creature of great resourcefulness
and power represented in the Popeye comic strip”), (a) Vauxhall, etc. A subcategory of the above
set may be considered those proper nouns which are used as common nouns – although their
spelling is capitalized: if designating a ‘type’ or an ‘item’ in a certain series of recurrences (esp.,
things or persons named after famous creators or ‘prototypes’, whether historical / legendary or
cultural, e.g. Give the Caesar what belongs to the Caesar; a Constable, which is quite an
interesting case of conversion: it was done in either sense – a constable (“Brit. a police officer”) –
Constable (“Constable, John (1776–1837), English painter. Among his best-known works are
early paintings like Flatford Mill (1817) and The Hay Wain (1821), inspired by the landscape of his
native Suffolk”) – a Constable (i.e. a painting made by the artist of the same name); a Shylock, a
Dante / Byron of our time; a Venus (= a sculpture representing Venus or a very beautiful woman),
etc.
According to the idea of ‘uniqueness’, the capital letter spelling defines some categories of
nouns, e.g. the Sun, the Earth, Heaven, etc.

A TENTATIVE CLASSIFICATION OF COMMON NOUNS ACCORDING TO THE IDEA

OF NUMBER

The criteria that noun classification generally uses are here structured along the following
oppositional relations: Individuality: the use of the plural / singular and unique values;
Abstraction / concreteness (from the terms abstract “existing in thought or as an idea but not
having a physical or concrete existence”, and concrete “existing in a material or physical form; real
or solid; not abstract”, respectively). Amassiveness or Non-Collective / Group character. Their
combinations will be worked out and assembled into semantic-grammatical patternings, as follows:
A. Individual Nouns: Within this category, singular individual nouns are opposed to plural
individual nouns (i.e. an ‘object’ vs. a ‘set of objects’ out of the respective notional / conceptual
collection: e.g. a house vs. (two, some, several, many) houses; a man vs. a couple of men. The two
forms may be homonymous: e.g. a series – series; a works – (many) works, etc. The degree of
individuality can be marked / is relevant with such nouns: general / generic sense is opposed to
(strictly) individual sense: The (A) lion is a feline / a larger cat. Lions are larger cats. vs. When the
hunter saw the lion, he got scared.
Other ‘generic’ uses of individual nouns are in keeping with / depend (as seen above) on
the use of the Ø article (in the above case, in the plural – designating a ‘class’: Hunters are always
eager to tell stories.) See also: – those nouns denoting seasons, e.g. Spring is always children’s
favourite season; – the names of the meals of the day, e.g. Ann eats breakfast at 7.30 and dinner at
5.30 p.m.
B. Defective individual nouns (Pluralia Tantum nouns): This class includes nouns
designating, as main subsets:  Clothing articles, e.g. breeches, overalls, jeans;  Instruments,
tools (made of two parts), e.g. tongs, compasses. Such nouns usually make use, when need arises to
be counted, of ‘numeratives’ (or numerative phrases), e.g. a pair of binoculars / glasses / jeans; 
Parts of the body: entrails, sinews, bowels, etc. Agreement / grammatical concord is made in the
plural, e.g. Where are my spectacles?  Other notions: sweepings, savings, takings, etc.
 C. Proper Name Equivalents: These are individualized / ‘unique’ notions, i.e. names
given to concrete occurrences of the objects as such. e.g. the moon, the Earth, the East / east;
heaven; French, Chinese (= the respective languages), etc.
These nouns can be particularized: A blossoming nature was sparkling in full glory. A red
sun shone over the morose scene. Moreover, they may be transformed into individual nouns: That
was the highest of heavens. He could see bright suns and moons whirling around.
D. Nouns of Material: These generally designate names of substances – whose
characteristics are homogeneousness, divisibility and amassiveness; any separate portion has the
name and properties of the whole. That is why they are generally known under the name of Mass
Nouns: e.g. soap, oil, wheat, concrete, limestone, cement, tar, mutton, (roast) chicken, bronze, etc.
Their plural forms, when used at all, are meant to denote: 1) Parts / varieties of that stuff /
product / substance, e.g. The wines in Portugal are best known by Englishmen. The coffees in
Brazil are said to be of top quality. 2) Quantitative ‘extensions’ of that material entity: (v. the no-
tion of ‘extensive plurals’, e.g. snows, sands, rains, dews (poetic), as in: There are abundant snows
in the Himalayas, but no fine sands). Their grammatical regimen includes the use of the Ø article:
Silver is a precious metal, just like gold and platinum. Fish is my favourite meat. (vs. Fishes
[individual+ plural] were swimming in the pond.) Particularized instances are marked through the
appropriate use of the determinative adjectives (minus the numerical ones), the indefinite article,
e.g. I’d like more / a lot of / much sugar in my coffee. The coffee was on the table. A wine of that
quality is something to dream of. Agreement / concord is usually in the singular: Petrol and oil are
beginning to be rather scarce nowadays. The usual exceptions to this rule include the mass nouns
that are at the same time ‘pluralia tantum’ nouns, e.g. dregs, lees, victuals, spirits, etc.
E. Abstract and other abstract and ‘unique’ nouns (i.e. nouns designating actions,
states, qualities; abstract categories: philosophical, aesthetic, e.g. the old, the good, the beautiful;
trends, currents, doctrines, opinions, e.g. liberalism, disestablishmentarianism, socialism, etc.;
various other abstract categories: poverty, revenge, age; music, literature; football; red, white;
ague; advice, information, etc. These nouns admit of plural forms (implying both plural markers
and plural agreement), when they denote: (a) Varieties of those concepts, idea(l)s, doctrines, etc.,
e.g. The literatures of the West have seen a number of Eastern / Oriental influences. (b) (As a
stylistic device, mainly) the so-called ‘intensive plurals’, e.g. raptures: He was in high raptures
after the glorious victory taken over his enemies, pardons, fears, ecstasies. To these should be
added the rather miscellaneous category of the ‘Pluralia Tantum’ nouns, e.g. names of sciences,
diseases, as well as other miscellaneous nouns (e.g. creeps, tantrums, rickets, mumps, etc).
F. Collective Nouns: This subcategory is represented by a number of individual nouns (or
unique abstract nouns naming collective entities), which are perceived by the speaker as a sum of
individual elements; therefore, they will take plural agreement. The most characteristic of the
nouns making up this class are: team, club, society, crew, family, jury, government, committee,
ministry, board; Cabinet, mankind; the bourgeoisie, the gentry, the aristocracy, etc. When they are
used in their abstract / generic sense (i.e. when they become unique abstractions), they take the
singular: A club is something that can bore you. When used in a particularized sense, these nouns
are accompanied by the definite article (the), demonstrative adjectives (in the singular), or by
possessive adjectives: Her family had long been up before dawn; they were on the lawn now. The
English gentry was a prosperous class during the whole of the Elizabethan period.
One and the same ‘collective’ noun may have both readings (i.e. collective proper and
distributive: referring to the particular / individual members of the group), e.g. Scotland has / have
scored heavily against Argentina.
G. Nouns of Multitude: This may be said to be a subset / a variety of the ‘collective’
nouns category. (The Romanian equivalent / translation could be “substantive ale pluralităţii”). The
difference between the ‘nouns of multitude’ and the collective nouns (proper) is that the nouns of
multitude cannot be used as individual or abstract unique nouns; yet, they may have numerals and
other numerical determinatives. The predicate agreement in their case is only in the plural.
Examples: folk, people, poultry, vermin (“(1) small animals (wild mammals, birds, some insects)
considered collectively, especially that are (or at least are perceived as being) troublesome to man,
domestic / farm animals, crops, or game, or which carry disease, e.g. foxes, rodents, insect pests,
parasitic worms or insects. (2) figuratively – people perceived as despicable and as causing
problems for the rest of society”), the police, the cavalry, the military, the foot (the use of the
definite article is compulsory – see also such substantivized adjectives as: the rich, the poor, the
dying, the dead, etc.). In much the same line, see the adjectives naming nations / peoples (and
having an invariable form: e.g. the English, the Dutch, the French, the Swiss). Except for the
above-mentioned nouns, the form of which is consistently accompanied by the definite (the)
article, all the other nouns of multitude have ‘the zero article’ (Ø art.), e.g. Poultry are a common
fact on every Danish farm. They can be particularized through the definite article, ‘the zero article’
(Ø art.), by determinative adjectives and numeral adjectives, e.g. The police were all over the place.
One could see over 10,000 cattle in the field.
H. Individual Nouns of Multitude: This may be considered a subspecies / subset of the
category of the ‘nouns of multitude’; they differ from the former category as they retain their
singular forms in spite of the fact that they are accompanied by plural determinatives and numerals:
deer, fish, grouse; (a) brace (of partridge, etc.), (a) yoke (of…), as in: The fowler killed two grouse,
and his friend the angler caught ten trout. Fish may also have the plural form fishes: Lots of fishes
swam in the pond. The colonizers of the West raised many head of cattle.

THE CATEGORY OF NUMBER

Language uses a specific logical system in order to categorize the items of perceived
reality. The objects of this categorization are chosen in keeping with the categories (i.e. the
conceptual system) of common sense, starting from the information given by the surrounding
reality. This individuating of the objects making up perceived reality can be done in several ways
(viz. in two different ways). These two major ways of “cutting” the world of spatio-temporal
realities into smaller distinguishable / discrete entities are in accordance with the two following
properties related to the description of reality in philosophical terms:  an entity can be bound with
respect to the dimensions of space and / or time;  an entity can be continuous along the same axes
(i.e. the axes of space and time). If continuous, an entity does not display parts / constituents along
the dimension of space and / or time. The other description is limitative: it refers to various
locations of that entity along the dimensions of space and time, i.e. parts out of the whole entity.
e.g. such nouns as: man, door, horse designate objects that are bound in space, having a
characteristic shape / form; no separate part taken out of them represents the objects as such (man,
door, horse), but only parts / fragments of them (viz. a man’s arms, legs, head, etc.). These entities
are opposed to such nouns as: silver, steel, butter, designating entities which are continuous in
space – i.e. they cannot be said to have a characteristic shape / spatial form; any part / fragment
taken out of such entities represents the selfsame entity (i.e. a piece of steel is nothing but steel,
etc.). The nouns in the first category were called sortals, while those in the second category were
called non-sortals: man is a sortal, and silver is a non-sortal noun. (This distinction is a possible
alternative for the older distinction opposing COUNT and MASS nouns). As far as the class of the
sortals is concerned, number can be applied to it in a definite manner and no arbitrary division of
the sortal term into parts is permitted. Non-sortals do not allow number to apply to them, yet they
allow arbitrary division into parts. It has to be added that this same distinction also applies to
situations, which can be either bound / limitative or continuous / non-limitative with respect to the
time dimension; thus, verb phrases like to make a desk, to deliver a speech, to buy are sortals,
while to laugh, to fight, to run are non-sortals, i.e. continuous in the dimension of time, allowing
for arbitrary division into parts. This extension of the distinction sortal / non-sortal applies to verb
phrases (VP) when the category of aspect is envisaged.
In the light of the part-whole relationship (i.e. the so-called mereological logic) 14, the
above distinction can be expressed as: subdivisibility vs. anti-subdivisibility, or additivity vs. anti-
additivity. The non-sortal category contains entities that are both subdivisible and additive (i.e. one
14
In philosophy, mereology designates the abstract study of the relations between parts and wholes.
can add or subtract any quantities / amounts to, or out of, say, silver, gold, butter, without altering
the specific nature of it, whereas man, door, horse will not make larger or smaller men, doors, etc.,
if added to, or subdivided into parts).
 Countable nouns represent one type of language items of what was called “sortal
predications” – as opposed to mass nouns (a type of non-sortal predications). These go in parallel
with the corresponding types of verbal and adjectival uses of sortal vs. non-sortal predications
(appearing, in a grammar textbook, including the present one, under the heading of Aspect).
(1) The first criterion distinguishing between the two classes is the overt (i.e. syntactic)
criterion; it is called overt because it is apparent, i.e. manifesting itself “at the surface” of the
message – which is to say, in a directly perceivable and analysable way. It will concern itself with
assessing such syntactic particulars as: Quantifiers and determiners that are appropriate, e.g. I.
many, few + pens, dogs, men, children, etc.; much, little + snow, coal, water, gold; II. a(n), each,
every + cat, tree, desk, man; a lot of, a little (bit of), an amount of + snow, coal, water, gold; III.
one, two, ten + cat(s), box(es), etc.; but: *one, two, ten + snow, coal, water, gold. So, count (or
countable) nouns can take “count” quantifiers, indefinite articles and cardinals / cardinal numerals
(Ware calls them “enumeratives”), while mass nouns can only take amount quantifiers (Ware calls
them “amassives”), and no cardinals.
(2) The presence of the plural form is another criterion in point. Yet, there are dangers concerning
the appropriateness of the “plural” use of the nouns. Cf. such nouns as measles, scissors, politics.
Compare: His politics are tremendous. In the conduct of global politics, economic status must be
backed by military capacity. Politics is another pair of sleeves / another cup of tea. Thereafter he
dropped out of active politics.
(3) A word (i.e. noun) is plural (i.e. countable) if plural verbs and plural (anaphoric)
pronouns are appropriate to it; a word / noun is singular (i.e. uncountable / mass) if the verbs and
pronouns are singular, e.g. I. Dogs are enjoying the party. They seem to be happy. II. Tea is
delicious. It is the favourite drink of the English.
(4) In terms of derivational morphology (viz. “lexicology-word-formation”, as put
traditionally), suffixes like -ware, -ness, -ity, -hood apply to mass nouns.
A. Countable Nouns. A semantic Characterization: Countable nouns are sortal terms,
designating entities that are bound in space (i.e. having a definite spatial space). Dividing a sortal
term will result in entities that are parts of the “object” designated. One calls such nouns general
terms. They are characterised by peculiarities related to individuation. These “general terms” are
contrasted to “singular terms”, such as: Dad(dy), Mary, which are only singular and have no
article. A “singular term” names just one object; a “general term” is true of each object, several ob -
jects or any number of objects. “General terms” have built-in modes of dividing their reference,
which explains their syntactic behaviour.
A Formal Characterization (this is a characterization in point of syntactic properties): 1)
being countable, nouns like girl, horse, tree take count quantifiers (many, few, each, every); they
are individuated by the indefinite article a(n), they take cardinal numerals, e.g. There were seven
butlers and lots of other servants. The quickest of them tried to take some luggage belonging to a
couple of passengers upstairs. After a moment’s waiting some of them left.
2) they have plural form (morphologically, it results from adding the plural morpheme -s,
whose phonological interpretations are /s/, /z/, /iz/ in different vicinities, as
in: /kts/, /dgz/, /'fksiz/, and trigger plural agreement with the verb, as well as plural anaphoric
pronouns. (see above).
CONCRETE vs. ABSTRACT NOUNS: (A) The concrete nouns are those used as names
of (material objects (e.g. persons, animals, plants, things, phenomena, events, etc.) whose existence
is perceived through the medium / agency of our senses. Examples of such concrete nouns are the
following: bill, desk, house, tree, bull, farmer, cold, heat, snow, fountainpen.
B) The abstract nouns denote objects (viz. actions, states, feelings, sentiments, sensations,
qualities, relations, etc.) as seen by our mind, i.e. as notions, e.g. beauty, walk, stinginess,
happiness, joy, love, likeness, strength, force, greatness, friendship, care, enmity, hatred / hate, etc.
A fact should be pointed out with regard to the use of nouns relative to the concrete // abstract
dichotomy – some words share both senses, i.e. they may be used either as abstract or concrete,
e.g. justice, medicine, beauty, etc., as in: Injustice is the basic of all social settlement. The justice
that the prince did was to be celebrated ever after.
THE INDIVIDUAL vs. COLLECTIVE DICHOTOMY
Common nouns, both concrete and abstract, may be classified as: 1) Individual – when
their singular form is meant to denote a single object – e.g. a) concrete: child, wife; cat, robin;
street, town; lily, oak; spoon; ticket; b) abstract: pride, modesty; grace, force; hope, anger; idea,
joy; value, taste;
2) Collective: when their singular form stands for a plurality of identical or similar objects,
viewed as a continuous whole / body, e.g.
a) concrete: army, herd, fleet, audience, team, flight, swarm, the proletariat, the
bourgeoisie, flock, bevy, etc.;
b) abstract: government, majority, congress, council, association, the public, the Press, etc.
3) Nouns of Material and Concrete Mass and Nouns of Abstract Mass, when they name /
denote the mass or substance / matter of an object:
a) concrete: gold, platinum, wine, brandy, cotton, maize, milk, dirt, rubbish, wood,
concrete, fog;
b) abstract: poetry, philosophy, music, knowledge, television, information intelligence,
nonsense (“rubbish”, in an abstract sense). Sometimes, a translation / shift has been made from a
purely mass (or amassive sense, i.e. designating the name of the respective matter) to a concrete
meaning, i.e. objects made up from that substance / matter). In such a context, the mass noun
ceases to be a name of matter and becomes an individual concrete noun; e.g. brass (Rom “alamă”)
– the brass (“alămărie, alămuri”) – brasses (“alămuri; alămărie; instrumente de alamă”); copper
(“aramă, cupru”) – a copper (“bănuţ”; “bumb de alamă”) – coppers (“bănuţi”; “mărunţiş”); glass
(“sticlă”; “sticlărie”; as a collective noun = glassware); a glass (“pahar”; “oglindă”); glasses
(“pahare”; “oglinzi”; “ochelari” – as a plurale tantum); iron (“fier”; “fontă”) – an iron (“fier de
călcat”); (to be) in irons (“a fi în fiare / cătuşe”), etc.
When the names of natural products / stuffs, raw / unprocessed or processed, as well as
those of animals whose flesh is edible, are identical, from a logical-grammatical point of view, with
the mass nouns (e.g. grass, fruit, corn, oats, barley, wheat, milk, cheese, cream, cake; chicken,
grouse, poultry, turkey, game (Rom. “vînat”), wild duck, wild goose, snipe, fish (generic;
amassive), carp, cod, pike, salmon, trout), the respective nouns will have the following
grammatical behaviour: (U) – like the mass nouns, they do not have plural forms, they are not
preceded by: many, by numerals / cardinals, the definite and indefinite articles, but they take: some,
a lot of, quantitatives (e.g. a kilo(gram) / a liter, etc., of…).

Observations and exceptions: 1. The plural form of such nouns as deer, sheep, swine is
identical to the singular form, although the verb and the anaphoric pronouns have plural forms.
These nouns have the same articles, quantifiers and cardinals as the countables proper. Their
“irregular” behaviour can be accounted for by diachrony: their OE forms were neuter, and in Old
English the various declensions were in accordance with gender – only the masculine nouns had
the -s ending, whereas for the neuter nouns there was no formal change: e.g. Old English sceap
“sheep” was the unique form for both singular and plural. As for deer, it will be useful to notice
that the OE form dear used to mean a “wild animal in general”, e.g. The red deer were seen
grazing in the distance. There were several of them. The sledge was drawn by a couple of reindeer.
The sheep were just browsing the scanty grass. Do not throw pearls to swine. They cannot
appreciate them.
2. The class of the nouns designating wild animals, wild fowls and fish take the singular
form for both singular and plural contexts, e.g. There are plover hovering over the marshes. The
hunter came back home with a brace of wild duck. Cranes, geese, teal, snipe, coot swarmed around
the hunters. He chose to hunt elk but finally got five moose. They would rather prefer going to
shoot wild goose, than black bear. They were offered a few salmon and a dozen of trout.
Some grammarians (Henry Sweet, Poutsma) call them “collective singular” nouns, while
Jespersen remarks that such instances as five snipe, or a few antelope are “neither a collective word
nor a singular, but a real (individualizing) plural, though the form be identical with the singular”
(see the presence of the cardinals, the plural agreement and the plural anaphoric pronouns, which
can fully prove Jespersen’s observation). Here are some more similar cases, as appearing in
English dictionaries: buffalo (pl. buffalo or buffaloes) “a heavily built wild ox with backswept
horns, found mainly in the Old World tropics”; gazelle, pl. gazelles or gazelles; antelope (pl.
antelopes or antelope); springbok (or, less commonly, springbuck ['spribk], pl. springbok,
springboks, or springbuck, springbucks “an antelope / gazelle, Antidorcas marsupialis / euchore, of
arid / semidesert regions of southern Africa, which, when disturbed, moves in leaps, i.e. pronks,
exposing a patch of white erectile hairs on the rump that are usually covered by a fold of skin; it
lives in large herds”; wildebeest ['wildibi:st, 'vil-], pl. wildebeests or wildebeest “another name for
the gnu, i.e. a large, sturdy dark African antelope with a long head, a beard and mane, and a sloping
back”, ruff (an Old World shore bird, Philomachus pugnax, the male of which has a large erectile
ruff of feathers in the breeding season: family Scolopacidae (sandpipers, etc.), order
Charadriiformes), etc. As a matter of fact, this is only a tendency, as there are plenty of cases when
the plural form is used. Poutsma supplies the following examples relating to names of fishes and
sea animals which more often than not use the singular form for plural contexts (verbal agreement
and substitutes): bass [bæs], charr / char (any of various troutlike fishes of the genus Salvelinus,
esp. S. alpinus, occurring in cold lakes and northern seas: family Salmonidae), cod / codfish,
coalfish / coley (a dark-coloured gadoid food fish, Pollachius virens, occurring in northern seas),
hake (any gadoid food fish of the genus Merluccius), parr (a salmon up to two years of age, with
dark spots and transverse bands), pike, plaice, saithe, squid, sturgeon, whiting. The following fish
names mark the plural: anchovy, eel, kipper, lamprey, poggy, sardine, sole, sprat, thornback. E.g.
Fresh-water fish is mainly favoured in inland countries. The fisherman has caught seven cod. The
anglers managed to catch many salmon, but rather few trout. Dogfishes usually follow the larger
shoals of sardines. Anchovies and eels don’t usually mix together. Russians greatly value sprats
eaten with their vodka.
3. There are countable nouns which form their plural by vowel change (Ablaut), e.g. foot-
feet, tooth-teeth, goose-geese, mouse-mice, louse-lice, man-men, woman-women. These forms can
be, like the nouns under (1), explained on historical grounds.
Compounds of man have the men form in the plural, e.g. alderman, cabman, Englishman,
like the compounds of woman, e.g. townswomen, gentlewomen, horsewomen, etc. Such nouns
ending in -man but not having the nature of compounds (Poutsma calls them “complex signs”) will
have the regular -s plural ending: Germans, Ottomans, Normans, Romans, Caymans, like those
proper names ending in -man: Longman – (the) Longmans, or in -foot: Longfoot – (the) Longfoots.
4. Irregular plurals accountable for on historical grounds again: children, oxen, brethren.
These are traces of the Old English “weak declension”, using the -en suffix; in children and
brethren there is also vowel-mutation: there is a (rather newly acquired, from a historical
perspective) semantic differentiation between brethren and brothers. (Middle English did not have
it). e.g. D.G. Rossetti and his literary brethren 15 stood up for a new, ethereal form in poetry.

The List of the Paradigms of Plural Nouns in Contemporary English: When the
inflectional morpheme -s is added:
 it is voiced if preceded by a voiced consonant (/z/), e.g. heads, circles, heels, baths,
mouths, paths, wreaths;
 it is voiceless, if preceded by a voiceless consonant (/s/), e.g. cats, books, cheques /
Amer. Engl. checks, laughs;
 it is voiced and has an epenthetic /i/ in front of it, 16 if the ending comes after a sibilant –
so, it becomes /iz/, e.g. places, garages, vases, boxes, judges, buses, breezes, gases, glasses,
quizzes, waltzes, dishes, churches.
15
Brethren is a plural form meaning “fellow Christians, members of a male religious order, or members of a
sect, society, etc.” (Rom. „frate, confrate (de credinţă, de schit, de breaslă etc.)”).
16
Epenthesis [e'penisis] is the insertion of a sound or (an unetymological) letter into a word, e.g. the b in
thimble.
  Remarks: A) When there are nouns ending in -o, the two possibilities of spelling the
ending are:
a) -es, e.g. buffalo–buffaloes, echo–echoes, hero–heroes, negro–negroes, potato–potatoes,
tomato–tomatoes, domino–dominoes, mosquito–mosquitoes, torpedo–torpedoes, veto–vetoes;
b) -s: (I) with nouns having a foreign ring about them, e.g. cameo–cameos, embryo–
embryos, fiasco–fiascos, folio–folios, portfolio–portfolios, oratorio–oratorios, radio–radios,
scenario–scenarios, studio–studios, trio–trios; and in the English words cuckoo–cuckoos,
kangaroo–kangaroos, taboo–taboos (the last two terms are of exotic origin, too: they are derived
from an aboriginal language of North Queensland, in Australia, and Tongan, respectively).
(II) with nouns borrowed from several Romance languages, such as Italian, Spanish,
Portuguese, or from Latin, e.g. canto–cantos, cento–centos, crescendo–crescendos, octavo–
octavos, piano–pianos, rondo–rondos, solo–solos, virtuoso–virtuosos; albino–albinos, gaucho–
gauchos, casino–casinos, guanaco–guanacos, etc.;
c) the two endings may coexist, e.g. banjo–banjos–banjoes; calico; cargo; contralto;
domino; flamingo; fresco; ghetto; grotto; halo; manifesto; memento; motto; tobacco; tornado;
volcano;
d) Nouns ending in -y preceded by: (I) a consonant change it to -i (+ the -es ending), e.g.
lady–ladies, story–stories; also: colloquy–colloquies, soliloquy–soliloquies;
(II) a vowel: the plural is formed by adding -s: boy–boys, key–keys, quay–quays, toy–toys.
This rule also applies to proper names like: Henry–Henrys, or Cato–Catos.
e) Nouns ending in -f or -fe add the plural ending –s, e.g. chief–chiefs, grief; muff; gulf;
roof, proof, cliff; safe. But there are some exceptions to this rule: the -f(e) final sequence is changed
to -v (+ the -es ending), e.g. calf–calves, elf–elves, half–halves, knife–knives, life–lives, leaf–
leaves, loaf–loaves, self–selves; sheaf–sheaves, shelf–shelves, thief–thieves, wolf–wolves, wife–
wives. There are still other nouns that have both patterns: dwarf–dwarves–dwarfs, hoof–hoofs–
hooves, staff–staffs–staves [steivz] (“the system of horizontal lines grouped into sets of five upon
which music is written; pitch is indicated on any one or between any adjacent two of them, where a
note is written”), scarf–scarves–scarfs, wharf–wharves–wharfs.
B) Foreign Plurals in English:
a) Latin nouns: I. alga–algae ['ældi:], larva–larvae ['l:vi:], libra–librae ['laibri:],
persona grata–persoane gratae [p:'suni: 'gr:ti:], vertebra–vertebrae ['v:tibri:];
II. alumnus–alumni ['lmnai] (feminine: alumna ['lmn]–alumnae ['lmni:]),
bacillus–bacilli [b'silai], locus–loci ['lusai], magus–magi ['meidai], polypus–polypi ['plipai],
stimulus–stimuli ['stimjulai, 'stimjuli:]; (but: focus ['fuks]–foci ['fusai]–focuses, fungus
['fgs]–fungi ['fgai, 'fndai, 'fndi]–funguses, radius ['reidis]–radii ['reidiai]–radiuses;
and: apparatus [æp'reits, æp'r:ts, 'æpreits]–apparatus–apparatuses, hiatus [hai'eits]–
hiatuses–hiatus);
III. addendum–addenda; agendum, bacterium, datum, erratum, quantum, stratum,
symposium;
IV. Ending in -ces when plural, e.g. apex–apices–apexes, calyx–calyces–calyxes, radix–
radices, vortex–vortices–vortexes.
b) Greek nouns: I. -is > -es, e.g. analysis–analyses, axis–axes, basis–bases ['beisi:z],
crisis–crises ['kraisi:z], ellipsis–ellipses, oasis–oases, parenthesis–parentheses, synopsis–synopses,
thesis–theses. Also: apsis–apsides, aegis–aegides;
II. -on > -a, e.g. phenomenon–phenomena, criterion–criteria;
c) Italian nouns, e.g. cicerone–ciceroni; dilettante–dilettanti, libretto–libretti–librettoes,
palazzo–palazzos–palazzi, etc.
d) French nouns, e.g. bateau–bateaux ['bætəu] (plural: bateaux ['bætəuz]) “a light flat-
bottomed riverboat used in Canada”, rondeau (plural: rondeaux ['rondəu, 'rondəuz]) “a poem of ten
or thirteen lines with only two rhymes throughout and with the opening words of the first line used
twice as a(n unrhymed) refrain”, bureau (plural: bureaux or bureaus), chateau / château (plural:
chateaus / châteaux ['ƒætəu, ' ƒætəuz]), tableau ['tæbləu], pl. tableaux ['tæbləu, 'tæbləuz], or
tableaus “(1) (tableau vivant) = a representation of a scene, incident, painting, sculpture, etc., by a
person or group arranged / posed silent and motionless; (2) a pause during or at the end of a scene
on stage when all the performers briefly freeze in position; (3) any dramatic group or scene”). 
Remark: Sometimes, as seen above, the foreign and the English patterns are used (in some cases,
with stylistic or even semantic differences), e.g. antenna – antennae – antennas, retina – retinae
['r‚t€ni:] – retinas, calculus – calculi – calculuses, cactus – cactuses – cacti, iambus – iambuses –
iambi, aquarium – aquariums – aquaria, medium – mediums – media, index – indexes – indices
(with a difference of meaning, too), stamen – stamens – stamina, etc. See also a number of cases in
which usage notes are necessary even for native speakers of English:  The noun datum: [USAGE:
In Latin, data is the plural of datum and, historically and in specialized scientific fields, it is also
treated as a plural in English, taking a plural verb, as in the data were collected and classified. In
modern non-scientific use, however, despite the complaints of traditionalists, it is often not treated
as a plural. Instead, it is treated as a mass noun, similar to a word like information, which cannot
normally have a plural and which takes a singular verb. Sentences such as data was (as well as
data were) collected over a number of years are now widely accepted in standard English.];  the
forms agendum and agenda [USAGE: Although agenda is the plural of agendum in Latin, in
standard modern English it is normally used as a singular noun with a standard plural form
(agendas)];  the noun media [USAGE: The word media comes from the Latin plural of medium.
The traditional view is that it should therefore be treated as a plural noun in all its senses in English
and be used with a plural rather than a singular verb: the media have not followed the reports
(rather than ‘has’). In practice, in the sense ‘television, radio, and the press collectively’, it behaves
as a collective noun (like staff or clergy, for example), which means that it is now acceptable in
standard English for it to take either a singular or a plural verb.];  the forms candelabrum and
candelabra: [USAGE: Based on the Latin forms, the correct singular is candelabrum and the
correct plural is candelabra. However, these forms are often not observed in practice: the singular
form is assumed to be candelabra and hence its plural is interpreted as candelabras. In nearly 50
per cent of the examples in the British National Corpus the singular is incorrectly given as
candelabra].  At other times, the problems posed by the form (and grammar) of certain foreign
nouns are even more complex, e.g. octopus “(USAGE: The standard plural in English of octopus is
octopuses. However, the word octopus comes from Greek and the Greek plural form octopodes is
still occasionally used. The plural form octopi, formed according to rules for Latin plurals, is
incorrect)”. All the dictionary quotations are from The NEW OXFORD Dictionary OF ENGLISH.
Problems Concerning the Semantics of Plural Countable Noun Phrases. Cardinality
of NP: The distinction sg. / pl. (as in: The boy ran. The boys ran) implies that: (l) One boy, etc. ran;
(2) At least two boys ran. Syntactic number is accompanied by (relevant) determiners or
quantifiers, e.g.: Five cows are browsing.
Uncountable / Mass Nouns: From a semantic standpoint, these nouns have the following
individuation characteristics: they are sortals (e.g. water, jam, silver, etc.), i.e. they do not divide
their reference; they have also additive / cumulative reference: one cow vs. another cow). Unlike
the singular terms (e.g. John), the mass terms do not name a unique object each. Consequently,
mass terms should be opposed to sortals (general terms), as well as to singular terms. Mass terms
do not refer to entities having an “inherent form”. They only designate matter / stuff.
From a syntactic point of view, mass terms are distinguished by: (1) using quantifiers
(“amassives”); not having the indefinite article a(n) or the cardinals: one cannot normally say
*three / four / ten oils; (2) having singular agreement with the verb; the singular anaphoric pronoun
it; (3) in point of structure, there are complex nouns containing (generally) the suffixes -ware,
-ness, -ity, -hood. Here are some examples: Romanians consider freshwater fish as good as the sea
varieties and species that the British value so much, only they eat more fruit than the British. There
was some diesel / diesel fuel left in the tank. Mass nouns can be either “concrete” or “abstract”. In
a more restricted sense, the distinction mass / count nouns purports on “concrete” mass / count
nouns only. There are however several common points about “concrete” and “abstract” nouns
(from a syntactic as well as a semantic angle) – cf. speed, decency, attention, so that the term “mass
nouns” was made to cover both concrete and non-concrete nouns (Some examples: a) concrete:
iron, coal, lead, gold, milk, coffee, butter, gas, air, fish, fruit, flesh; b) non-concrete: success, luck,
progress, knowledge, vanity, care, courage, attention). “Amassive” quantifiers (or mass
quantifiers) are characteristic of mass nouns, e.g. much, little (used with both concrete and non-
concrete nouns): much / little + whisky / salt / affection / danger / speed vs. many / few + *whisky,
*salt / *affection / *speed.
Quantifiers that “individuate” a certain portion of the “stuff” characterize mass nouns.
When used with such quantifiers, mass nouns are re-categorized into general terms. A member of
suchlike quantifiers (e.g. a piece of, an amount / a great amount of, a bit of, a (little) scrap of, a
touch of) are used both with concrete and abstract mass nouns.
Others are used only with concrete mass nouns. A restricted group are used only with non-
concrete (= abstract) mass nouns. Examples:  Quantifiers used only with “concrete” mass nouns:
a bar of chocolate, a cake of soap, a lump of sugar, a skein of wool, a slice of / a rasher of bacon /
ham, a stack of hay, a clod / lump of earth / clay, a cup of tea / coffee / milk / cocoa, a glass of wine
/ water / beer / milk, a reel of wire / thread / film, a grain / a sheaf of wheat / barley / corn, a tot of
whisky / brandy / gin, etc.
 Quantifiers that are only used with abstract / non-concrete mass nouns: a stroke of luck,
an act of charity / kindness / justice, a pang of jealousy, a flutter of excitement , etc. (On the other
hand, expressions like “We had two coffees each”, “He had a beer”, etc. are actually the elliptical
variants of “We had two cups of coffee”, “He had a glass / bottle of beer”).
The definite article the is not used with mass nouns. If used, it is a marker of the re-
categorization of the mass noun into a general term (the whole NP is seen as a singular term), e.g.
Jam is sweet. There is jam all over the table. But: The jam is on the table. (Here, the jam is a
singular term). Compare: Platinum and silver are rare metals. And: The silver was found in the next
room. (There is no possibility of saying: *Silver was found in the next room).
Conclusion: Mass nouns, when used with the definite article, produce NPs that are general
terms, having criteria of individuation deriving from the context (e.g. The coffee (over) there). Such
NPs name unique objects – so, they are singular terms. This is the same as in the case of the
individuation achieved through the use of the determiners this and that: i.e. a certain “portion” of
the respective matter / stuff is named; hence, such NPs are used for singular terms. (e.g.
Marmalade is sweet. This marmalade is not so stale as the other. – cf. The marmalade is not here).
For a, each, every, another there are restrictions of co-occurrence. Each, every, another turn the NP
into a general term (implying distinctness, individuation), e.g. Each / Every / Another / whisky / tea
will be delicious.
A(n) needs further specification (viz. an explicit quantifying phrase): a kind of… All, some
do not need criteria of division, e.g. All butter is yellowish. All attention is needed. Some butter is
whitish. Predeterminers like half, double, twice, three times, one third, one fifth, etc. do not need
criteria of division / multiplication. They are used with general terms: half (1/2 of) the pear / orange.
Other examples: Half the water was so warm. Half that water… Half of the / that amount
of water was warm. (Not: *Half water was so warm). Or: Double the / this whisky was yours. (But
not: *Double / seven times / whisky / was on the table). Double of the / this / that quantity / amount
of whisky was cold. Much and little are the characteristic quantifiers for mass nouns (as opposed to
many, few, which are used with general terms), e.g. many / few girls; but one cannot say: *much /
*a little girls. See also: plenty of, a lot of, lots of, a great deal of…
If a mass quantifier is used with general terms in the singular, then the NP becomes a
(complex) mass term – i.e. it is re-categorized into a mass term, e.g. She showed a lot of foot / too
much tooth. Or: She was more of a child than a woman. No cardinals and no ordinals can occur
with mass nouns. In case cardinals or ordinals do occur with mass nouns, then the NP is elliptical
(it is an implicit expression of individuation), and the NP is a (complex) general term, e.g. The first
(kind of) wine was excellent. Three (kinds of) wine = Three wines. See also the “abstract mass
nouns”, with which there are no concrete quantifiers, (ordinal or cardinal) numerals. One cannot
say: * The first (bit of) attention. Still, there are specialised expressions that can be used to express
“abstract quantity”, e.g. The first word of advice, etc.
Mass Terms and General Terms
A lot of nouns and NPs seem not to bother cutting across the mass–count (theoretical)
boundary. Otto Jespersen was the first to point that out, supplying examples such as: a tin of
sardines - an alloy of copper and tin; many small crumbs - crust or crumb; a tall oak - a table made
of oak; various matters were discussed - the relation of matter and space; various noises - a good
deal of noise; confidential talks - much talk (about ecology); state papers - a parcel in brown
paper; few talents - little talent; many experiences - much experience (is needed to solve this
problem); a delightful time - I have no time now (to do it), etc. The structure underlying the NPs in
the first column is: plural markers, count quantifiers, indefinite article, plural agreement. For the
NPs in the second column (which are mass uses of the corresponding general terms), we have:
mass quantifiers (much, little etc.) and singular agreement. Quine showed that there are general
terms (e.g. apple) that are doubled by mass terms, as in: Put some apple in the salad. – as distinct
from: some apple or other. “Mary had a little lamb” can be decoded correctly only after making
sure the precise context of Mary’s having (viz. “possessing” or “helping herself to”) a / some lamb,
respectively.
If mass terms are parts of nominal predicates, they become general terms, e.g. That puddle
is water (=It is a bit of water), some implicit quantifier operating a division on the “stuff” term.
Consider also the following examples: Someone can have a number of pains and an amount of
pain; More theory and more theories; more truths, or more truth; much hope, or many hopes. See
also: justification / justifications, consideration / considerations, similarity / similarities; a dozen
of chicken eggs, but a plateful of scrambled egg / scrambled eggs; mashed potato and mashed
potatoes. “That gallery has more Rembrandt than this other, but some other gallery has by far the
most Rembrandt in the world”; “How much family does Joe have?”; “Is there much elk in the
region?”, etc. The difference in all the above cases is not a matter of pure semantic idiosyncrasy
(one must not rely on the sense of such words as: apple, experience), but something derived from
the morphological and syntactic characteristics of those terms. Therefore, careful analysis of
suchlike cases is needed in order to describe such twofold behaviour. We can thus determine a
lexical redundancy rule17 for both terms (i.e. both are given the same lexicon entry, while the
lexical redundancy rule describes the phonological, syntactic and semantic relation holding
between the two).
Plural Forms “Related” to Mass Terms:
When a plural form can be found for a noun, that means that, semantically, there are
criteria of individuation for that noun. Since mass nouns do not display such criteria, plural
markers (and other count properties) show that the respective noun no longer belongs to the class
of the “mass nouns” – i.e. it was re-categorized within the class of the general terms (GTs). There
are several types of such relations – each of them having an associated lexical redundancy rule.
 Case I: e.g. wine – wines: “He drinks a lot of wine” (= a mass noun: subdivisible, and
also additive-cumulative; Syntactically, they require a mass quantifier; much: no count quantifiers,
or cardinals. Singular agreement is needed, as well as anaphoric pronouns: Wine is healthy, if you
drink it moderately). Vs. “Many different wines are produced in Spain” (=a plural form + plural
verb agreement; count quantifiers, plural anaphoric pronouns: “Four wines were served. They were
all dry wines”). It follows that, in the latter set of examples, wines is a general term (an elliptical
form for “kinds of”): “kinds of…” divides its reference in mutual opposition according to certain
properties / characteristics, or criteria of individuation: in our case colour, taste, flavour; moreover,
they have different names – i.e. the lexicalization of those kinds, e.g. Madeira, Odobeşti, sherry (“a
fortified wine originally and mainly from southern Spain, often drunk as an apéritif”), etc. e.g. He
took / drank three sherries. One can derive a lexical redundancy rule from the above observations,
by systematizing them into: 1. semantic information; 2. syntactic information; 3. phonological
information. (1) Semantically: the change of semantic class (MT  GT), as well as the sense of the
(new) GT. (2) Syntactic statements change in the (sub-categorization) frame it belongs to. (3)
Phonologically: the presence of the plural marker added to the GT.
/wain/ /wainz/
Mass Term Gen.Term
17
Redundancy here refers to “the repetition of information or inclusion of additional information to reduce
errors (as in telecommunication transmissions and computer processing)”.
 +___V sg. + ___V pl.
+ Much___ + Many___
Stuff Name (N) Kinds of (A)
Other examples: tea–teas (through lexicalization, one will have: green / Ceylon tea, as
mass terms), food–foods, fruit–fruits, meat–meats, steel–steels, coffee–coffees, wool–wools, e.g.
Those foods were rather exotic for the Danish guests. (Cf. Air is a mixture of gases). Also, abstract
mass terms display the same behaviour, e.g. experience–experiences: Experience is helpful (= a
mass term). He had many such experiences (= a general term, elliptical for “kinds of…”: it has
count properties: plural agreement, plural anaphoric pronouns, count quantifiers). Other examples:
talent, danger, fashion. e.g. His brother’s talents are very special. Paris fashions amuse him, so he
tries them all.
 Case II: This case of recategorization can be illustrated by the nouns salt-salts (of which
the latter is a mass term, too, but having plural agreement with the verb, induced by the plural form
of the noun). Nevertheless, the quantifiers that are used are mass quantifiers. (a) Salt is bad for
metal structures. (b) Will you give the bottle of smelling salts? (a) The noun has all the properties
characteristic of mass nouns: cumulative reference, singular agreement, singular anaphoric
pronoun (it), mass quantifiers (much, little). (b) The noun is a “stuff” term, too (it does not divide
its reference; it has cumulative reference: any sum of parts which are smelling salts is “smelling
salts”). Syntactically, it has plural form, plural agreement plural pronouns: “We took a dose of
Epsom salts. They were the only medicine required”. But it has mass quantifiers associated with
the term: too much Epsom salts. Semantically, the singular mass term includes the sense of the
plural mass term. Hence, the following rule can be stated:
/s:lt/ /s:lts/
Mass Term Mass Term
+___V sg. + ___V pl.
+ Much___ + Much___
Stuff name (N) Stuff name included by (A)
Other examples: water–waters; snow–snows, dew–dews, sand–sands, wit–wits. e.g. a)
Water is a liquid. b) The destroyer was in home / territorial waters. The waters of the Mississippi
run deep. The best mineral waters seem to be found in France and Romania.
(a) A Mass noun – semantically, it does not divide its reference: syntactically: it has
singular verb agreement, singular anaphoric pronoun and mass quantifiers.
(b) A Mass term, as well; semantically, it does not divide its reference; syntactically, it
implies plural agreement with the verb, plural anaphoric pronouns – yet, mass quantifiers: There
was plenty of snow that winter. The snows of the Alps were quite impressive. The plurals like dews,
snows, sands are also called “extensive plurals”, while those like raptures “expressions of intense
pleasure or enthusiasm about something; joyous ecstasy: The tabloids went into raptures about
her”, and ecstasies are called “intensive plurals”! (See supra).
 Case III: This third class includes mass terms that have corresponding plural forms
representing general terms (like the terms in the first class, only this time the relation between the
mass terms and the general terms is: abstraction – acts that imply that abstract notion), e.g. (a) Pay
good attention to what is being said; (b) Countless little attentions were shown to those very
attractive ladies. In (a), attention, an abstract mass term has all the syntactic properties of mass
nouns; in (b), attentions is a general term (it has count properties: count quantifiers, plural verb
agreement; its sense (“polite or kind acts of paying attention to someone”) implies the sense of the
singular mass term. So, the rule that holds between the two corresponding sets can be written as:
/'tenn/ /'tennz/
Mass Noun General Term
+___V sg. + ___V pl.
+ Much___ + Many___
Abstract term (A) Acts that imply (A)
Here are some other such examples: confidence–confidences, love–loves, decency–
decencies, kindness–kindnesses, regard–regards, respect–respects, curiosity–curiosities, novelty–
novelties, as in: My love for that man seemed endless. All his youthful loves were rather worthless.
What about John’s new love? She’s a marvel, I must admit. Your confidence in him was a sound
basis for your joint project. The two girls were exchanging confidences. Your regard for your
teacher is all you can offer him. Will you please give them my regards?
Here are a number of similar cases, which can consequently be grouped under the same
heading are those mass terms having a “concrete” meaning that are related to corresponding plural
general terms, e.g. iron–irons; paper–papers; tin–tins; silk–silks; rubber–rubbers, etc. e.g. (a) Nazi
Germany badly needed oil and rubber. (b) Try not to forget your rubbers! (“Amer. Engl. rubber
boots; galoshes”); (b') (this time in the singular): Will you lend me your rubber?
(a) A mass term; semantically, it does not divide its reference; syntactically, it has all the
properties of mass nouns. (b) A general term (it means “overshoes”); semantically, the term divides
its reference; syntactically, it has count properties. The relation holding between the mass term
under (a) and the general term under (b) is that of “inclusion” / “implication”; (b') is a general term;
semantically and syntactically, it is a count noun: ‘Give me all your rubbers.’ ‘How many of them
did you say? All four of them?’
General Terms and Mass Occurrences: This is the case of those general terms naming
animals (e.g. pig, sheep, calf, cow / ox) whose meat is named through mass terms representing
lexicalized items (i.e. as many different words / dictionary entries) – e.g. pork, mutton, beef, veal.
But the majority of the common general terms do not have such corresponding terms functioning as
the lexicalization of the respective mass term; it is the selfsame word (i.e. from a phonological point
of view) that is used in both cases; the two different usages (viz. the general term and its mass term
usage) are established contextually (cf. the Romanian sentence: “Mai aveţi pui?”, where pui can
mean, contextually, “a bird / domestic fowl, or the meat from such a bird, representing a dish”), e.g.
There were many chickens on Rob’s farm. Do you want cold chicken? How many apples do you
need? How much apple would you like in the salad? Only four oaks survived the fire. The panel was
made of oak. Where’s the theatre? Unfortunately, there isn’t much theatre to see in Piteşti.
Plural Countable Nouns: Distributive vs. Collective: All plural countable nouns can be
interpreted as: a) distributive NPs; b) collective NPs; this depends on the semantics of the verbal
phrase used. Let us compare: a) All the cows were browsing; b) All the sheep gathered. For (a), the
statement is true of each single cow performing that action. vs. (b) In this statement, gathered refers
to all the sheep as a “group”.
There are ambiguous cases, as well, e.g. All the boys lifted the desk. The interpretation of
the sentence can be: (a) They (all) lifted the desk, but in turn. (b) They lifted the desk together. The
two interpretations (distributive vs. collective) depend, as seen above, on the kind of predication
used in the respective sentence, e.g. collective interpretation: to gather, to collide, to be numerous,
to be similar, as in: All these cars are similar. Some transitive verbs are interpreted in a collective
sense when having plural subjects: to prepare, to form, etc. These planes form a squad. Or, when
they have plural direct objects: to mix, to correlate, etc. After mixing the ingredients, the pancake is
virtually ready. The “collective nouns” allow for two interpretations, as well:  collective (as a group
/ a whole);  distributive (as individual members of a group / collectivity).
Collective Nouns: Collective nouns have a positive response to all the tests of countability
mentioned before (they have countable quantifiers and determiners plural agreement and plural
anaphoric pronouns when meaning “several bodies”), e.g.: The two teams were going to play. Every
herd is given its own pasture.
By their nature, collective nouns can be assigned either a distributive or a collective
interpretation: “The armies were admired for their courage in battle”; “The four armies gathered
their men to fight back the enemy”. The predications used determine the distributive / collective
interpretation of the respective sentences.
A special distributive interpretation of collective nouns occurs when members making up a
“body” are meant, e.g. All his family wore ready to leave. Some more examples as given by
Poutsma: admiralty, assembly, audience, board, cabinet, cavalry, clergy, committee, crowd, enemy,
family, generation, government, jury, mankind, ministry, mob, people, public, e.g. The jury were
behaving nervously. / Has the jury retired? Mankind should use all its resources. / All mankind are
prone to self-deceiving and hasty action.

“Bare Plurals”: This term is applied to those NPs in the plural, having no determiner; e.g.
Dogs are not always kind to strangers. (In the structuralist view, they are accompanied by the
“zero” / null determiner (Ø), which is actually the plural counterpart of the indefinite article a(n),
the absence of the article being meaningful for a “plurality of count nouns”. The construction thus
obtained is in complementary distribution with plural determiners such as all, most, some, etc., e .g.
Some dogs are not very tame). An analysis of the distributional contexts displaying this type of NP
demonstrates that: a. they have a generic use, e.g. A cow is a large animal. Cows are large animals.
b. they are part of a predicate NP: Tom is a cat. Tom and Sly are cats.
The differences arise when it comes to their semantic interpretation (hence, their syntactic
interpretation). Sometimes the Ø article NPs are ambiguous in meaning (namely, there is ambiguity
between their existential and their universal readings, e.g. (1) Boys were playing on the floor, and (2)
Boys seem to be cleverer than adults. Their respective interpretations can be re-cast in the following
structures: (1) Some boys were playing on the floor. (2) All / Most boys are cleverer than adults.
Here, most boys is, in fact, nearer to the “generic” use of the NP, because it does not imply a strict
observance of the “universality” of all boys, but a sense better rendered by the adverbial generally.
See also the following instances: Bears hibernate in caves. All bears hibernate in caves, but not
every single bear hibernates in caves, though.
Conclusion: The plural counterpart of a dog is some dogs (not dogs). It is demonstrated
through the analysis of the anaphoric pronouns at work. This type of logical-grammatical
relationship is called “anaphoric reference”, i.e. the type of anaphoric pronoun used to refer to those
NPs; the antecedent is resumed by the definite and indefinite pronouns it and one:  Compare: Harry
is looking for a good bank, and Tom is looking for it, too. (= the same bank). And: Harry is looking
for a good bank, and Tom is looking for one, too (= indefinite). Conf. Harry is looking for good
banks, and Tom is looking for them, too. Harry is looking for good banks, and Tom is looking for
some, too. Hence the conclusion that the meaning of the anaphoric pronoun used is dependent upon
the nature of the antecedent.
“Bare plurals” as kind designating expressions: If we analyse the following sentences:
Dogs are not very tame. (Dog is here a “sortal” term – i.e. limited in space (and continuous in time).
As opposed to: Dogs are everywhere. (The reference of the term is not bounded in space, implying
that, in this case, dog is a non-sortal term) – we reach the conclusion that the “bare plural” NPs can
well be considered “proper” names of kinds: they have several locations (“everywhere”).
Also in: All men or Most men are sinners. – here, the noun designates a class (an object +
another object, etc…) Versus: Men are mortal. Here, it is the name of that “kind” of “objects that is
the topic. Consider also: (All) men are mortal. And: Tigers are ferocious. (The truth is general for the
former, but not for the latter: there can be tigers which are not really ferocious). So, the
interpretation of such NPs is generic. In the examples above, the (state) predicates (which designate
a property of the subject) do not depend on time anchorage; they designate an atemporal quality. Let
us consider other instances of NPs having “kind” interpretation: Man is mortal. A cuckoo is a lazy
bird. The cow is a fairly large mammal. Cows are useful. Money is the root of evil.
Or, expressing the “kind” interpretation overtly: This kind of animal resembles an ET being.
A certain kind of elephant was favoured in India. Some kind of wild duck has grey feathers.
 As a general conclusion, we can say that: There are “objects” (e.g. Tom, this chair, the best
boxer in Thailand, etc.) which are recognized as such (by natural languages). Also, there are “kinds”
(which is not to say “sets” of objects: they are “individuals” that are not bound in space – and, at the
same time, are continuous in time, e.g. The wild duck is rarer nowadays. The American blacks seem
to have improved their social standards. The African dog is a carnivorous animal. Man was born a
sinner. Men are sinners by their nature. Dogs are said to be friendly. These kind-designating
expressions are the same for all mass nouns (e. g. wine, butter, oil, salt, iron, silver), as well.
 Pluralia Tantum Nouns: A “plurale tantum”18 is a noun which only has (or usually has)
the plural form. There are several classes of such nouns; they designate:
(1) Illnesses and diseases (physical or mental derangements), e.g. chills, creeps (to give
someone the creeps (informal) means “to induce a feeling of revulsion or fear in someone”), dismals
(the dismals (archaic, informal) means “low spirits: a fit of the dismals”), hysterics, fidgets (usually,
the form is in the plural, fidgets “a state of mental or physical restlessness or uneasiness: a
marketing person full of nervous energy and fidgets”), measles, mumps, rickets, shivers (the shivers
means “a spell or an attack of trembling, typically as a result of fear or horror: a look that gave him
the shivers”), sullens (the sullens (archaic) means “a sulky or depressed mood”), sulks ( “a period of
gloomy and bad-tempered silence stemming from annoyance and resentment: she was in a fit of the
sulks”), tantrums (“uncontrolled outburst of anger and frustration, typically in a young child”),
thrills (thrills and spills means “the excitement of dangerous sports or entertainments, as
experienced by spectators”), etc. They have singular agreement with the verb, singular pro-nouns;
no quantifiers; individualization is possible, e.g. Several series of sulks, a long fit of dismals /
sullens. They have no articles or cardinals. e.g. Measles is not a very serious disease; it occurs in
very young children.
(2) Names of sciences and other disciplines of study, e.g. aesthetics, acoustics, bionics,
dynamics, economics, electronics, linguistics, mathematics, optics, physics, phonetics, politics,
tactics.
They behave like the mass terms (compare electronics and logic, botany, etc.). They have
singular verb agreement; singular pronouns; if the verb is in the plural, the mass noun is
contextually changed into a general term designating “kinds of N”; no a(n) article if re-categorized
(form a mass term to a general term, as mentioned above); there is a change in point of determiners
and quantifiers, e.g. Do aesthetics harm a man’s scientific background? Politics were no good in that
place. Statistics show that cancer can be cured. Statistics is a discipline that can be of great help to
the industry.
(3) Names of games and similar leisure pastimes, e.g. billiards, checkers, draughts, marbles
(treated as sing.) “a game in which small balls of coloured glass or similar material, used as toys, are
rolled along the ground”), ninepins, skittles, darts. They have mass nouns behaviour (compare
billiards and snooker); they imply singular verb agreement, singular anaphoric pronouns; they have
no articles, quantifiers or cardinals: e.g. Billiards, which is an easy game, is played by two persons.
Ninepins requires no muscular strength. (News is also a noun belonging to these three classes, e.g.
Ill news travels fast).
Note the semantic distinction between: domino (historical “a loose cloak, worn with a mask
for the upper part of the face at masquerades”) and dominoes (treated as sing.) “the game played
with 28 small oblong pieces, marked with 0–6 pips in each half, in which they are laid down to form
a line, each player in turn trying to find and lay down a domino with a value matched by that of a
piece at either end of the line already formed”), and marble (“a hard crystalline metamorphic form
of limestone, typically white with mottlings or streaks of colour, which is capable of taking a polish
and is used in sculpture and architecture”) and marbles (“[treated as SING.] a game in which small
balls of coloured glass or similar material are rolled along the ground”).
(4) Names of instruments (formed of two parts), e.g. compasses, chains, fetters (usually
fetters) “a chain or manacle used to restrain a prisoner, typically placed around the ankles: he lay
bound with fetters of iron”), irons, scales (usually, scales) “an instrument for weighing, originally a
simple balance (a pair of scales), but now usually a device with an electronic or other internal
weighing mechanism”), spectacles, scissors, shears (shears (also a pair of shears) “a cutting
instrument in which two blades move past each other, like scissors but typically larger, e.g. garden
shears”), pliers (pliers (also a pair of pliers) “pincers with parallel, flat, and typically serrated
surfaces, used chiefly for gripping small objects or bending wire”), pincers (usually, pincers) (also a
pair of pincers) “a tool made of two pieces of metal bearing blunt concave jaws that are arranged
like the blades of scissors, used for gripping and pulling things”), tweezers (also a pair of tweezers)
“a small instrument like a pair of pincers for plucking out hairs and picking up small objects”),

18
The plural form of the (Latin) term Plurale tantum is Pluralia tantum.
tongs, nutcrackers, bellows (also treated as singular: “1. a device with an air bag that emits a stream
of air when squeezed. 2. (also a pair of bellows) a kind with two handles used for blowing air at a
fire”), binoculars, etc. These nouns have countable properties; semantically, they divide their
reference. They are general terms. To be individualized, they take the (special) quantifier a pair of,
e.g. The boys took a large pair of shears. Will you give me your (eye)glasses / spectacles?
Some of them can occur with the singular form, e.g. scale, bellow. On the other hand,
compasses (compasses or a pair of compasses: “an instrument for drawing circles and arcs and
measuring distances between points, consisting of two arms linked by a movable joint, one arm
ending in a point and the other usually carrying a pencil or pen.”) is semantically opposed to
compass (“an instrument containing a magnetized pointer which shows the direction of magnetic
north and bearings from it”). Cf. also iron and irons.
(5) Names of certain articles of dress (also typically formed of two symmetrical parts), e.g.
breeches, drawers, knickers, knee-shorts, pantaloons, pyjamas, overalls, tights, trousers, trunks,
jeans, tails, etc. Like the terms in class (4), these nouns are general terms, e.g. The old man was
wearing blue trunks. He did not need that pair of worn-out overalls.
(6) Names of parts of the (human or animal) body (generally making up pairs), e.g. bowels,
entrails, eyelashes, thews, gums, lungs, loins, buttocks, tits, whiskers, sinews, etc. They trigger plural
agreement with the verb; they divide their reference; semantically, they are general terms. e.g. Tom
grew a tremendous pair of red whiskers. The lungs of some birds are never eaten.
(7) A miscellaneous group, including: dregs, lees, husks, grits, sediments. They have plural
agreement, yet they do not divide their reference, e.g. There were husks in John’s corn.
(8) A class which is traditionally added to the “pluralia tantum” category although they are
general terms proper except for the plural form, e.g. belongings, diggings, incomings, lodgings,
savings, surroundings, workings. (Most of them can occur with a singular form as well). When the
plural form is used, there is plural verb agreement. e.g. His belongings were rather poor. There were
the savings of years of economy and thriftiness. To those should be added nouns like: amends,
annals, assizes, auspices, grounds, hustings (“a meeting at which candidates in an election address
potential voters”), which trigger plural agreement and plural anaphoric pronouns, e.g. Amends were
made for that injury. Have the hustings for the parliamentary election begun?
As a conclusion of the systematizing of the [+COUNT] : [–COUNT] opposition, we can
say that the distinction between countables and uncountables is a distinction between nouns that are
quantified in the form “some X”, “a little X” , “much X”, and those which are quantified in the form
“an X” , “one X” , “many X-s”. It seems to be a universal feature of languages. The charts below try
to systematize the respective sets in point of countability; one must notice that, in the first set, the
distinction is mainly overt (supposing the presence of the plural marker); it may be covert, 19 too
(when there is a Ø plural allomorph).
A) [+ COUNT] nouns can occur as different subsets / classes, which can be illustrated by
the following examples of English nouns: 1) cow, crocodile, teacher, boy, thing, morpheme,
classroom, pair, item; 2) barracks, headquarters, general stores, works, news; 3) family, jury, team,
club, corporation, government, majority; 4) dozen, couple, brace, score; 5) deer, fish, carp, trout.
Hence one can see that the countables cover several traditional subclasses. Thus, the nouns under (1)
are “individual nouns; those under (2) have the peculiarity that the singular is identical with the
plural; the lexicon will list them making abstraction of the -s in the singular; the plural allomorph is
thus ; (3) these nouns behave like those under (1), with the peculiarity that the singular can be
construed as a plural; the /+/- SET/ feature accounts for such cases (they are in fact the so-cal led
“collective” nouns); (4) covers alternatives for some of the numerals; their selection of the -s or the
 allomorph follows certain rules: e.g. a couple of friends; a brace of partridge(s); a dozen of
handkerchiefs, a score of ships. Some of these items take a plural morpheme optionally, we can say:
ten couple(s) / pair(s) / dozen(s) / score(s) of… (dozen can also be used without of: two dozen(s of)
eggs). Some other items never take a plural morpheme: brace, span (of horses), yoke (of oxen),
gross.
A similar development can be noticed with nouns designating currency / monetary units,
19
That is to say “not openly acknowledged or displayed”.
e.g. two hundred pound / quid.
The terms in class (5) have a rather unpredictable selection of  or –s as plural allomorphs.20
However, there seems to be a rule according to which  is selected when they are looked on as game
(they are perceived as possible food, cf. beef, pork, mutton, veal, etc. rather than as living creatures –
viz. cow, pig, sheep, calf, etc.). Compare also with such Romanian expressions as “A început
vînătoarea la urs / cerb”, “A început pescuitul la crap / păstrăv”, etc.
B) [–COUNT] nouns can be classified in subsets illustrated by the nouns below: 1) snow,
steel, mutton, pie; 2) beauty, the beautiful, literature, childhood, materialism; 3) nature, heaven,
hell; 4) Mary, Dick; 5) the sun / the Sun, the moon / the Moon; 6) mathematics, bionics, electronics;
7) chess, badminton, tennis; 8) measles, mumps, rickets; 9) (the) police, cattle, poultry, gentry,
vermin, youth; 10) the rich, the bourgeoisie, the military; 11) scissors, pincers, pliers, compasses,
suspenders, flannels, blue-jeans; 12) bowels, entrails, guts, sinews, whiskers; 13) information,
advice, news; 14) remains, dregs, proceeds, savings. So, there are two kinds of uncountables: (a)
“singular” uncountables (classes: l, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 13); (b) “plural” uncountables (classes: 6, 8,
11, 12, 14). They are – as seen from the angle of the traditional classification – respectively: 1)
“mass” (i.e. concrete mass) nouns; 3) abstract nouns conceived as unique; 4) proper nouns; 5)
proper name equivalents.
All these can be considered regular uncountables (since they imply a singular verb / singular
agreement); they are opposed to classes (9) to (12), the members of which imply plural verbs / plural
agreement (they are “pluralia tantum” nouns). The remaining subclasses include items having an
idiosyncratic behaviour, which has to be specified. From a semantic point of view, there are also
several kinds of uncountability:
 Objects can be countable because: (a) of their semantic nature (undivided reference – so,
they cannot be counted, e.g. salt, oil); (b) they are unique, e.g. Tom Starling, Frank Sinatra, The
Evening Star); or they may denote unique or total concepts, e.g. the beautiful, tennis, logic); (c) they
are already plural (e.g. tongs, see subclasses 11, 12). With these, a “dual” (‘a pair of…’) can be
semantically opposed to a (“bigger”) plural, e.g. Where are (all) the scissors in the house?”
The Countability Squish: The notion of “squish” (see J.R. Rosa, 1972) is related to that
branch of mathematics that deals with “fuzzy sets” (as opposed to discrete sets). 21 Traditional
grammarians used to trace grammatical distinctions in terms of discrete sets / classes / groups: a
certain lexical item was either an adverb or an adjective, which was based on a number of syntactic
properties. The problem of certain “exceptional” elements possessing unpredictable properties not
included in the general theory was a challenge to the neatness and operative / functional power of
such sharp (or “crisp”) distinctions or boundaries. As certain elements have “mixed” properties,
characteristic of dissimilar / different categories / subdivisions, theoretical studies have replaced
the /+/-/ distinction with an // degree distinction. Thus, instead of postulating clear-cut sets of
elements having certain properties, the existence of one single continuum is postulated. The
characteristic properties are ordered alongside that continuum, like a graded scale along which,
when moving, certain properties “freeze” as others come up or / and become operative. The span of
certain lexical items may be in-between cases. The continuum or hierarchy / scale is a squish,
encompassing such in-between cases, unlike the charts of clean-cut, fixed sets, allowing for
miscellaneous elements to be placed in extra sets of exceptional cases (appendices of “bits and
odds”). At the two ends of such a “squish”, the elements (here, the nouns) are well-behaved with
respect to the characteristic feature under analysis (in our case, the mass / count distinction). Let us
consider the following set of representative nouns and analyse their semantic-grammatical
behaviour, as represented by the following morpho-syntactic indices:

20
In linguistics, allomorph means “any of the phonological representations of a single morpheme, for
example, the final (s) and (z) sounds of bets and beds are allomorphs of the English noun-plural morpheme”.
21
The adjective fuzzy means, in computing and logic “of or relating to a form of set theory and logic in which
predicates may have degrees of applicability, rather than simply being true or false; it has important uses in
artificial intelligence and the design of control systems”.
Noun Plural Indivi- Car- Many Few Much Little Plural
concord duation dinals mar-
(a, ker
each)
– – – – – + + –
mud
– – – – – + + –
love
– – – – – + + +
physics
– – – – – – – +
measles
– – – – – – – +
domi-noes
– – – – +
lees + + +
– – – – +
hust-ings + + +
– – + + +
thanks + – –
– – + + +
noodles + –/? –/?
– – + + – – +
lungs +
+ + + – – +
scissors + –
+ + + – – +
scales + –
+ + + + + – – +
alms
+ + + + + – – +
gallows
+ + + + + – – –
sheep
+ + + + + – – –
girl
+ + + + + – – –
book

THE CATEGORY OF GENDER

Gender is a highly controversial problem in linguistics, and all the more so in English
grammar. In spite of that, nearly all Indo-European languages (usually) distinguish three genders:
masculine, feminine and neuter, reflecting the traditional belief – that grammarians took over from
cultural, archetypal sources (v. the panist tradition with ancient civilizations) that animacy,
inanimacy, and sex are notions having their counterparts / correspondents in the words and notions
of natural languages. Thence, the traditional division of NOMINA into the three above-mentioned
gender classes (some grammarians mention four, and even seven classes for English with a high
diversity of criteria, although there are grammarians who do not recognize this nominal category for
English). There are certain criteria starting from which one can establish a correspondence between
animacy and sex and the sub-classes of NOMINA – although this is not the only criterion for a
gender classification: there are languages in which some other criteria function as a basis for
dividing nomina into gender classes, e.g. shape, size, colour, texture etc. In some languages, the
gender criteria act according to the respective singular and plural forms (e.g. in Swahili, an African
language in which there are six such prefixes, so the number of gender classes is six). In other
languages, some other “natural” concepts, e.g. animacy, humaneness, abstractness, etc. may function
as criteria of gender classification.
The most important distinction operating within the group of the Indo-European languages
is that between (highly) inflected languages and those languages having but few inflectional
markers. Most languages having a full-fledged system of inflections seem to be more likely to adopt
coherent criteria (e.g. humaneness, sex, size, colour) in point of gender marking. It is true that there
may arise numerous inconsistencies (and exceptions) between the “natural” and the “grammatical”
gender; in older phrases of the evolution of the Indo-European languages, a more “natural” bias
must have been the rule in point of gender – thence, a number of peculiarities / idiosyncrasies
occurred in languages like ancient Greek or Latin (e.g. Lat. malus “apple-tree”, cerasus “cherry-
tree”, prunus “plum-tree”, etc. were considered to be feminine, just like femina, silva, casa, in spite
of their belonging to the second, predominantly masculine, declension – cf. porcus, lupus). In most
(inflectional) contemporary Indo-European languages (e.g. German) the criteria governing the
masculine / feminine gender of the inanimate nouns are highly arbitrary (and hence unpredictable
for a foreigner): German der Morgen / Mittag / Abend vs. die Nacht; French le jour vs. la nuit; la
dent vs. le front; Romanian dinte – mână – picior – talpă. Furthermore, the grammarians’ assertion
that natural and grammatical gender do not correspond is fully provable through instances such as
French sentinelle, Romanian sentinelă (see also: calfă, catană, ordonanţă, iudă, lepădătură, etc.), or
French un épouvantail, un souillon, mon chou, Romanian un băboi.
Semantically, there are terms that can be differentiated, on the plane of content, according to
sex. Only “live” objects have sex. English semantics will thus distinguish between entities which
can, and those which cannot have sex. The latter will in their turn distinguish between male and
female, which is exactly the common meaning of the grammatical forms making up the category of
gender (viz. a classification of entities on the basis of their biological nature, especially their sex).
The extent to which the semantic distinctions corresponding to reality are doubled by grammatical
evidence in English (and the formal markers that justify the postulation of gender as a category of
English grammar) is one of the foundations of the differentiation that traditional grammarians draw
between “grammatical” and “natural” gender. The extent to which certain markers (endings,
substitutability by certain pronouns) correspond to sex oppositions in reality will account for the
respective languages having natural gender. If the above correspondence does not exist (the marker
has no correspondence in reality), the gender in the respective language is “grammatical”; the
gender endings are consequently said to be purely arbitrary, as will also be (syntactic) co-
occurrence with certain forms.
Expressing gender features: (1) [+/–HUMAN] The semantic opposition that every
(English) speaker seems to conceive between entities such as: man, pupil, Peter and rabbit, desk,
thing respectively, an opposition based upon the division of the world into humans (i.e. human
speakers) and everything else, is the distinction between human and non-human, i.e. [+/–HUMAN].
On the syntactic level, it corresponds to the opposition between nouns that are obligatorily
substitutable by he / she vs. nouns substitutable (not obligatorily, though) by it. The [+/–HUMAN]
feature can be thus said to be a syntactic feature to the extent to which substitutability demonstrates
it has syntactic relevance.
An important point to be made here would be the degree of interest the speaker shows in
expressing / perceiving the [+HUMAN] gender opposition in linguistic terms; it is a well-known
fact that humans take a lot more interest in fellow-human beings than in objects belonging to the
non-human world (lifeless or animal objects). The same attitude extending to members of the animal
kind could be understandable within certain limits, although it may intrigue (e.g. “Is the
hippopotamus a he or a she?”) The reverse is also true: over-using it may show lack of interest /
consideration (especially when it comes to pet animals, whose masters may be offended or vexed,
even shocked when asked, “How old is it?”). It is all the more offending when the referent is a
baby / infant / child.
 Another way to manifest the human // non-human opposition is substitutability by relative
pronouns – compare: who [+HUMAN], e.g. The man, who had just entered the reception hall, is not
a student. The man, whom we always admired unconditionally, was our boss. As opposed to which
[–HUMAN], e.g. The cow, which was now grazing, was almost a member of the family. The house,
which had been recently whitewashed, was a nice little thing. That thing, which had never happened
before, astonished them. The genitive form whose, which stands for both human and non-human,
neutralizes the opposition, e.g. The man, whose horse you admired, is Roger Brown. The cow,
whose horns were rather long, was reddish. The book, whose title you read yesterday, was a new
novel by Sam White. The same goes for the restrictive relative pronouns, e.g. The man, whom
everybody knows here, is Mr. Stan Smith. It will be true and useful to add that careful grammarians
and experts in the field of English usage recommend the use of the phrase (the…) of which instead
of whose (…), e.g. The house, the walls of which had not been repainted recently, was a ghastly
sight; instead of The house, whose walls had not been repainted recently, was a ghastly sight.
There is another neutralization, that of the restrictive relative pronoun that, e.g. The man
that kicked you was a real brute. Cf. The horse that kicked you… The same pattern as the non-
restrictive relative pronouns is observed by the relative-interrogative pronouns: who [+HUMAN];
what [–HUMAN].
Going back to the “traditional classifications”, we shall conclude that “neuter” nouns have
the feature [–HUMAN], while “masculine” and “feminine” nouns have the feature [+HUMAN],
although the boundary between humans and animals is not fixed. So [+HUMAN] nouns are either
“masculine” or “feminine”, and [–HUMAN] nouns are neuter. (2) [+/–ANIMATE] In some cases,
the syntactic plane reflects the distinction between animates and non-animates instead of that
between humans and non-humans. It means that the [+ANIMATE] feature will characterize nouns
substituted by he / she, whereas [–ANIMATE] will characterize nouns substitutable by it. In the
cases in which substitutability by he / she does not operate (“things” whose sex is impossible to
detect, e.g. insects, or unknown / ignored, e.g. baby, infant, etc.), interest / relevance is a matter in
point. Thus, if he and she are used instead of it, there is a high probability that the entities (viz.
animals) referred to are big / important animals, or also animals who have some relationship to man
(i.e. a fairly close relationship, for economic, affective or other reasons). It can be shown statistically
that the most important such principle is affectivity: an English speaker would hardly call his / her
pet animal, e.g. his / her favourite cat / dog / horse / crocodile etc., it; (e.g. Look at it! Isn’t it a
darling!). In point of syntax (see “substitutability”), the same behaviour of the relative-interrogative
pronouns is to be noticed: Who can be used for [+ANIMATE], [–HUMAN] nouns, e.g. Who has
eaten the fish on the table? (with reference to a cat!). The use of genitive markers (the ’s genitive vs.
the of genitive) is consistent with the opposition [+ANIMATE] : [–ANIMATE]:
 The ’s genitive marker is used with [+ANIMATE] nouns, e.g. Mary’s books, The Pilgrim’s
Progress;  The of genitive marker (usually) occurs with [–ANIMATE] nouns, e.g. the corner of the
room, the hands of the clock, The voice of America. Therefore, the systematic syntactic oppositions
marking the semantic oppositive features [+ANIMATE] and [–ANIMATE] make it a syntactic
feature.
(3) [+/–MALE]: This semantic opposition is underlined by the distinction drawn between
sex categories in reality. It is expressed on the syntactic plane by the opposition of the masculine /
feminine personal pronouns in the third person, singular (he / she). The oppositions already
established include this pair, irrespective of their elements being [+/–HUMAN], or [±ANIMATE].
The he / she opposition is neutralized in different ways for humans and animates.
a) [±HUMAN] nouns will neutralize the he / she opposition. The remaining term – he – will
express the meaning of the members of the previous pair (she / he), which is to say that he is used as
a substitute for human referents whose sex is unknown or lacking interest for the speaker, e.g.
student, teacher, friend, scientist, etc. These kind of nouns are called epicene22. There are some
exceptions, though: baby / child / infant / brat, etc. b) [+ANIMATE], [–HUMAN] nouns will

22
In grammar, the term epicene ['episi:n] denotes: (1) “a noun that may refer to a male or a female, such as
teacher as opposed to businessman or shepherd” (2) in Latin, Greek, etc. “a noun that retains the same
grammatical gender regardless of the sex of the referent”.
neutralize the he / she opposition through it (possibly also he, but very rarely as she), when we don’t
(intend, or want to) know the sex of an animal, e.g. The zebra was fanning its tail. It had a thick
black mane, too.
Generally speaking, there are various possibilities of neutralizing the above opposition,
ranging from positive / negative specifications of the (distinct) semantic feature to optional and
obligatory specifications. Thus, depending on the context, there can be the following subclasses,
according to the [+/–MALE] feature: [+MALE] nouns, e.g. man, boy, son, father; [–MALE]
nouns, e.g. woman, girl, daughter, mother;
[+/–MALE] nouns, e.g. sheep, cat, dog;
[OMALE] nouns, e.g. teacher, friend, student, attendant;
Consequently, the [+MALE] and [–MALE] features correspond to the masculine / feminine
distinction; those nouns having the feature [–MALE] will be “feminine” nouns; the [+MALE] nouns
correspond to “masculine” nouns; the [OMALE] nouns correspond to the “common” gender.
(4) There is an additional feature that can be possibly related to the various gender
distinctions: [+/–YOUNG]. There are noun paradigms that isolate a certain member (possibly,
certain members) in keeping with this feature, e.g. the noun boy is characterised as [+YOUNG] vs.
man, which is /–YOUNG/; or, girl vs. woman, lamb vs. sheep, calf vs. cow / bull. There are quite a
few members of the [+ANIMATE] nouns (possibly [+HUMAN], too) that have specialized
morphological markers for this semantic distinction, e.g. the suffixes -ling, -let, -ster. They often
have specific (diminutival, hypocoristic, 23 pejorative and other) connotations, e.g. suckling,
duckling, weakling (“a person or animal that is physically weak and frail; an ineffectual or cowardly
person”), piglet, starlet (informal “a young actress with aspirations to become a star”), youngster.
A subclassification of English nouns according to gender features
The classification below was proposed by the American linguist Noam Chomsky. It includes
not only the [+/–ANIMATE], [±HUMAN], [±MALE], [±YOUNG] distinctions, but also number
distinctions.

COMMON
+ –

COUNT ANIM
+ – + –

ANIM ABSTRACT HUMAN

+ – + – + –

HUMAN book virtue dirt John Fido

+ – Egypt

boy dog
Such a classification should not be understood as giving (hierarchic) precedence to certain
subclasses over others; there can be a similar classification as follows:
COUNT
+ –

HUMAN ABSTRACT
+ – + –

boy ANIM virtue dirt

+ –

23
Hypocorism means: (1) “a pet name, especially one using a diminutive affix, e.g. Sally is a hypocorism for
Sarah”; (2) “another word for euphemism.” The correponding adjective is hypocoristic.
 dog book
So, the [±MALE], etc. features can also operate in a different arrangement, as the
[±COUNT], [±HUMAN], [±ANIMATE] are not strictly ordered, so various cross-classifications
can be made. Although there are no hard and fast rules as to the semantic / syntactic parallelism,
the above oppositions are expressed both on the semantic and the syntactic planes. The syntactic
plane evinces a fluctuating manifestation of the [±HUMAN] feature, competing with the
[±ANIMATE] feature.
Marking gender (Gender Markers): Gender oppositions in English have a single
systematic way of expression (marking), i.e. substitution, a syntactic device. Occasionally, gender
marking can be done through specialized morphemes (i.e. a morphological way in the traditional
meaning, dealing with bound morphemes, or lexical proper – when free morphemes account for
gender distinction marking). The vast majority of the gender distinctions are of a lexical nature.
A. Paradigmatic distinctions: 1. Morphological markers: The [±ANIMATE] and
[±HUMAN] distinctions have no specific morphological markers, and neither does the distinction
[±MALE] for the whole of the existing paradigms. The small number of cases that do manifest that
gender distinction (the most important for the bulk of today’s Indo-European languages, at least) in
English appertain to either derivational morphology or lexis proper (i.e. the lexicon). The case in
point is that of a relatively small number of: (a) derivational morphemes; (b) specialized free
morphemes.
(a) As mentioned before, the derivational morphemes English uses to realize the [+MALE]
: [–MALE] distinction are for the most part morphemes deriving feminine nouns from masculine
nouns, according to the rule:
N [+MALE]+ derivational morpheme  N [–MALE]. The feminine counterpart in each
pair will be marked by morphemes such as: -ess, -ette, -ine, -(tr)ix, -a, as in: actress, enchantress,
governess, Jewess, lawyeress, manageress, marchioness, poetess, waitress, heroine, czarina /
tsarina / tzarina, undergraduate, sultana, administratrix, etc. There are, however, few cases in
which it is the [+MALE] noun that is derived from a [–MALE/ noun, e.g. widow [–MALE],
corresponding to the derived form widower [+MALE].
The markers of the [+/–YOUNG] opposition are still rare, e.g. piglet, duckling, gosling.
Some of the above suffixes are not always consistent in point of derivative meaning; some of them
(e.g. -ette, -let, -ling) can also have a diminutive sense (as in: kitchenette, booklet, starlet, owlet,
foundling, starveling), to which is sometimes added a derogatory (i.e. “contemptible” or
“unimportant”) meaning, e.g. hireling, princeling, weakling. Still other cases carry (stylistic)
connotations that can be ascribed to their being used in certain (specialized) contexts; as said
before, some of these may also point to the fact that, in such cases as authoress, Negress, Jewess,
the gender opposition is seen as unnecessary, minimizing, possibly derogatory or indelicate. When
stylistic needs go against the necessary amount of information in point of gender distinction to be
conveyed by the speaker (for instance, when that information is absolutely indispensable in order
to avoid the risk of possible ambiguity), paraphrases should be used, e.g. a Jewish woman, a
negro / coloured / African-American woman, etc. Like a number of agent derivational suffixes in
Romanian, e.g. -giu, in geamgiu, zarzavagiu, bragagiu, mangalagiu, but also in mahalagiu,
damblagiu, fustangiu, pomanagiu, scandalagiu, zavragiu, more recently tablagiu), some feminine
suffixes among those which can be still considered as (comparatively) productive have lost their
initial meaning, retaining instead a predominantly derogatory one; they are used – if at all – in an
ever-decreasing number of instances occurring in current use, some of them are jargon words or
even “nonce words”.24
b) The use of free morphemes as markers of gender results in compounds of the type: he-
goat, she-cousin, male student, milk-woman / milkmaid, etc. following the rules: N [±MALE] + N
[±MALE]  N [±MALE]; N [±MALE] + N [ OMALE]  N [±MALE] they are doubled: one for
[+MALE], the other for [–MALE]. The order is more often than not reversed: N [±MALE] + N
[±MALE]  N [+MALE] and N [ OMALE] + N [±MALE]  N [±MALE]. So, there are eight of
them. Here are other such examples: male-being, female-student, female engineer, female doctor;
24
Nonce means “(of a word or expression) coined for one occasion: a nonce word.”
charwoman, charman; cash boy, cash girl; guinea cock, turkey cock, peacock – vs. guinea hen,
turkey hen, peahen; Jack-ass – vs. Jenny-ass (derived from the popular proper names Jack and
Jean, respectively), billy-goat vs. nanny-goat (from the names William and Ann), tom-cat vs.
tabby-cat / tib-cat (from the proper names Thomas and Tabitha).
In a number of -man compounds (e.g. Englishman, chairman, statesman) the two
constituents have fused, so that -man has lost its gender sense. Consequently, the two forms apply
indiscriminately to either male or female beings. With names of nationality, it applies only in the
plural: Frenchmen is opposed to Frenchman, as [OMALE] to [+MALE]. For such compounds as
statesman or chairman, the need is sometimes felt to make gender clear – possibly with a view to
avoiding ambiguity – by adding a supplementary gender marking free morpheme, e.g. Elizabeth
was a woman statestman(?).
The feature [±YOUNG] is rendered through free morphemes, such as calf, e.g. calf
elephant, calf whale; cub, e.g. bear cub, lion cub; pup, e.g. dog / wolf / fox pups.
2. Gender paradigms (other than the morphologically marked paradigms that were
mentioned above – i.e. purely lexical paradigms).
(a) Pronouns: as in other languages, pronominal paradigms, in view of their auxiliary (i.e.
tool-word) status, are the most conservative – including the matter of gender marking. Here are the
gender distinctions according to Otto Jespersen: Animate vs. Inanimate: he, she vs. it, who vs.
what (when interrogative), who vs. which (when relative), somebody, someone vs. something,
anybody, anyone vs. anything, nobody, no one vs. nothing, everybody, everyone vs. everything, all
(with plural agreement), e.g. They are all here. vs. all (with singular agreement), e.g. All is right;
the good (+ plural), e.g. The good may do as they choose. vs. the good (+ sing.), e.g. The good is
oft interred with their bones.
Such distinctions illustrating the features [±HUMAN], [±ANIMATE], [±MALE] are
manifested by the following pronouns: the third person singular pronouns: he, she, it (Nominative
case); him, her, it (Accusative, Dative cases); possessives (possessive pronouns and adjectives):
his, his, her, hers, its, its (own); reflexive and emphatic pronouns: himself, herself, itself, ourselves,
themselves.25
The relative pronouns, the interrogative pronouns and the compound indefinite pronouns
evince gender distinctions organized along the [±HUMAN] : [±ANIMATE] opposition (as seen in
the following list):  relative pronouns: who vs. which;  interrogative pronouns: who vs. what; 
compound indefinite pronouns: somebody / someone vs. something.
(b) Nouns: There is no lexical paradigm in English illustrating the opposition human / non-
human; while the opposition animate / inanimate is illustrated by such lexical pairs in which there
is one member for the name of the (live) animal and the other for the flesh of that animal ( i.e. the
name of the same animal when killed / slain for food), e.g. sheep vs. mutton, pig vs. pork, calf vs.
veal, cow / ox vs. beef, hen / cock vs. chicken, deer vs. venison.
The opposition male vs. female evinces a range of situations, going from one item
covering all possibilities, e.g. fly, trout, crocodile, etc. to a lexical pair covering the opposition
[+MALE] : [–MALE]. I. For the nouns included in the first class, if the need is felt to specify them
as [+/–MALE], special means – i.e. morphological markers – should be used. A special case in
point is that of [+HUMAN] nouns, in which the item used to cover all (= both) gender classes is
known as the “common gender” (also, as the “dual” gender) 26; it is mainly the case of names of
professions, in which the [OMALE] feature is evinced, e.g. doctor, teacher, writer, student, friend.
For special purposes requiring (other than contextual) specifications for gender, they are added free
gender morphemes, e.g. he / she; male / female, etc.
II. A second category presents two lexical items covering the two sex classes: [+MALE] :
[–MALE], e.g. dog vs. bitch; cock / (Amer. English) rooster vs. hen; tailor vs. seamstress; Mister

25
Emphatic means “showing or giving emphasis, expressed, spoken, or done with emphasis; expressing
something forcibly and clearly”. Here the phrase emphatic pronouns translates as pronume de întărire.
26
Dual: (in the grammar of Old English, Old Slavic, Ancient Greek, and certain other languages) denoting a
form of a word, i.e. an inflection, denoting that exactly two referents (e.g. two people or things) are being
referred to (as distinct from singular and plural). Example: Russian dva glaza “two eyes”.
vs. Mistress; Master vs. Miss; lord / gentleman vs. lady; Sir vs. Madam, etc.
In those cases in which the sex opposition is neutralized, the respective member is, in a
majority of cases, the one having the specification [+MALE], e.g. dog, lion, fox etc. A number of
items have no counterpart for the opposing sex category: consequently, they are exclusively
marked either [–MALE], e.g. blonde, brunette, siren, shrew, termagant, virago, minx, hussy, prude,
frump, dowd, dowager; or [+MALE], e.g. fop, dandy, dude, ruffian, etc.
III. Thirdly, there are series of nouns including three items: [+MALE], [–MALE], [+/–
MALE], for [–HUM] nouns, [+MALE], [–MALE], [ OMALE] for [+HUMAN] nouns, e.g. [–
HUMAN], [+/–MALE] parent, deer; [–HUMAN], [+MALE] sire, stag / hart; [–HUMAN], [–
MALE] dam (“the female / feminine parent of an animal, especially a domestic mammal, or
livestock”); roe (or roe deer “a small graceful Eurasian deer, Capreolus capreolus, living in the
woodlands, which lacks a visible tail, and has small antlers and a reddish-brown summer coat that
turns greyish in winter”), doe (“a female deer, especially a female roe, fallow deer, or reindeer  the
female of the hare, rabbit, rat, ferret, or kangaroo”). On the other hand, there are taxonomic
(semantic-grammatical) combinations like: [+HUMAN], [ oMALE], e.g. child; [+HUMAN],
[+MALE], e.g. son, boy; [+HUMAN], [–MALE] e.g. daughter, girl, mother, etc.
IV. There are series including four items. This is the case of the “complete” series in which
the [+YOUNG] feature holds the fourth position, e.g. [+/–/oMALE] sheep, horse; [+MALE] ram,
stallion; [–MALE] ewe, mare; [+YOUNG] lamb, colt. (Some of the items under the heading
[+YOUNG] may be further specified according to sex: e.g. ewe-lamb (Romanian mioriţă); foal: colt
[+MALE] and filly [–MALE]. The five-member distinctions thus obtained would lack consistency,
as other devices than those purely lexical would be used: ewe-lamb.
Very much as in Romanian (see porc – vier – scroafă – godac / purcel), there are other
specialized (odd) items completing the paradigms (e.g. puppy, kitten, kid); some of them are
definitely obsolescent, obsolete or of highly specialized usage (cf. Romanian vătui, tretin, tîrţău, etc.
– which are today virtually forgotten by speakers). The general rule when using such gender
specifications seems to be the degree of interest taken by the speakers in the respective classes of
beings. They should be fairly well known, as being part of their common culture, or cultural
background.
As a conclusion: Gender distinctions in contemporary English are achieved in three ways:
 through specialized bound morphemes (a derivational matter);  through specialized free
morphemes;  through special lexemes. A tendency is notable in contemporary English to diminish
the use of the bound morphemes in marking gender, while enhancing the recurrence of the cases in
which gender is marked through free morphemes. This can be partially accounted for by the
additional meanings (connotations, be they of derogation or disparagement) that some bound
morphemes carry.
B. The Syntagmatic Analysis. The syntagmatic axis displays three possibilities of gender
marking: (1) Substitutability by the personal pronouns he / she / it and the derived forms himself /
herself / itself; (2) substitution by relative, interrogative and indefinite pronouns; (3) co-occurrence
with certain adjectives.
The following situations result: (1) he / who – e.g. man, bachelor, John; (2) she / who –
e.g. woman, maid, Mary; (3) he / she / who – e.g. person, citizen, doctor, parent, friend; (4) it /
which – e.g. cake, box, insect, street, paper; (5) it / he / which – e.g. bull, ram, billy-goat, drake,
horse; (6) it / she / which – e.g. cow, ewe, nanny-goat, car, boat; (7) it / he / she / who / which – e.g.
child, baby, dog, cat.
Some further criteria for an analysis of English Nomina in point of gender systematization
are:
2) Substitution of indefinite pronouns: Some indefinite pronouns (e.g. everybody /
anybody / nobody, everyone, anyone, etc.) make a notional / conceptual concord, being more often
than not replaced by they (and, according to the syntactic context, by their, themselves) rather than
he or she (and him, himself, respectively). Such is the case of coordinated subjects of which one is /
+MALE/ and the other /-MALE/. In the sentence: Either the boy or the girl left || I. his || II. *his or
her || III. their book here, III. may be considered substandard, and yet it is increasingly favoured by
use. Using (?) their is not so much an attempt at making a notional number agreement, as a means of
avoiding gender markers (the ± MALE opposition is neutralized in the plural). Indefinites
characterized by [OMALE] are replaced by they [OMALE], not by he [+MALE]. The reverse is true:
the “common gender” class nouns (i.e. those [+HUM] nouns in which gender distinction is not
generally held as very important, e.g. student, author, teacher) are sometimes specified in the
context through pronominal substitutes, e.g. Every student must return his or her books on time.
3) Co-oocurrence with adjectives: “Common gender” forms are commonly disambiguated
through the use of certain adjectives, specialized for only one sex. They are therefore marked as
such in the lexicon: [+____ N [+MALE], e.g. handsome, effeminate; [+____ N [–MALE], e.g.
buxom, plump, as shown by the following examples: roommate; a handsome roommate; a buxom
roommate. The first is marked as [+MALE], while the second is [–MALE].
Gender and other grammatical categories: Actual usage displays a number of occurrences
in which gender intersects other grammatical categories (e.g. person, number, case); there are still
more occurrences evincing pragmatic relevance in point of gender.
 Gender and number: The intersection of gender and number features leads to the
formation of various nominal patterns (cf. the semantic hierarchy mentioned before). Such is the
case of the reduction / neutralization by the personal pronoun they of the ±MALE opposition as
appearing in the pair he / she, or the ±HUMAN and ±ANIMATE oppositions. Compounds
designating nationality that include the noun -man as an element (e.g. Englishman, Welshman,
Dutchman, Chinaman, etc.) will neutralize the opposition ±MALE. Thus, if Englishman is
[+MALE], Englishmen is [OMALE]. Nouns having the number feature [ OSET] are interpreted as
[+ANIM], [+HUM] when the feature is realized as [+SET], and as [–ANIM], [–HUM], when it is
realized as [–SET]. The proof as to that will be provided through substitution by who / which, e.g.
The committee who were responsible for the main decisions. The group which has made that
decision. (See R. Quirk, p. 861)
Indefinites like everybody having the feature [–SET] are more often than not substituted by
they, which clearly demonstrates that the speaker’s adding the [+PLURAL] feature is only meant to
delete / neutralize the (unnecessary or unwanted) [±MALE] distinction. Consequently, the [+PLUR]
feature in pronouns is a means of neutralizing the gender (viz. “sex”) opposition, e.g. Everybody was
asked to put their biros on the desks. Everybody was asked to put his or her biros on the desks.
 Gender and person: All (hierarchical) distinctions of gender in the English Nomina are
patterned along the lines of the person distinction that separates the “subjective” from the
“objective” persons (viz. the first and second persons vs. the third person) of the pronouns. It is only
the third person that contains gender information (she is opposed to he), while in the first and second
person this opposition is absent (of course, it is pragmatically established, as one is supposed to
know the gender appurtenance / status of the people one is talking to).
Referential gender: Agreement in gender is expressed through the anaphoric use of the
third person singular pronoun (he, she, it). For the [±MALE] opposition, within the [+HUMAN]
category, he and she are used, being thus opposed, in the superordinate [±HUMAN] distinction, to
it. Hierarchically, the gender oppositions in these three personal pronouns are as follows: he / she are
opposed to it, while he is opposed to she (correspondingly, human vs. non-human and male vs.
female). Thus, the normative pattern is defined, e.g. The bridegroom was handsome; he also had a
beautiful moustache. Jane was fretting, yet she admitted she could be even more nervous than that.
The hen had just laid its thousandth egg, etc.; in which cases it is used for non-human beings and for
objects while he / she are used for human beings. She is used for [+FEMALE] nouns, and he for
[+MALE] (or [–FEMALE]) nouns. While this is the general pattern, real usage of the English
language sees a number of deviations.
Deviations from the normative pattern may be explained through the speakers’ attitude
towards the enunciation and the pragmatic content of the utterance. There are two main contexts that
do not observe the above normative pattern (which would entitle us to say that, in broad lines,
gender in English is predictable), allowing for alternative patterns, in which the normal gender
oppositions are reshaped: a) The informal colloquial contexts; b) The literary style.
Informal context tends to use a gender reference pattern tainted by a sense of intimacy (i.e.
involving very close connection), sometimes in utter disregard of the strict grammatical rules (thus,
an intimate pattern). In literary language, it is mainly the use of personification that accounts for the
most numerous cases of infringement to the normative pattern of gender in English.
The Intimate Pattern ia thus delineated by M. Mathiot: “the striking characteristic of the use
of he, she, it in the intimate pattern is the speaker’s disregard for the two attributes that serve as
defining criteria for entities in the normative pattern: 1. human status, and 2. biological sex. In the
normative pattern only non-human entities are referred to as it, only human females as she, and only
human males as he. The intimate pattern ia constituted by three types of usage, in which the rules of
the normative pattern are disregarded: on the one hand, non-human entities are personified, while
human entities are denied their human status. On the other hand, there is a reversal of sex roles:
women are treated as if they were men and referred to as he; men are treated as if they were women
and referred to as she.”
The three types of shifting from the settled rules of normative usage can be thus
summarized: A) Personification (known as “upgrading”); B) Denial of human status (or
“downgrading”); C) Sex-role reversal. The colloquial character of the intimate pattern may be
demonstrated through the fact that its use is restricted to a limited social (and communicational)
area; mainly for group relations – outside the intimate group, the normative pattern will be resumed.
Examples: I’ve finally fixed her up (in reference to a door – intimate pattern); cf. That door was
quite a mess; its look was messy, too (which is the normative pattern).
The “in-mate” usage is rather confusing for non-native speakers, who feel (and are, in fact)
“aliens” to the group thus constituted.
A) Upgrading27 (or personification – Curme speaks of “animating gender”). It is used
whenever entities are regarded (and named) as if they were human. The speaker will use either he or
she. Assimilating an “object” to a human being indicates, generally, a certain amount of positive
involvement on behalf of the speaker as far as the respective entity is concerned; that may range
from mere interest in the object of the personification to a maximum of passionate / highly
affectionate / enthusiastic / rapturous, etc. involvement. There are many instances of entities
belonging to the “objectual” world (as opposed to the actual “human” world) that can be upgraded /
personified. This almost limitless set of possible occurrences may include nearly everything in the
domain of either concrete or abstract “objectual” entities, e.g. houses, doors, pieces of furniture,
prices, teams, balls, formulas, etc., e.g. I’m going to have her (= my car) painted pink one day…;
She (= my van) is a real wonder.
In a number of contexts, personification has a certain professional smack; it can be part of a
professional jargon, e.g. The up train started at 8.30, and we were among her passengers. In much
the same way, professional people will refer to ships, boats, schooners, frigates, sails, steamers,
balloons, aeroplanes, as well as other types of craft, using the personal pronouns she, e.g. We were
just aboard The White Dove when a thunderbolt struck her. There are however counter-examples,
cases when ships and machines are referred to by the personal pronoun he, not she: The tiny
submarine was not fit to fight back, so the Jerries sank him. Plants and animals are also a favourite
subject of personification, e.g. Did you see that gorgeous cauliflower in Ann’s garden? No, I didn’t
see him. The jaguar was ceaselessly prowling in the hope to find something to feed his little ones.
Within the animal subgroup, in which it constitutes the general rule (e.g. The sheep was
grazing with its lamb), there are a number of “subsets” in which upgrading is usually applied, in
parallel with the use of it as in the normative pattern (it is a case of “free variation” of the two
patterns, e.g. The goat was with her two kids. When I saw that shiny big old fly, I felt I could crush
him). Kruisinga makes the following observations: “Some names of animals have a personal gender
without sex being thought of. This traditional personal gender is usually masculine – as for horse,
dog, elephant, lion, buffalo, fish. The traditional feminine gender is for less frequent animals, and
may be due to the usually female sex of the animal, as in the case of cat, perhaps also of parrot.”
Otto Jespersen’s commentary holds that: “The rule given is that he is used in reference to
strong or big animals and she in reference to weak or small animals”, but “the rule is absolutely
wrong (when) whalers speak of whales as she.” e.g. When a trout is beaten, you can call him a grill.

27
Among other things, to upgrade means “to raise (an employee) to a higher grade or rank.”
Can you see the cat scratching her pussy? So you’ve really got a parrot and you could make her
speak. Curme extends the idea of personality to animate non-humans “with reference to little
children and small insects, when the idea of personality is little developed, we usually employ the
neuter person /it/”.
B) Downgrading: Entities whose human status is denied are downgraded. Human status
may be inherent with such entities or else attributed through convention (viz. previous upgrading).
Downgrading is done through the use of the personal pronoun it for human beings of former
“personifications”. Downgrading human status will imply negative involvement from the speaker to
various degrees (i.e. lack of interest in the downgraded entity, annoyance, contempt, up to violent
deprecation). Downgrading human beings denotes (Kruisinga, 1936) that “the person is unknown or
vaguely thought of, or [because] the person is considered a negligible quantity”, e.g. You’re talking
about that Jim fellow? That’s a cousin of the headmaster, isn’t it?
Downgrading expresses contempt (i.e. depersonalization through the disparaging use of it,
alongside that, e.g. “What’s the matter, sweet one? Is it worrying itself over that letter?”; “Would
you like to marry Murray?” “Fancy being owned by that! Fancy seeing it everyday!”); or violent
rage, e.g. “I can understand why they (= the robbers) took my silverware. But why did it take my
piggy bank?”.
There are contexts in which downgrading may alternate with upgrading, e.g. (A man talking
about his car) “Sometimes I feel like junking it, just tossing it. But then she comes back… I just
don’t know what I am going to do with her.”
Literary Style: Literary language generally uses substitution of abstract nouns by he or she.
It seems that a great deal of importance in referring to such names is held by the gender their
counterparts (or likes) have in Latin (or Romance languages such as French and Italian). Thus, for
instance, names of countries are feminine, and rivers are masculine: “Oxford had made her own way
into history”; “France has always known her arch-enemy as being England.” Nouns such as
wisdom, crime, science, life, nature, fate, liberty, church, music are feminine, e.g. “I love wisdom
more than she loves me”; “Music with her silver sound made their hearts rejoice.”
Names of celestial bodies are either masculine or feminine, e.g. Mars, Jupiter, the sun / the
Sun are masculine, just like time, year, etc., while Venus, the moon / the Moon, as well as the
names of the seasons are feminine. Examples: ”Spring with her verdure joined Nature with her
lusty joy”. Some [–ANIMATE] nouns which can be upgraded, to become: (A) Masculine: the sun /
Sun, the ocean, rivers, mountains, time, day, death, anger, love, discord, despair, war, murder,
stone, law, the vices, etc.; (B) Feminine: spring, summer, the soul, virtue, night, darkness, cities,
countries, arts, sciences, liberty, charity, victory, mercy, religion, ships, the earth, the world, the
moon, etc. (see Curme, 1947, p. 213)
Actual usage does not follow even the “norms” / rules of deviant cases: there are numerous
disconcerting examples (thus, in P. Benchley thriller Jaws, the killer shark is referred to by the
author as it, while the characters refer to the animal by he, demonstrating a deeper sense of affective
attitude). Deviations from the “normative pattern” can be considered manifestations of one or
several additional patterns of usage, governed by “intimacy”. The transfer of a range of qualities
characteristic of humans (males or females) to objects is a proof of the anthropocentrism 28 of
language – here, in its “affective” manifestation. The normative-intimate switch is based on certain
relationship existing between the speaker and the respective object or animal; it should be
considered in a pragmatic view; moreover, it is “subjective”. Therefore, in contemporary usage there
are two patterns: a) objective (in keeping with it, gender distinction is predictable), i.e. the standard
pattern; b) the subjective pattern – characterized by unpredictability and capricious gender
distinctions. The “subjective” pattern takes precedence over the standard pattern in many cases
displayed by actual usage.
A cognitive view – based on the cultural significance of the data obtained through mere
grammatical, normative analysis – can be taken in addition to all that was said, mainly with a view
to revealing the specific relevant way in which native speakers conceive the reality (in point of

28
The adjective anthropocentric means “regarding man (and humankind) as the most important and central
element of existence / factor in the universe, especially as opposed to God or animals.”
gender): “The cognitive analysis of the referential gender consists in relating the semantic
oppositions ascertained in the semantical analysis to the nature of the concepts involved” (Mathiot).
Thus, additional insight into the functioning of the normative pattern itself may be provided. The
fact that one term is marked and the other is unmarked in the two main semantic oppositions
HUMAN / NON-HUMAN and MALE / FEMALE shows that, while -1) “human beings are defined
on the basis of a characteristic that non-human entities do not have; -2) women are defined on the
basis of a characteristic that men do not have; with regard to human beings, the entities whose
human status is ambiguous give a clue as to what is the characteristic of humaneness (…) Babies
and young children are a case in point. Even when they are regarded as lovable, they are generally
believed to lack the faculty of reason; this suggests that the latter faculty is the defining
characteristic of humaneness. With regard to women (…) the defining characteristic is the ability to
give birth. Thus the overt opposition human vs. non-human is covertly specified as having reason vs.
lacking reason; the overt opposition female vs. male is covertly specified as able to give birth vs
unable to give birth”. (Mathiot, 1975, p. 11).
Only some uses of gender constitute shared usage (i.e. common to men and women), while
there are others specific either to men or to women. They have sex-differentiated usage (Mathiot:
“There are two uses: 1) those manifesting men’s conception of femaleness and maleness; 2) those
manifesting women’s conception of femaleness and maleness”). The example Mathiot gives in point
of shared usage is the system of appearance evaluation as expressed by the opposition ugly /
beautiful – the first corresponding to he, the second to she – and they imply, respectively, such
attributes as: dainty, delicate, slim, sleek, trim, graceful, elegant, young, clean, white / fair etc., vs.
ungraceful, slow, bulky, large, loud, filthy, etc. A cactus will be he, whereas a violet – she.
Furthermore, differentiated usage (in the intimate pattern) includes such oppositions as competent /
incompetent (respectively, MALE / FEMALE); even female teachers will be designateed by
[+MALE] anaphoric pronouns when competence is meant. 29 On the contrary, women tend to oppose
FEMALE to MALE in the evaluative pair: “mature” vs. “infantile, inconsequential” e.g. “She’ll be
all right” (speaking about a plant). Both patterns (the intimate and the normative ones) have the
same conception of humaneness (i.e. humans are superior to all other entities), while having
different conceptions of femaleness and maleness. The existence of an intimate pattern of usage
demonstrates the speakers’ awareness of sense distinctions within the normative pattern, which is to
say that “grammatical” meanings can become overt, too.

29
In keeping with (comparatively recent) tendencies to come into line with the so-called “politically correct”
speech, even dictionaries try hard to avoid “sex discrimination”, thus having recourse to such distortions of the
(cultural and) grammatical gender-conventions in use for centuries as saying: “self-portrait (noun) a portrait
that an artist produces of themselves”. The same neutralization of the masculine-feminine opposition, when
the generic sense is meant, occurs in: Every teacher must use their best skills in class. (For a more
comprehensive commentary, see the Usage note in The NEW OXFORD Dictionary OF ENGLISH, s.v. they:
“The word they (with its counterparts them, their, and themselves) as a singular pronoun to refer to a person
of unspecified sex has been used since at least the 16 th century. In the late 20 th century, as the traditional use of
he to refer to a person of either sex came under scrutiny on the grounds of sexism, this use of they has become
more common. It is now generally accepted in contexts where it follows an indefinite pronoun such as
anyone, no one, someone, or a person, as in anyone can join if they are a resident and each to their own. In
other contexts, coming after singular nouns, the use of they is now common, though less widely accepted,
especially in formal contexts. Sentences such as ask a friend if they could help are still criticized for being
ungrammatical. Nevertheless, in view of the growing acceptance of they and its obvious practical advantages,
they is used in this dictionary in many cases where he would have been used formerly. See also usage at HE
and SHE”.
 THE CATEGORY OF CASE

There has been a wealth of theoretical literature dealing with the category of case ever since
Panini’s grammar30 evincing a puzzling multitude of points of view, instances and main lines of
investigation.
The notion of Case: Most traditional grammars maintained the view that “case” is
represented by case inflections (i.e. morphemes), related to the declension paradigms displayed by
the Latin, Greek and other (classic) grammars – as morphology itself was considered the very study
of inflections / the inflectional system of a language. The only basis for the existence of case seemed
to be the association of the notion of case with some formal (distinctive) elements (viz. endings).
Jespersen and Curme, among other traditional grammarians, consider that other devices (e.g. word-
order, prepositions, etc.) may be considered as case-markers; there are instances when certain verbs
determine the use of certain cases – cf. “lend the book to me” (Dative) and “ask him a question”
(Accusative [ə'kju:zətiv]). Moreover, case inflections were attributed semantic (grammatical) value,
a (grammatical) “sense”. e.g. the Nominative Case, or the case “designating the actor of an action”:
The boy is writing. The teacher bought a book. The actor-action description entails the semantic
feature of animacy as specific to the Nominative Case. Jespersen considers that, if out of the several
nouns in a sentence only one is animate, the speaker has a tendency to make the latter the subject of
the sentence (he adds the example of many English verbs such as like, which became “personal”
imperspnal, e.g. Middle English “Him likes oysters” – Modern English “He likes oysters”, Cf.
Romanian “Îi plac stridiile”. See also Modern English “If it pleases you”). The actor-action
description is contradicted by numerous instances such as: “That envelope (=Subject, Nominative)
contains money.”
A more complete characterization of the Nominative case would be the enumeration of the
various syntactic functions of the NPs in the nominative:  Subject: Tom / He took the flowers. 
Predicative: That is the question.  Apposition: Dickens, the great writer, was one of the foremost
masters of realism in literature.
The Accusative Case was described as following transitive verbs to designate “the person or
thing on which the action of the verb is performed” (Jespersen), e.g. The king killed the lion. John
burned the wood. Yet, such instances as “John burned his fingers” or “John suffers pain” seem to
contradict the assertion that the noun in the accusative is actually the object of the action expressed
by the verb, while such verbs as hear, see only have an “object” in the accusative in a metaphorical
way (a man can be seen without “suffering” anything like the results of the action of “beating”); “in
such a sentence as He fears the man, the relations are exactly reversed, the grammatical nominative
being really the object affected, while the grammatical accusative represents the cause” (O.
Jespersen, quoting H. Sweet). The meaning of the narrow definition of the Accusative is lost in a
great number of situations, or, better, it varies according to the variety of verbs that command it, e.g.
to run a business / shop vs. to run a / the risk (of…), as in He preferred not to run the risk of
encountering Betty’s sister. Consequently, a discriminative test meant to better establish the value of
the Accusative would be specifying the function of the NPs (viz. direct objects of the VPs they
determine). In English, word order has taken over the function formerly discharged by the
distinctive Accusative inflections / endings. The function of Direct Object that the accusative
displays in English is facilitated by the strict order of nouns in the sentence, owing to the lost
importance of the subject-object morphology in the older stages of English. Thus, the unique object
will come immediately after the verb and its case will be the accusative. Transitive verbs are
commonly followed by nouns in the accusative expressing the result / goal of an activity (e.g. to
build / burn / destroy a house). Many intransitive verbs were accordingly used with (apparent)
Direct Objects indicating the result: to weep tears, to look compassion; a special use of such
apparent transitives is known under the name of “cognate objects / accusatives”, e.g. to live a happy
life, to sing a (merry) song, to smile a terrible smile, to sleep the sleep of the right ones, etc.
30
Panini: Indian grammarian; sources vary as to when he lived, with dates ranging from the 4 th to the 7th
century BC. He is noted as the author of the Eight Lectures, a grammar of Sanskrit.
 When there are two object nouns in a sentence, the case of each one is determined by the
regimen of the governing verb: a double accusative object will be taken by such verbs as ask,
forgive, strike, save, as well as banish, dismiss, excuse, expel. Examples: Ask me no silly questions.
That’ll save me a great deal of trouble. Will you excuse him the question? Quite on the contrary, a
Dative-Accusative noun choice (viz. IO+DO) will be used with such verbs as give, lend, hold, pay,
tell, read, deny, show, hand, throw, wish: Has he paid you the money? Don’t hand me the letter! He
gave me a book. Will you lend me £5? I’ll read you the text. Throw her that ball! I’ve told you that
story. He denies them their legal rights.
Historically, the older case forms of the English personal pronouns were levelled, so that the
distinction between the Accusative and Dative was lost (the old Dative supplanted the Accusative).
Otto Jespersen explained this preference for the Dative forms of the personal pronouns through the
fact that, in most cases, personal pronouns are used as indirect objects vs. the DO / direct object).
The Dative Case: In Modern English, its only markers are the prepositions to and for, to
which is added word order. Jespersen’s observation is that those languages which make a formal
distinction between the Dative and Accusative generally put the person in the Dative and the “thing”
in the Accusative, as an indirect and direct object, respectively (although there are exceptions: the
Dative where there is only one object or both objects in the Accusative). Thus, the difference
between the Dative and Accusative cases is a purely syntactic one (i.e. not a notional / conceptual
one, which is only dependent on the syntactic / idiomatic rules specific to each language, as well as
the regimen of the particular verbs involved.
Historically, the Dative lost its former inflectional marker and began to be superposed to the
Old English instrumental case; while, in a separate direction, the preposition to was used for spatial
direction. In Middle English, the inflectional Dative was superseded by the to-Dative as the locative
sense of the preposition to was becoming abstract (an “abstract locative”): She gave it to Tom. Thus,
the older instrumental, ablative and locative cases were subordinated by the indirect object sense of
the Dative, thanks to its twofold functions: a) “abstract” (corresponding to the indirect object
proper); b) “concrete” (more or less akin to the prepositional object). e.g. (a) I bought a book for
Mary / I bought Mary a book. I gave books to John / I gave John books. (b) She is cold to me (=
towards me). She threw a stone at me. (Cf. He threw me a ball).
Curme distinguishes between “inflectional” prepositions (deprived of the original “concrete”
force and currently used to denote case relations (see a above), and prepositions still owning a
concrete force (for, to) and consequently displaying the function of a prepositional object (see b
above). The Dative case is characteristic of the Indirect Object and the prepositional object
functions. The verbs that take the Dative (vs. the Accusative) case are those involving the idea of
“person”, e.g. The idea came / occurred to me that he was there. What’s happened to you? He
proposed to Jane. She didn’t surrender to him. Moreover, there are nouns and adjectives (in relation
to certain verbs asking for a noun in the accusative) which require a to-Dative nominal form, e.g. He
helps his friends. A help to the needy. He is quite helpful to us.
When modifying the whole of a sentence, the Dative (i.e. the Sentence Dative) is used with
the abstract location meaning of the prepositions to and for. It assumes two varieties: (1) the Dative
of Reference; (2) the Dative of Interest, e.g. (1) To me (the matter does not seem all right). And (2)
Will you read the paper for me? For him I’ll do everything in my power. In similar constructions
(e.g. the for-to infinitive construction) “there is always a logical relation between the dative and the
following infinitive” (Curme), e.g. “For him to do such an easy thing would be trivial. It would be
fun for everyone / for Tom to go surfing.
The Genitive Case was characterized notionally in rather vague terms – cf. the paraphrases
belonging to, belonging together, appertaining to, connected to, connection to, related / relation to,
associated / association with. In Old English, the use of the Genitive case was triggered by a certain
verbal category which required a “genitive object” (cf. similar German patterns, as well as a number
of German or Russian prepositions taking nouns in the Genitive). The Genitive case is currently
used in English only as a marker of noun-noun relations. That type of relation was characterized by
traditional grammarians, using rather the notional / conceptual sense of the nouns involved, as:
a) The Possessive Genitive (the majority of the cases in actual use), according to the idea of
“belonging to the sphere of” (i.e. the determined noun falls within the sphere of the determining
one), e.g. my mother’s hat, the man’s endurance, the pig’s snout, the world’s problems, Newton’s
discoveries, the Smiths’ car, the sun’s rays, the nations’ wealth.
b) The Partitive Genitive. It denotes a part-whole relationship; sometimes, it is hard to
distinguish this category from that of the “possesive genitive”, e.g. Pete’s hands / mouth / eyes, the
mountain’s top, the house’s roof / the roof of the house, the earth’s core, the book’s content / the
content(s) of the book.
c) The Genitive of Origin: The determined-determiner relationship is that of “source /
authorship” (i.e. the determined nouns designate the “source” of the determiner, e.g. the lion’s cubs,
the king’s son, Fielding’s work, nature’s work).
d) The Subjective Genitive: The noun in the genitive designates the performer of the action
expressed by the second (viz. determined) noun, e.g. Henry V’s reign, the plumber’s repairs /
repairing / arrival / departure, Tom’s / his decision.
e) The Objective Genitive: The noun in the genitive denotes the object of the action, e.g. the
children’s education (vs. the parents’ education, which is / might be ambiguous: either a ‘subjective’
or ‘objective’ genitive), the kingdom’s loss, John’s promotion, the country’s progress, Britain’s
advance.
f) The Descriptive Genitive. It is closely related to the ‘possessive genitive’, and it includes:
(1) the genitive of characteristic, e.g. a woman’s voice, a man’s footwear, children’s clothes /
clothing; (2) the genitive of measure, e.g. a five minutes’ walk / talk, today’s newspaper, a month’s
rent, a two days’ beard, the day’s news, a week’s wages, an hour’s delay, etc. Such distinctions as
the above-mentioned one use highly heterogeneous semantic and syntactic criteria; sometimes, the
semantic ones are vague and may overlap.
A more recent subdivision of the classes of usage of the genitive case has established a more
specialized semantic characterization, based on the conceptual notion of ‘abstract relation’. Thus,
the cases previously treated as ‘possessive’, ‘partitive’, ‘descriptive’ or ‘origin genitive’ are
recategorized under the following entries: (1) ‘Picture’ nouns, e.g. Tom’s picture / portrait /
likeness / image / photograph / statue, etc. (2) Nouns expressing kinship and social relations, e.g.
Betty’s mother sister / cousin / husband / acquaintances / friend / archenemy . (3) Nouns expressing
characteristics, e.g. The child’s age / size / health / intelligence / height / weight. The lake’s depth.
The ocean’s temperature. The country’s climate. (4) Nouns expressing part-whole relationships, e.g.
The man’s eyes / arms / lungs. The pig’s tail / snout / hoofs. The book’s jacket / covers / title /
contents. The mountain’s top. The journey’s end.
The semantic relations underlying such conceptual relations as the above-mentioned ones
imply: (1) an original whose depicting is constituted by the other term of the relation (viz. the
determined noun); (2) two ‘objects’ united by a ‘social’ relationship; (3) and (4) parts or
characteristics ‘abstractly located’ as to a given abstract or concrete ‘object’. This non-traditional
division requires a theoretical frame rather different from the older (semantic-syntactic) one. 31
31
As a matter of fact, it is the relational, i.e. grammatical, sense of the preposition that matters when it comes
to discussing the various types, values and meanings of the English genitive. See as an apt illustration of this
issue the respective entry in The NEW OXFORD Dictionary OF ENGLISH: “preposition 1. expressing the
relationship between a part and a whole: * with the word denoting the part functioning as the head of the
phrase: the sleeve of his coat | in the back of the car | the days of the week.* after a number, quantifier, or
partitive noun, with the word denoting the whole functioning as the head of the phrase: nine of the children
came to the show | a series of programmes | [with MASS NOUN] a piece of cake | a lot of money | a cup of tea.
2. expressing the relationship between a scale or measure and a value: an increase of 5% | a height of 10
metres. * expressing an age: a boy of 15. 3. indicating an association between two entities, typically one of
belonging, in which the first is the head of the phrase and the second is something associated with it: the son
of a friend | the government of India | a photograph of the bride | [with a POSSESSIVE] a former colleague of
John’s. * expressing the relationship between an author, artist, or composer and their works collectively: the
plays of Shakespeare | the paintings of Rembrandt. 4. expressing the relationship between a direction and a
point of reference: north of Watford | on the left of the picture. 5. expressing the relationship between a general
category and the thing being specified which belongs to such a category: the city of Prague | the idea of a just
society | the set of all genes. * governed by a noun expressing the fact that a category is vague: this type of
book | the general kind of answer that would satisfy me. 6. expressing the relationship between an abstract
concept having a verb-like meaning and a noun denoting the subject of the underlying verb: the opinion of the
 ‘SYNTACTIC’ VS. ‘CONCRETE’ CASES

Case may be seen either as a purely abstract notion (category), or in a more ‘concrete’
meaning (as dealing with spatial and temporal relations). Traditionally, grammarians hold that the
Nominative, the Genitive and the Accusative are ‘syntactic’ cases, as opposed to the Dative, which
is either a concrete case or a syntactic case (compare: Give books to John and I am going to
London).
This belief, subdividing cases into ‘concrete’ (=local) and ‘syntactic’ is supported by data
coming from the grammar of languages such as Finnish, Hungarian, Old Greek, etc. (for instance,
Finnish has such ‘spatial’ cases as: the inessive, adessive, elative, ablative, allative, illative,
prosecutive, all of which can be roughly translated into English or other Indo-European languages
through nouns preceded by preposition respectively: in, on, out of, from, to, into, through / along /
over). They are opposed to the ‘typical’ syntactic cases, where grammatical regimen lacks
‘locative’ / ‘spatial’ (i.e. ‘concrete’) determinations, viz. the Nominative, Genitive and transitive
cases.
Yet, clear-cut distinctions between the two categories are hard to draw (v. Otto Jespersen:
“In Arian languages,32 the two categories were inextricably mingled from the first. The purely
concrete uses of the old grammatical cases came to be dropped chiefly because prepositions came
into wide use, which indicated the local and other relations with greater precision than the old cases.
The number of the old cases constantly dwindled, especially as more regular word order often
sufficed to indicate the value of a word in a sentence. Thus, both local and syntactic determinations
came to be transmitted by one and the same case: v. Latin ‘Romam ire’ (Accusative-local) – ‘Romam
videre’ (Accusative-object).” Under these circumstances, and starting from the idea that a common
point can account for both uses, grammarians were inclined to establish a more restrictive number of
cases, more general (viz. comprehensive), and also meant to be universal (i.e. applying practically to
all languages), a ‘universal set’ which was to be applied to the particular languages in different
ways. (See, as a very good example, Hjelmslev’s case system, based on three dimensions: (1)
direction (far / near / resting); (2) coherence / incoherence; (3) subjective / objective. They are
viewed as a hierarchy, e.g. the Nominative, when used in a subject NP, is opposed to the predicative
occurrence as ‘far’ vs. ‘close’; French dans is ‘coherent’ as opposed to à côté de, which is
‘incoherent’; the third dimension – that of subjectivity – implies the presence of the ‘spectator’.
Thus ‘He is behind the tree’ is opposed to ‘He is underneath the tree’. Hjelmslev’s system proved
not to be operative enough for the description of particular case systems, although it was referred to
and used by later approaches.)
The fact is that cases (viz. particular cases) cannot be truly compared, when occurring in
different languages. Yet, such a comparison can be made in point of case uses. (See Fillmore: “The
case systems belonging to two different languages may have different numbers of cases and the
nouns of the cases may conceal functional differences, but case uses are comparable”). Case system
– and the notion of ‘case’ itself – were given an entirely different interpretation as considered
through the bias of the new conception of grammar postulating the existence of wide differences
between the morphological, syntactic and semantic levels, respectively (and their respective
applicability). Thus, the concept of ‘case use’ was dealt with by semantics, while case forms was the
province of morphology (= morphological markers); syntax was considered a superordinated level.

directors | the decision of the County Council.* where the second noun denotes the object of the underlying
verb: the murder of two boys | payment of his debts | an admirer of Dickens.* where the head of the phrase is a
predicative adjective: it was kind of you to ask | I am certain of that. 7. indicating the relationship between a
verb and an indirect object: * with a verb expressing a mental state: they must be persuaded of the severity of
the problem | I don’t know of anything that would be suitable. * expressing a cause: he died of cancer.
8. indicating the material or substance constituting something: the house was built of bricks | walls of stone.
9. N. Amer. expressing time in relation to the following hour: it would be just a quarter of three in New York.
32
Here, the adjective Arian / Aryan means “Indo-European”, and the corresponding noun means “a member
of any of the peoples supposedly descended from the Indo-Europeans, especially a speaker of an Iranian or
Indic language in ancient times.”
Fillmore proposed (in 1968) that case uses should be regarded as elementary notions (‘universalia’),
and the case forms should be derived from the former on the basis of particular (grammatical) rules.
‘Case uses’ should be therefore studied at the semantic level: (Fillmore: “the same sorts of semantic
functions could be seen as realized in the form of case endings in one language, as prepositional or
positional constructions in another, or in some quite different way in a third”). Moreover, studies
made, among others, by Jackendoff (1972) showed that the correspondence between grammatical
relations and semantic relations is far from perfect. (“The grammatical relations such as subject or
object do not correspond in any simple fashion to the understood semantic relations; in a) The door
opened. b) Charles opened the door. The door has the same semantic value in (a) and (b), although it
is subject in (a) and object in (b)”). In both (c) and (d), the relation between John and Mary is the
same: c) John bought a book from Mary; d) Mary sold a book to John.
Case Grammar – Case as a Conceptual Notion:
In the traditional grammar’s view, form was the basic element and the various uses to which
they could be put were the ‘content’ filling in those ‘frames’. Much to the contrary, the so-called
‘Case Grammar’ (as proposed by Gruber (1965), Fillmore (1968, 197l), Anderson (197l), Jackendoff
(1972, 1976) tries to take the case uses as a starting point, while the “observable case forms are deri -
vable from them by the rules of the grammar” (Fillmore). Case uses are set against the background
of the (already mentioned) distinctions between case uses and case form – distinctions that are
drawn on separate levels / components of analysis: phonology, syntax, semantics, morphology. Case
is in fact, these linguists say, a matter of semantics. Similarities linking the various levels (the links
existing between case uses and the Syntactic relations – subject, object, etc. of a sentence – or case
uses and case forms: Nominative, Dative, Accusative, etc.) derive from the fact that the information
provided by those different layers of analysis proves a common matter in the functioning of
linguistic communication.
The following general properties are ascribed to the ‘case grammar’ as viewed in semantic
terms: 1) A simple sentence has a sense, which is called a proposition – whose propositional case
(the very sense of the sentence, all other determinations, e.g. negative, interrogative markers, tense,
mood, left aside) is given by a verb associated with NPs having a certain relation to the respective
verb). 2) The number of NPs in relation to the verb (hence, the number of particular cases to be
analysed) depends on our understanding of the notion of process, event, state (i.e. a part of our
knowledge about the world) cf. the aspect – a conceptual relation having to do with the lexical verbs
that are used. 3) The NPs will be thus assigned (conceptual) ‘roles’, belonging to a repertory, roles
which have every chance to be common to all actual languages (e.g. the instigator of a process, the
experiencer of a psychological event, the object undergoing a change (movement, the location of an
event). 4) Accordingly, the verbs occurring in the particular constructions of a certain language will
be arranged / classified in keeping with the possibility they display of evincing the various cases.
Thus, “an irreducible number of cases, by which grammar theory makes its contribution to the
semantic interpretation of a sentence” (Fillmore) are detected; further conditions are to be observed:
“it turns out that this number is small; (…) there are reasonable principles according to which these
role types can be identified (and if) the grammar which incorporates them is superior to those in
which they are not” (ibidem). This conception of the case framework has proved of undeniable
value, both theoretical and explanatory – through its disclosing the links between syntactic and
semantics, on the one hand, and also through offering a semantic and morphological explanation. It
also helps in analysing the lexical structures of either the verb or the NP in re lation, making a
contribution to the latter undrestanding of processes, events and states.
The inventory of (conceptual) cases (as established by Gruber, 1965) is made up of
universal determinations mirroring the ideas we conceive about the situations surrounding us – as to
‘who did it’, ‘who(m) it happened to’, ‘what got changed’, etc. Gruber’s inventory of cases
comprises the following ‘universal case roles’: a) Theme (Th), the case of the NP undergoing a
motion or change, or whose location or position is asserted. b) Location (L), the case of the NP
which expresses the location or place of a process / event / state. c) Goal; d) Source; e) Agent; f)
Experiencer; g) Result, etc. Here is a brief presentation of these conceptual cases:
1. Theme: It is the case of the NP which undergoes a motion or change. It is a part of clause
structure that establishes the subject-matter or viewpoint of the clause; thus, theme is the first major
constituent of a sentence, indicating the subject-matter, usually but not necessarily the subject.
Though theme is typically the subject, it can optionally be other constituents, as in ‘ maths I do like’,
or ‘smitten she is not’. It is true that in English and other Indo-European languages, theme and
subject often coincide, e.g. The teacher is coming. The rock moved away. Sam gave the dictionary
away. Tom bought the car from Ned. (In the more recent Prague linguistics school approach,
‘theme’ is opposed to ‘rheme’,33 a distinction similar to that holding between ‘topic’ 34 and
‘comment’.)
2. Location / Locative: It is the NP that expresses the idea of location of an entity or action.
It occurs with verbs of location, e.g. The old lady was standing under a red bus shelter. The brick
was in the nearest corner. The burglar clung to the window sill. Harry kept three new books on the
left shelf. The fountainpen belonged to Allan. Simon owns that car. NPs that in traditional grammar
are analysed as subjects or objects are reclassified as locatives by Case Grammar, e.g. Glasgow can
be very lonely and depressing. They pounded the pavements. Roundhay Park is the venue for
tonight’s pop concert.
3. Goal: The verbs of action will imply the thematic relations known by the names of Goal
and Source, respectively. Loosely, the entity affected by the action of the verb is the Goal, e.g. The
cat caught a mouse. (The same idea was expressed by means of some other terms, such as ‘patient’
and ‘recipient’). In Case Grammar, Goal refers to the ‘target’ of the verbal action, i.e. the place
towards which an entity moves: Tom moved the rock towards the wall. In a different model of Case
Grammar, ‘Goal’ is opposed to ‘Patient’, e.g. I cut my finger with a rock.
4. Source: In Case Grammar, Source refers to the place from which an entity moves (or
originates). It is virtually always contrasted with Goal. Examples: We walked from the Tower Bridge
to the British Museum. The apple fell from Newton’s tree.
5. Agent (or ‘Agentive’): This case is principally contrasted with ‘Actor’. The typical
function of such NPs is to specify the ‘agent’ or means by which a particular action or
transformation came about. The semantic reading which identifies the NP ascribes / attributes it
volition / will. So, only animates (i.e. [+ANIM] entities) can function as Agents. In active
constructions, English and most other Indo-European languages usually place the agent as the
grammatical subject, e.g. Tom moved the piano. Bob filled the waste into the hole. The young lady
opened the window. Dick heated the soup on the stove. (Compare the last sentence with: The
window broke.).
6. Experiencer: This term is used in later versions of Case Grammar. It designates the
animate entity being affected by the situation (i.e. action or state) expressed by the sentence verb;
examples: The boy heard a bang on the door. Jock likes flowers. The book interests Mary. Jane is
very happy. Diogenes is desperately in love. (The earlier term used by Case Grammar was Dative).
Verbs like to hear and to see agree with the ‘Experiencer’ description, unlike to listen and to look,
which have the semantic feature [+VOLITION].
7. Result: In grammar (very much as in semantics), the term ‘Result’ refers to an element
that expresses the notion of consequence or effect, i.e. the object or being resulting from the event
indicated by the sentence verb, e.g. He is writing a letter. Ronald made a chair. They dug a grave.
The three piglets built a wooden cabin. In later Case Grammar, the term ‘Result’ replaced
‘Factitive’.
8. Instrument: It is the relation designating the inanimate force or object which helps to
bring about / cause the situation expressed by the sentence verb. Examples: They attacked the police
with stones and petrol bombs. Sam broke the door with a pickaxe. The hammer broke the bus
window. A brick injured an old lady. He used a shield to protect himself. Ian opened the door with a
skeleton key. She saw it with her own eyes. As can be seen, the NPs displaying the ‘instrumental’
reading can occur as (syntactic) subjects or objects. ‘Instrumental’ is contrasted with ‘Agentive’.
(Compare with the Instrumental case in several Indo-European languages, including Old English,
33
Rheme is the part of a clause / the constituent of a sentence which gives information about the theme; in
fact, it adds most new information, in addition to what has already been said in the discourse. Opposed to the
theme, the rheme is usually, but not always, associated with the subject. Another term for rheme is focus.
34
In linguistics, topic means “the part of a sentence about which something is said, typically the first major
constituent”.
where the implement – or other inanimate thing – used in performing the action of the verb is / was
designated in a specific way, in most cases by means of specific inflections, e.g. Latin Amore, more,
ore, re probantur amicitiae. “Friendship should be proved through / by (means of) love, behaviour,
appearance, and deeds”).

THE CATEGORY OF DETERMINATION

All natural languages have expressions which achieve the act of pointing out (proper names:
London, Romania, Mary, Johnson; definite descriptions: the rich man, the dog which / that belongs
to Perry, this hat; pronouns: I, you, he, it). The category of determination will study the NPs
containing an article appended to (i.e. determining) a nominal head (a head-Noun). Languages use
the expressions they possess in an indefinite number of situations, in different places, periods of
time, through and about different people, to express different things. The efficiency of languages, as
defined by Barwise and Perry, depends on expressions used by different people, in different spatial-
temporal locations, with different connections to the world around them, which can have different
interpretations, even though they retain the same linguistic meaning. e.g. “I am right, and you are
wrong.” The two interlocutors, saying the same sentence, mean opposite things. There are identical
utterances, identical (semantic) meanings, and yet, different (pragmatic) interpretation, given in the
context.
So, there are expressions that have a constant sense, but get different interpretations when
used in different contexts, by different people at different locations and times. The respective (space,
temporal, etc.) marks will have to be interpreted in the context, e.g. (Kaplan): “I was insulted
yesterday”. (The interpretation depends on who said that and what time). D. Kaplan (On the Logic
of Demonstratives, 1973) first drew the distinction between sense and (contextual) interpretation:
expressions (sentences) like: I am bald; This finger hurts; That is an orangoutang; It is now 7 a.m.;
Move it there, containing “demonstratives” like I, yesterday, this, that, evince a constant linguistic
sense, but they acquire different interpretations each time they are actually used in contexts by
different people at different times and places. Kaplan called the sense “Character” and the
interpretation “Content”, depending on the context. “The interpretation of an expression must be the
product of factors some of which are fixed solely by language, and others which vary with the
expression’s use. The former is the linguistic sense of the expression, the latter its context of use”.
The context should be subdivided into three main factors defining particular occasions of using a
certain expression (Barwise and Perry): 1) Indexical(ity), or discourse situation; 2) (Speaker’s)
Connections; 3) Resource situations.
A brief presentation of the factors that make up the context of use:
1. Deictic Elements or Indexicals: Deixis (< Greek)35 has everything to do withg the notion
of “indicating, pointing, showing”, and the best samples one can consider are the use of demonstra-
tives, the first and second person pronouns, tense, specific time and place adverbs, e.g. now, there,
and other grammatical features in direct relation to the circumstances of utterance. It is the
grammatical pattern of the various items of information that languages provide about the person(s),
place and time of the utterance (which has to take place between two interlocutors (I, you) at a
certain time (see tense, specific temporal adverbs: now, then, yesterday, today, tomorrow), at a
certain place (here, there). They do not name things, but rather localize them, interpreting them

35
Deixis ['daiksis] means “the use or reference of a deictic word, or the function or use of deictic words,
forms, or expressions” (the term was coined in the 20 th century, from Greek, meaning literally “reference”,
from deiknunai “to show”). In logic and linguistics, deictic means “a term / a word or expression whose
meaning is dependent on the context of utterance, i.e. the context in which it is used – such as I, me, you, here,
that one there, now, tomorrow, or next Tuesday. Deictics are also called indexicals (the term was coined in this
sense, early in the 20 th century, by the American philosopher and logician Charles Sanders Peirce, 1839-
1914; a founder of American pragmatism, he argued that the meaning of a belief is to be understood by the
actions and uses to which it gives rise).
according to the specific context analyzed. (E.g. Jackie is biting me; who is biting who(m)? At what
specific (present) time?). Deixis is also known as indexicality. The most representative indexical
elements are the first and second of the personal pronouns, the tenses, the place and time adverbials.
2. Speaker Connections: When using expressions like Johnnie, Monica, the strong man,
that man wearing the red hat, my wife, we pick out an individual from among the others of the same
kind actually existing in the world: these are not unique. A proper name (John, Smith) will be
referred to as a unique entity (specifically localized) through the speaker’s experience (or
knowledge) of the world. In this way, the speaker exploits his connection(s) to the place he / she
holds in the world.
3. Resource Situations: A sentence like “Jackie is biting me” implies deictic (me) and
connective information (I know Jackie the dog). When I don’t know anything about that dog, I may
describe it: “The dog that just now passed the window is biting Molly”, or “John’s dog is biting
Molly”. In this case, we exploit (directly perceivable) facts in order to define other facts. Or let us
take a different example: “The cat needs to go out” (here the definite article can be accounted for, in
the context, by the fact that the family has but one cat.) The respective situations can be exploited in
different ways: (1) They are directly perceived by the speaker. (2) They are the object of some
common knowledge about some part of the word. (3) They are common knowledge about the way
the world is. (4) They are built up by previous discourse.
The linguistic sense of an expression determines its interpretation on a particular occasion of
use. The unchanging sense of an expression (i.e. its dictionary meaning) is the one that every
member of the community has learned and uses repeatedly, but each time he / she uses it, there is an
interpretation done in keeping with the varying circumstances of utterance (Indexicals, (speaker’s or
listener’s) Connections with the world, the respective situation available to the speaker / listener).
Indexicals vs. Definite Descriptions: Both definite description and indexical expressions
exploit a resource situation in order to identify an individual. However, there are notable differences
between them. Indexicals determine deixis: the study of the way languages grammaticalize
information about the persons, place, time of the utterance determines the person’s deixis
(information about the interlocutors (e.g. Who, me?), place (e.g. Move it from there to there! Stay
where you are!); information about the location of the individuals; time deixis (e.g. a notice reading
“Back in 3 hours”), thus resulting two axes: the encoding time and the decoding time. Deixis implies
three grammatical (and logical) categories: person, place, time.
(a) Person: It encodes the ‘roles’ played by the individual concerned by / involved in the act
of utterance – the first person is the speaker’s reference to himself, the second person is the
speaker’s reference to the addressee(s), the third person is the speaker’s reference to persons /
entities that are neither speakers nor addressees in the utterance. Natural languages encode these
roles through pronouns (plus agreement).
(b) Place: The basic distinction holds between proximal (close to the speaker), as opposed
to distal (non-proximal). This distinction is more intricately expressed by many languages (such as
Latin). Other place indexicals are the demonstrative adjectives (this vs. that), the deictic adverbs
(here vs. there).
(c) Time: The temporal points and spaces / stretches are encoded according to the timers of
the utterance, resulting deictic adverbs of time, e.g. now, then, yesterday, this year, the day before
yesterday, etc. plus tense markers. Face-to-face interaction being the primary quality of
communication as done through natural languages, communication has an egocentric organization,
encoded / grammaticalized by deictic elements. Certain (deictic) centers must be established /
assumed in order for the anchoring to be done (these are unmarked points of anchorage – see
Levinson, 1983): I. The central person is the speaker. II. The central time is when the speaker
produces the utterance. III. The central place is the speaker’s location when producing the utterance.
IV. The discourse center is the point at which the speaker is in the production of the utterance ( i.e.
when uttering the discourse analyzed). V. The social center is the speaker’s social status relative to
the addressee’s (or addressees’) own social status / rank. Indexicals exploit resource situations to
identify objects / entities. Those may be: (1) directly perceived (by the speaker and hearer); (2) The
object of some common knowledge about some part of the world; (3) built up by previous discourse.
Hence, the functions carried out by the respective deictic expressions are, accordingly: (1) Gestural;
(2) Symbolic; (3) Anaphoric.36 To these Lakoff adds a fourth function, the emotional function,
based on intimate, close perceiving of the situation.
(See the following examples):  Gestural deictics / functions: This one, not that one, you
blockhead! That is the Niagara Falls over there! He is not the boss, she is! He is only an employee.
 The symbolic function implies knowing certain aspects of the speech situation, which do not come
from direct perception of the situation, e.g. This / that city is really beautiful! (In this case, one has
to know (or be familiar with) the city about which the sentence holds good). You all must join us!
We can’t pay it this week.  The emotional use / function: e.g. This MacEnroe is really terrible (an
inferential relation). There was this guy name Peter. (= colloquial style). How’s that throat? (=
expressing solidarity). He continued working on the blueprints with this wonderful passion. (idem).
Here’s that America again… There are even older tennis players that can be good.  The discourse
function (a rather distinct function from the others; it is ‘non-deictic’). Compare: a. (the gestural
use): This finger hurts. What did you say? b. (the symbolic use): This country isn’t free. Is Harry
there? c. (the discourse use): There we go. Now, this is not what I said. You can never tell what they
may do to you. He did this and that.
The non-deictic / discourse use includes two traditional functions: (I) anaphoric (cased on
previous discourse) and (II) cataphoric (ensuing the following discourse). 37 Those functions are
syntactic, and they are based on the syntagmatic rules of discourse.
Indexicals and Description with the Definite Article: Different uses of the same definite
description (e.g. the day / desk), although having a constant sense, are associated with different
interpretations. (The old man coughed has different interpretations depending on whether the
sentence is in a narrative or is based on a “resource situation” at hand. Traditional grammar
handbooks and studies written in Romania and elsewhere (see L. Leviţchi, I.A. Preda, A. Bădescu,
G. Gălăţeanu, etc.) identify the following values of the definite article: a. (deictic) gestural value; b.
(deictic) symbolic value; c. (non-deictic) discourse values (anaphoric vs. cataphoric). This partition
is based on the different ways in which the respective situation may be available: a. and b. = the
definition is made in the immediate context – physically (or even directly) available to the
interlocutors, while for c., it is done in the linguistic context built up by previous discourse.
The uses associated with the definite article the are parallel to those of the indexical
expressions, and the distinction rests on the same variety of ways in which respective situations are
exploitable. Thus, they are: (I) Perceived by the speaker (and listener), that is the Deictic function;
(II). They are the object of some common knowledge about some part of the world – that is the
Deictic and the Symbolic functions. (III) Common knowledge (or general knowledge) about the way
the world is. (IV) Built up by previous, or ensuing discourse, that is Anaphoric vs. Cataphoric, and is
similar to Connections with the uses of a definite description to a certain interpretation (i.e. unique,
on the basis of the respective situation available).
(I) The Deictic use is based on speaker and hearer perception of the respective situation.
There are several possibilities to do that: both speaker and hearer have a direct perception of the
situation; only the speaker, or only the hearer, have access to it. Compare: Give me the (that / this)
saltcellar. And: Give me a saltcellar. Can you take me to the hospital? and: Can you take me to the
nearest hospital? (II) The Symbolic use: Can you take me to the hospital? vs. Can you take me to
the hospital in the whereabouts / where I work? The staff can bore you sometimes. vs. Our staff can
become bores. Just look at the Prime-Minister. vs. Look at the Prime-Minister in office / our own
Prime-Minister. (There is ambiguity here when, for instance, I am in a foreign country.) … The best
show in the land. Cf. What this country needs is a good Prime-Minister. Have you seen the

36
Anaphora ['næfr] means, in grammar, “the use of a word such as a pronoun that has the same reference
as a word used earlier in the same discourse (a text or conversation), to avoid repetition”. Such words referring
back to previously used words are, for example, the pronouns he, she, it, and they, and the verb do in I like it
and so do they. In the sentence John wrote the essay in the library but Peter did it at home, both did and it are
examples of anaphora. Compare with cataphora, exophoric.
37
Cataphora [k'tæfr] means “the use of a word (such as a pronoun) or phrase that has the same reference
as, or stands for, a word or phrase used subsequently in the same discourse (e.g. the personal pronoun she in
She may be approaching 35, but Joan has no plans to retire from the sport yet)”.
bridegroom? (i.e. in this specific wedding party), etc. (III) “General knowledge” about the world,
e.g. The town clerks should be responsible for that they do. (IV) (a) Anaphoric use (the respective
situation is built by previous discourse; it is based on a (syntactic) relation) between an antecedent
NP and the anaphor (which is an indefinite description), e.g. There was 1 a king who lived in 2 a far-
off land; 1 the king was powerful and rich and 2 the land prosperous. The individuals are introduced
in the domain of the discourse only to be later on identified. Control / propriety 38 of identification is
ensured by precise syntagmatic rules meant to distinguish among the object already introduced.
Remarks: A. There is an associative type of anaphor.39 If one speaks about a book, one can
add something about the author (…is well-known; …has also written…), the content, the covers,
etc. B. There are anaphoric rules based on the syntagmatic rules of discourse development.
Semantically, they are supported by (conceptual) relations like: partonymy (i.e. expressing part-
whole relationships), hyponymy,40 synonymy. e.g. He was driving a car. Suddenly, the car stopped.
John travelled to Paris. The trip was rather long. An old lady and an old man were sitting on the
opposite bench. The couple were deep in recollections. (Other characteristic properties, as illustrated
by sentences like: Look at that car! The colour doesn’t seem to suit our garage.
IV. (b) the Cataphoric use (when the respective situation is built by ensuing discourse – it is
‘pointing forwards’), e.g. The boy (who is breaking the windows) is my cousin. The book (on the
table) is yours. The woman (he loves best) is Michelle. The mechanism of the description is as
follows: a larger set (or domain) is chosen, then restrictive relative clauses are added, resulting an
even more restricted set, having a specific property. “The man (who runs) is my brother”. So, the
head-noun is modified through restriction. A similar instance is the OF-genitive construction: the
modification added to the head-noun results in the location of the object within the set of objects
intended in the resource situation: “The front page of The Guardian”.
Proper Names as Definite Description: A proper name explains a certain way the speaker
is connected to a given / the respective situation, e.g. John, Ronald Atkins, Tobias Dolby. There are
also, in spite of the form they have, proper names which are not ‘pure’, e.g. Mary, Charles Dickens,
July, Monday, Paris, Cambridge, Easter, but in the form of definite description, e.g. the British
Museum, the United States of America, the Royal Exchange. They function as proper names, and are
“institutionalized” names41 establishing their conventions (geography, culture, history, politics). e.g.
the Arctic Ocean, the North Sea, the Strait of Gibraltar, the Far East, the Argentine (Republic), the
Low Countries / the Netherlands, etc.
 Observation: A number of these descriptions have the head-noun in the plural: the
Appalachian Mountains [æp'leitin], (the names of mountains may also assume elliptical forms,
such as: the Alps, the Andes, the Carpathians, the Caucasus), the Flanders, the Hebrides, the West
Indies.
 A large class manifests a strong tendency to be assimilated into the class of the “pure”
proper names, e.g. (the) High Street, (the) Cape Colony, (the) Land’s End (cf. Southend), (the)
Regent’s Park, (the) St. James’s Hall, etc. See also the notions / names of: University, College,
School, Hospital, e.g. the Birmingham University, Oxford University, Queen’s College, St. John’s
Hospital, Watson’s Hospitals, etc. (Poutsma: “the definite article is mostly dropped before the names
of buildings, bridges and other structures: Buckingham Palace, Westminster Abbey, Victoria Station,
St. Paul’s Cathedral, Lincoln’s Inn, Gray’s Inn, Exeter Hall, Magdalen College, Richmond Jail,
Lincoln Bridge, Waterloo Bridge, the Marshalsea Prison”. (Exceptions: the Christian Station, the
Portsmouth Dockyard (v. Chatham dockyard).
38
Propriety means “the quality, condition or state of being right, appropriate or fitting”. In different constexts,
it may also mean “conformity to the prevailing standard of behaviour, speech, etc.”
39
An anaphor is a word or phrase that refers back to an earlier word or phrase (e.g. in My cousin said he was
coming, he is used as an anaphor for my cousin). The word anaphor is a backformation from anaphora.
40
A hyponym ['haipnim] is a word whose meaning is included in that of another word; for instance, spoon is
a hyponym of cutlery; scarlet, vermilion, and crimson are hyponyms of red. Hyponyms are hence words of
more specific meaning than the general or superordinate terms applicable to them. Contrasted with hypernym.
Compare with: superordinate, synonym, antonym.
41
The verb to institutionalize (or to institutionalise) means “to establish (something, typically a practice or
activity) as a convention or norm in an organization or culture; to establish itself as an institution.”
  The definite article is regularly used with names of: hotels, museums, theatres (exception:
the names of hotels with the name of the owner in the genitive / definite article), e.g. the Ritz Hotel,
the Windsor Hotel, the British Museum, the Garrick Theatre, the Savoy (Theatre); but: Claridge’s
Hotel. (Poutsma: “it is almost regularly dropped before the names of streets, squares, parks, proper
names containing such nouns as circus, crescent,42 cross, field(s), garden(s), park, square, street,
terrace, e.g. Oxford Street, Queen’s Street, Finsbury Circus, Charing Cross, Soho Fields, Covent
Garden, Hyde Park, Russell Square, King’s Square, etc.; but: the Thames Embankment.
Conclusions: There is a class of proper names having the form of definite description and
naming: geographical areas, historical and cultural institutions, political and administrative
divisions, etc. Some of these have a clear tendency to drop the definite article, resulting in the form
of ‘pure’ proper names. A different subset has a tendency to drop the head-noun, thus resulting the
form of elliptical definite description (e.g. the Alps). There are ‘pure’ proper names that may occur
with the definite (or indefinite) article, which process transforms these nouns into sortal terms; they
are thus recategorized as terms of countability (they can be used in the plural, they can have
cardinals, e.g. I met two Williams during the trip, and Ann met three Henrys. There are two Bostons,
one in England, the other in America. One cannot say how many Napoleons there were: the
Napoleon we know is the victor of the whole of Europe. The London of the Shakespearean times is
not the London of the 20th century.
Instances like: “The Johnsons didn’t mix with the rest of us” include proper names with the
definite article, i.e. elliptical forms of the definite description of the following type: “The persons in
the family called Johnson”. See also: “I have two Chaucers in my library. Shakespeares are seldom
born. (These are elliptical expressions for “books written by X”, and “people like Y”). At other
times, cultural, historical or other criteria operate in recategorizing common nouns into proper
names, using the definite article: the (Holy) Virgin; the Book; The / Our Saviour (the Lord); the
Devil; the Flood (where a cultural basis can be detected), plus (historical and geographical criteria):
the (English) Channel, the Tower (in London), the Levant, the Mall,43 the Strand,44 the Restoration,
the Inquisition, the Revolution, the Pilgrim Fathers.
Another category of common nouns that are recategorized as proper nouns (equivalents),
without the (overt) marker represented by the definite article are the nouns designating everyday,
routine objects / individuals, recurrent in everyday life, e.g. Mother, Father, brother (optimally,
Fred), sister (optimally, Mary); breakfast, lunch, supper; bed, church, school, home, market,
college, hospital; winter, summer, harvest; morning, night, evening, noon, midnight, dawn,
day(-)break, dusk, sunrise, sunset. They acquire ‘unique’ designation being part of our daily life,
permanently encountered and fully known within our immediate surroundings.
Indefinite Descriptions: Where opposed to the definite descriptions (which ‘pick out’ the
intended member of a certain set, e.g. “the tall man near the door”), the indefinite descriptions
merely refer to “one member, as far as the hearer was concerned an arbitrary member, of an infinite
class of such objects”. (Hawkins). Thus, a domain of description is created that is not pragmatically
defined and not necessarily bound to any specific context, out of which an element is picked out,
e.g. Will you bring me a red ball, please? The object depicted may exist in a shared (by speaker and
hearer) resource situation, e.g. “A member of Parliament has just died”, that is I can locate him. See
also: “Pass me a bucket” (that is, it may be chosen out of an existing / well-known set / a set
presented before). Or: “I was holding a book. A page / some pages fell out” (that is, I know the
former location / origin of that page / those particular pages). But these are only limiting cases,
when the sets of similar objects are pragmatically restricted.
 The general / representative conditions imposed on the use of indefinite descriptions
(description of the form: a + singular Count noun): to point out to an object in a certain speaker-

42
Crescent ['kresnt, 'kreznt] (used as a rule in proper names, and chiefly in British English) means “a street
or terrace of houses forming an arc; a crescent-shaped street, often lined with houses of the same style: Sam
lived in St. Chad’s Crescent.”
43
The Mall is a tree-bordered walk in St. James’s Park, London, so named because it was the site of a pall-
mall alley. A mall is a sheltered walk or promenade.
44
The Strand is a street in West central London, parallel to the Thames; it is famous for its hotels and theatres.
hearer set of objects – that is there must be at least one more such object in that set which is
excluded from reference by the use of the indefinite description: Sid bought a book from Oxfam’s.
He found out that a page (of it) was / some pages were torn. So he went and spoke to an author
about it. (vs. the author of the book). We went to a wedding on Saturday. I was talking to a
bridesmaid about it afterwards. (vs. the bridesmaid, that is the same bridesmaid). (If the object is a
single one, the definite description is used. The indefinite description picks out one element, leaving
aside from reference the rest).
In the case of the plural indefinite with some + plural countable noun, the same behaviour is
valid, e.g. Two students were standing outside the factory gate. Bill kept his eye on them. After a
little while some students (that is, (some other students) came up to Bill / him and asked him his
name. (vs. Ten students were standing outside the factory gate. Bill kept his eye on them. After a
while some students came up to Bill and asked him his name. (Some students are optionally, a group
within the ten students’ group). Or: I’ve seen a new Jaguar. But I didn’t buy it as a / one / two /
some tyre(s) was / were flat. (We do not normally say “…because four tyres were flat).
There is the notion of “exclusiveness” of identification with indefinite NP: (1) a +sing.
count N cannot identify an object that is unique in the shared set; (2) some + plural (count) N cannot
locate objects if there are two objects in question in the shared set (thus resulting that a + sg. count
N can be used only if there is at least one more such object in the shared set which its usage can
exclude): e.g. In a situation where there is only one pen, one cannot say “Pass me a pen”, but “…the
/ that pen”, which means that the speaker expects the hearer(s) to be able to recognize what s/he
speaks about from the description used and the resource situation that is a definite description. The
use of an indefinite description would imply that the audience cannot recognize the intended
object(s).
Definite vs. indefinite Description: (The examples below are given by Hawkins). (a) The /
*a prettiest girl there was Michelle. (b) The / *an only girl there was Michelle. (c) Paul bought the /
*a bigger bag of the two. (d) I remarked the / *a sweet child that Michelle used to be. (e) Fred was
wearing the / *a same jacket I was wearing. (f) The two Eskimos spoke a / *the similar language.
Commentary: NPs point to an object / individual which is uniquely identifiable on the basis of a
given resource situation, e.g. sentence (a) *a prettiest girl is ungrammatical because there cannot be
other subjects satisfying the description made by means of the superlative; (b) only renders the same
note of uniqueness; (c) and (d) there are not other boys or children referrable to; (e) same implies
identity, resulting a definite NP which is different from (f) “similar” implies non-identity (sharing
some properties, not all); the choice is between two objects implying the indefinite description, so
the structure is correct). Let us consider some further examples: So you were at Eton? Then you
must know a chap called Aldous. So you were at Eton? Then you must know *the chap called
Aldous. The use of the definite description in the second sentence is inappropriate: there is no
possibility of locating the individuality of X in the shared situations (there is no such
conventionalized knowledge about Eton and X; moreover, X is not present in the immediate
situation, as the sentence is the opening of a conversation). Also: …You must know a friend of
mine, Professor Smith. You must have seen a colleague of mine with red hair and pumps. But: *You
must know the friend of mine, Professor Smith. *You must have seen the colleague of mine with red
hair and pumps.
The basic value of the indefinite article: The indefinite article picks out an object denoted
by the common noun that is the head of the NP. Definite description is based on sets defined by the
pragmatic context shared by the speaker and hearer. When a shared set is available for both the
speaker and the hearer, the condition must be met that the set should contain more than one object of
the same type, so that reference (by indefinite description) might exclude some objects and pick out
one. The use of the indefinite article is to introduce an individual chosen from the set denoted by the
common noun (i.e. the head of the NP having the indefinite article).
The Epiphoric Value is recognized traditionally: Two large fields lay on a hillside. Across
the field ran a wonderful high hedge. After breakfast, Mother took a brown parcel into her arms.
The parcel was so heavy. Henry was armed with a dagger and a revolver. He held the dagger in his
left hand, and the revolver in his right hand. (These are descriptions used to introduce new
individuals / objects in the discourse, all chosen from the set of objects denoted by the common
nouns. When referred to later on, they take the anaphoric the). When introducing an object /
individual to the hearer, in case the object or individual is from among the speaker-hearer shared
respective situation, the indefinite description is appropriately used if there are other objects /
individuals in the respective shared set that could be identified using the same description: there is a
tall man only if there is other (tall) man who can be referred to (and excluded from) within the set.
 There are cases of ambiguity: (a) “Monica visited a museum every day”. b) “He didn’t
see a misprint”. (Disambiguating will lead to: (a) “…There is a certain museum that Monica visited
every day”. “Every day Monica visits a museum” (i.e. one every day). (b) “There is a misprint that
he didn’t see”. “He saw no (single) misprint(s)”. (The explanations given are in syntactic, semantic,
and pragmatic terms). The first interpretation is specific // the second interpretation is non-specific,
that is the speaker has a particular object in mind // the speaker has not any particular object in mind.
The number and identity of the indefinite objects are determined by the other quantifiers present in
the respective sentence. Some cases of clearly specific interpretation: Bill doesn’t like a book on
flowers which I’ve just given him for his birthday. With the modifier certain: Does he like a certain
book on plants? Or, in the reverse way (pointing to the typically non-specific interpretation): I’ve
never seen a five-legged human; or the paraphrase with single for the non-specific interpretation:
John played a sonata. John played a sonata this morning. He played a certain sonata (this morning).
He played a single sonata (this morning).  In the specific use / reading, the particular referent that
the speaker has in mind has a generally arbitrary identity (for the hearer).  In the non-specific use:
the identity of the included referent is arbitrary (for both speaker and hearer). Which of the potential
referents are included and which excluded is indeterminate.
For the generic NPs, things are much the same as in the case of the non-generic NP, e.g. A
fish likes water. (The reference set is fish (= the set of fish). So, any (random) element picked out
from the set of fish will like water). Compare with: Pass me a book. (A restriction: one within the
reach of the hearer’s hand. There is no such restriction with generic NPs.) Also compare: The
madrigal is polyphonic. The madrigal is popular. A madrigal is polyphonic. *A madrigal is popular.
The concept of ‘popularity’ is relative (to other sorts of music). It is nonsensical to say that a
(random) madrigal is more popular than any (all other) random madrigals.
‘Generic’ and ‘individual’ senses are not different in their essence. A singular indefinite still
involves a reference to one entity as opposed to the whole class, as the very randomness
(arbitrariness of the choice) – the referent can be typical / representative of its kind. In the generic
use / description, both hearer and speaker have not a particular referent in mind. The identity is
random. (cf. A young man has been killed in car accidents daily in recent times). But both non-
generic and generic indefinites include only one object in their reference. Generic indefinites
resemble non-specific indefinites, minus the quantifiers making up the (indefinite, non-specific
context of reference). The lion is numerous in those parts. *A lion is numerous… Lions are
numerous… The emu abounds in this area. *An emu abounds… Emus abound in…
Indefinite NPs cannot denote kind-level expressions or subjects (cf. numerous, rare,
common, be everywhere, abound, scatter) as predicates. They denote an arbitrary element of the set
denoted by the singular common noun. (A lion refers to only one lion, excluding all others from
reference vs. the “class predicate”, e.g. “is extinct (in Europe and Asia)” – Cf. *One lion is
numerous (in these parts).
The properties predicated are arrived at by: (a) deduction, (b) prescription, e.g. (a) A
bachelor is an unmarried / a single man. (b) A Christian is forgiving. Compare with: *A porkchop is
tender. But: A good porkchop is tender. Sentences like (b) imply a set of properties / selections
(otherwise, the element selected is not true Christians); it may depend on social and cultural norms
or the speaker’s point of view.
The existential force of any (*Any Christian is forgiving (?)) will make the prescriptive,
reading impossible. (But: Any true Christian is forgiving).
A(n) + Predicative: This is the only case in which an indefinite NP picks out a kind-level
individual, rather than an individual object, e.g. John is a doctor. Mary is a (good) woman. Azor is a
dog / a dog’s name. (It may be said that the presence of the indefinite article before predicate
nominals is semantically insignificant (Farkas, 1982); it may be a morphological constraint on
singular NPs in English – cf. Romanian: “Ion e medic. Maria e profesoară. Copilul lor e fetiţă”. But:
“Azor este un câine. Bob e un crocodil.” (The first set of examples shows that there is no possibility
for the indefinite article + predicative construction to be used when the predicate nominal designates
a name of profession; only regional uses will permit it: *Gheorghe este un profesor).
In predicate nominal position, indefinite NPs refer to kinds and predicate that the objects
referred to belong to that kind.
The ellipsis of the article (Definite or Indefinite) is a stylistic phenomenon, used in
‘journalese’ (and quick colloquial style, e.g. Dickens’s Pickwick Club characters).
Examples: (a) (In journalese):45 Angry father kills bully son. Campus welcomes Cultural
Gift. (b) (In colloquial speech): Penny for your thoughts! Coach / coffee is ready, Sir! (Cf. other
types of ellipsis: Care for a coffee?).

DETERMINATION REVISITED

Determination is not perspicuous, although it is not a covert grammatical category (like

gender). It has markers, i.e. determiners: articles, demonstrative adjectives, indefinite adjectives.
Their paradigms may be those of the closed-system determiners or the open-system determiners, but
it was studied less than the others nominal categories. Its ‘overtness’ is expressed by the fact that the
markers used are not bound morphemes (inflections), but separate words. Traditional grammars only
describe, for the article, for instance, its uses, leaving aside its / their meaning(s). Their ‘meaning’
can only be studied within the NPs they form. (So, we speak of indefinite / definite nouns, instead of
definite / indefinite articles).
These NPs may have more or less complex structures (compare: Paul, the salt, his three
wives, the last four months, your next blue dress, even many of her numerous questions), thus
including, besides the nominal element (salt, wives, weeks, etc.), and the qualifying adjectives (blue,
numerous), other elements that add specifications to the main nominal element (or the head-noun).
The element on its left is the determiner, whereas the determiner on its right is represented by
complements. (The adjectives and the complements are optional; so, the sequence will appear as:
NP___Det (Adj.) N (Compl.)
The constituency of the determiners46 (proper, that is the Central class): It is a closed class;
its members are mutually exclusive. The subsets recognized traditionally are:  the articles, e.g. a,
the, Ø, some, marked as (Art.);  the demonstrative (adjectives); (Indefinite): this, that, you, marked
as (Dem.);  the possessives, marked as (Pos.) (adjectives again), e.g. my, your, his, her, their;
indefinite (adj.), e.g. some, any, no, every, each, either, neither, much, enough, to which are added
some idiomatic determiners / phrases, e.g. a few, a little, quite a few.  WH- words (interrogative,
relative adjectives), e.g. what(ever), which(ever), where, marked as (Wh).
(Possible) subclassifications: (a) According to their possibilities to take an alternative of
construction: some (of the) boys; each boy / each of the boys, etc. To the OF-construction class are
added determiners that do not belong to the central class: tall, both, half, many, several.
(b) According to their possibilities to co-occur with the noun-classes (which are established
in keeping with their [±COUNT] character, as well as the [±PLURAL] description), there are the
following combinations, illustrated by determiners such as:
I. [COUNT] sing., pl., [MASS]: the, possessives, no, whose, which(ever), what(ever),
some (when stressed, e.g. Some girl! ['sm 'g:l]);
II. [COUNT] pl., [MASS]: Ø (‘the zero article’), some (when unstressed, e.g. Some
people like it. [sm 'pi:pl]), any (unstressed), enough;
III. [COUNT] sing., [MASS]: this, that;
IV. [COUNT] pl.: these, those, many;
45
Journalese means “(Informal, derogatory): a superficial hackneyed / cliché-ridden style of writing regarded
as typical of (or supposedly characteristic of) newspapers and magazines”.
46
The dictionary definition of the term determiner is “a modifying word, such as a number, article, personal
pronoun, that determines (i.e. limits) the meaning of a noun phrase, making clear the kind of reference a noun
or noun phrase / noun group has, for instance a, the, every, or their in ‘their black cat’”.
 V. [COUNT] sing.: a(n), every, each, either, neither;
VI. [MASS]: much. (after Quirk et alii)

Predeterminers and Postdeterminers: The main distinction operated by the determiners’

possibilities of occurrence in the syntagmatic (spoken) string is that between (1) the elements (words
or phrases) that occur before a determiner, typically quantifying the noun phrase, for example both
or a lot of, and (2) the elements that occupy the position following the central class. So, the
Predeterminers represent a position (in the NP) in front of the central class (pre-article), as opposed
to the Postdeterminers, which come after the central class of determiners (in post-article position).
The following subclassification will be fully illustrative and serviceable here:
(a) Predeterminers: 1. closed-system predeterminers: all, both, half;
2. multipliers: double, twice, three / five times, marked as mult;
3. fractions: one third, two fifths, six tenths, marked as frac;
(b) Postdeterminers: 1. closed-system postdeterminers, or postdeterminers proper:
some, selfsame, very, only;
2. ordinals, marked as ord; in their turn, they can be: closed-system ordinals:
other, next, first, last, and: ordinal numbers: second, third, fifth, nineteenth;
3. quantitative postdeterminers, marked as quant; quantifiers can be:
closed-system quantifiers: several, many, few, little;
cardinal numbers: one, two, five, seven;
open-class quantifiers (or quantifier phrases): a bunch of, a handful of,
etc.
(Observations)  The status of all is not clear; all is in predeterminer position, e.g. all the
monkeys; the meaning, however, is generic. It may rank with the indefinites, e.g. any, each, every, or
as a ‘universal’ quantifier.
 There are (frequent) combinations like: his every bone ached, where his is no longer a
determiner, but a predeterminer. Every is a postdeterminer, instead of a determiner.

THE ENGLISH ARTICLE

The article is the main marker of the category of determination in English; it is the
grammatical instrument (i.e. a “tool-word”) that individualizes the “objects” (denoted by the
respective nouns). Individualization, thus achieved, takes support on context (this may be a
situational or linguistic context). In English, the article (the definite article, viz. the, or the indefinite
article a(n), as well as the “zero” occurrence of the article (Ø) appears before the determined noun
(in front position). Phonetically, the article does not bear stress (with few exceptions, e.g. ‘Dante,
the poet’). Functionally, (i.e. from a distributional point of view), the article cannot appear in
isolation; it can only occur with a noun / a noun substitute (selectively), i.e. a ‘Nomen’.
The class of the articles thus represents the most important category of determiners (proper).
In English, the article can achieve: (1) unique, or (2) individual determination, corresponding to the
unique or individual, respectively, reference of the nouns it is placed next to. (1) Unique reference is
defined by the determination of a certain member of a class of “objects”, as in: The girl was
cooking. (i.e. the definite article). (2) Individual reference applies to any member of a class, without
identifying it in a unique say. This case is marked by the use of:  The indefinite article a(n) + sg.
countable nouns: There is a pen on the desk. There is an apple on the tray. Or:  The use of the
‘zero’ article (Ø art.) + pl. countable nouns / uncountable nouns; sometimes, there is also a parallel
structure adding some / any, e.g. There are (some) pens on the desk. There is (some) butter on the
saucer. Is there (any) butter in the fridge?
3. Generic defining / the generic use of the article occurs when a class of elements / ‘objects’
is ascribed a property that is specific to the whole of that class (e.g. Girls always giggle. A horse can
run faster than a dog. The elephant lives in the great plains or in the jungle). There are several ways
of marking the generic use / generic determination: a. The definite article the [, i(:)], e.g. The
cuckoo is reported to be a lazy bird. b. The indefinite article a(n): A cow gives us milk. c. The Ø
article + plural coun(table) nouns, e.g. Lions are just larger cats. With uncountables / Mass nouns,
the Ø article is the rule: Cream is fattening. Perseverance is a great quality. Air is indispensable to
every living creature on the surface of the Earth. (Cf. The air in this room is stuffy.) Uncountable
nouns (Mass nouns, or nouns of material), abstractions (and their equivalents), having no (normal)
plural form, hence having only the singular form, do not take the indefinite article, e.g. No one can
live without hope. Meat was the mainstay of his diet. They can have the definite article, if it is
required by a certain context, e.g. The cream you sent me was delicious. If we have to do with
countable occurrences of uncountable nouns, they can take the definite article, e.g. The wines in
Spain seem to be the best in the world.
Sometimes some may be considered as a plural form / a plural correspondent of the inde-
finite article a(n): There is an orange on the table.  There are some oranges on the table. Yet, this
is not always true (i.e. some + pl. Count. Nouns have a more restricted sense than the phrases of the
type: Ø art.+ pl. Count. nouns): Let us compare “There were some children playing in the garden”
and “There were children playing in the garden”; the scope of the latter determination is – spatially
and temporally – wider than that operated for the first sentence.
Unique reference with proper nouns: Proper nouns are the most representative cases of
unique reference, because they are thought of as the only members of the ‘class’ they denote: Frank,
Italy, the USA, the Rhine, January, England, Mount Everest, Sunday, etc. Their opposition to
common nouns is marked by the following facts:  they are spelt with initial capitals, e.g. Bucharest,
France, Windsor Castle, Lake Windermere; the Arctic, the Ukraine, (the) Lebanon, the Hague, the
Albert Hall;  there is no contrast between these forms accompanied by the definite article and those
having the ‘zero’ article (Ø art.), without there being any opposition proper between them: Austria;
the Netherlands; Piccadilly Circus, Trafalgar Square; the Mall (or, as a proper noun equivalent, the
Earth, the Moon, etc.);  proper nouns having the ‘zero’ article can take an article when special re-
ference is made / there is restriction of their reference, in space or in time, by adding restrictive
relative clauses, attributive qualifications, of qualifications or extensions / qualifications originating
in restrictive relative clauses. e.g. in the Britain of today (cf. Britain); the London he liked (cf.
London); the young Shakespeare (cf. Shakespeare); in the England of Queen Elizabeth (cf.
England). To these should be added those proper nouns which have, through use, lost their character
of uniqueness: viz.: * the proper nouns in the plural: the Smiths, the Joneses; * the proper nouns
which have become common nouns: “Did you see the Rembrandt (= the painting by Rembrandt) at
the Tate?”, “She is driving a new Austin”.  (There are some exceptions though: * Those proper
nouns which are used in direct address / in the ‘vocative’ (sometimes with an emotional tinge), e.g.
Mother, dear Ann; also: good old Jones, poor little Bess; * Those proper nouns which are
accompanied by an adjective (see above) which characteristically define a nickname or a unitary
idea (be it a name or an abstraction), e.g. Saint Joan, young Tom, Little Dorrit, lazy Mary, brave
Robin Hood, Modern Greek, ancient Rome, Old English, Elizabethan England, medi(a)eval Paris,
colloquial French, standard Chinese, etc.

THE DEFINITE ARTICLE

The definite article has the form the, with the following pronunciations: (1) [ðə] before
consonants: the pupil, the girl; /ðə/ before semiconsonants: the university, the union, the one, the
youth, the year; (2) [ði] before vowels: the apple, the ear (also, before an h letter which is not
pronounced: the heir, the hour, the honour). The form [ði:] is only used for emphasis: “Is he the Mr.
Smith?”; “These are the facts”.
One can say that the definite article the accompanies the nouns denoting: A. Certain
‘objects’, known by the recipient of the message, either through their own milieu, or through being
previously mentioned, or by being particularized through determinatives or attributes; B. ‘Objects’
that are thought of as ‘unique’, or are very well known, e.g. “The door is shut, but the windows are
open”; “Put out the lights, will you?”; “Do try to make the child understand that!”; “Thank you for
the treat”; “Speaking of draughts – he was very good at the game”; “On the Continent (= in Europe),
cars drive on the right”; “The world seems not to be a perfect place to live”. C. The definite article
has still the value (and partly the function) of a demonstrative (a fact which can actually be
accounted for through its origin): “I’d be glad to have that at the moment (= this moment)”; “Don’t
do anything of the kind / sort (= that kind / sort)”; “Many happy returns of the day (= this day)!”;
“The people (= those people) there are all so strange…”
Summing it up, the definite article, whose main part is to render ‘uniqueness’ of reference,
discharges the following functions: 1. The deictic function (cf. the indexicals), in which case the
reference of the respective nouns is defined in situational contexts (including the speaker-recipient
couple), e.g. (in a rather restricted situation / context): “Will you close the door?”; “Go to the
window, please”; (in a larger context): “Could you tell me where the hospital is?”; (in an even larger
context, e.g. that of a country / nation): “Did you see the new minister?”; “What’s on the radio
tonight?”; (in a very general context – i.e. the Universe): “The Earth moves round the sun”.
2. The anaphoric function – with nouns having the definite determination by their being
previously mentioned, e.g. “I saw a boy in the street. The boy was running fast (= that boy whom I
saw in the street)”.
3. The cataphoric function – when the definite determination is achieved after the
respective noun, through various extensions (e.g. restrictive relative clauses, or a prepositional
phrase restricted from a relative clause): “The girl who is carrying that big suitcase is Jane’s sister”;
“The man (who is) in the red car is Mr. Brown”.
4. The generic function: The noun is used in its most general sense, as representing a whole
class of similar ‘objects’, e.g. “The wild elephant can be found in some regions of Africa”; “The
tiger may also be a useful animal”.
5. The definite article used with proper nouns: Singular proper nouns do not take the
definite article, as they designate a ‘unique’ specimen (so, nouns like James, Italy, Edinburgh,
Romania are generally referred to as having ‘no article’). Still, there are certain cases when these
proper nouns lose their ‘unique’ character – and thus are entitled to a definite article:  When in a
plural use, e.g. the Smiths;  When they are turned into common nouns, e.g. the chesterfield (“(1) a
large tightly stuffed sofa, with (straight) padded arms and back of the same height, and curved
outwards at the top; (2) a man’s plain, knee-length, straight overcoat, typically with a fly front and a
velvet collar” – named after a 19 th-century Earl of Chesterfield), the Plymouth (“a make of car”); 
When particularized by a qualification (an attribute, a relative clause, an apposition, an appositive
clause), e.g. “The famous Mr. Brown”; “He could hardly recognize the Rome of prewar days”; “The
Jane he married was not the Jane he had known”.  When in the structure of the proper name there
is an adjective or a noun used as an adjective / attribute, as well as an of phrase in postposition, the
definite article is the rule: the United States of America, the Art Gallery, the Houses of Parliament,
the University of Cluj. (In some cases, one of the elements – the nominal head itself – is omitted;
still, the definite article is used, e.g. the (river) Thames, the Danube (river), the Tate (gallery), the
Atlantic (Ocean), the Mediterranean (Sea), the Intercontinental (Hotel).
Classes of proper nouns taking the definite article:
 Plural proper nouns: the Browns, the Netherlands, the Hebrides, the Alps, the Andes, the
Carpathians;
 Geographical names. These may denote: rivers (the Volga, the Tyne); oceans and seas (the
Red Sea, the Pacific (Ocean)); gulfs, bays, capes, deserts (the Persian Gulf, the Cape of Good Hope,
the Sahara); canals and channels (the Suez Canal, the English Channel).
 Remarks: * Those proper nouns having a singular form, e.g. Europe, Wales, Asia Minor,
Great Britain, Eastern Europe, Snowdon, Malta, Northern Ireland, Paris, Piccadilly, South
Kensington, etc. do not take the definite article, with few exceptions: the Argentine (Republic), (but
Argentina), the Congo, the Levant, the Palatinate, the Ruhr, the Sudan, the Transvaal, (the)
Lebanon, (the) Tyrol, (the) Crimea, the Riviera, the Peloponese, the Hague, the Ukraine. * Being in
the plural, the names of the mountainous ranges take the definite article, even if they may have a
singular form: the Carpathians (also: the Atlas, the Caucasus, the Pennine Chain) Yet, the names of
peaks have no definite article: Mount Everest / Everest, Mount Olympus (Exceptions: the Jungfrau,
the St. Bernard and the St. Gothard). * When the nouns cape, lake / loch, mount and port are
immediately followed by a proper or common noun in apposition, they have no article: Cape
Canaveral, Lake Windermere, Loch Lomond, Mount Everest, Port Arthur, Port Said. * Similarly,
when the nouns: bay, head, point, harbour, haven, hill, land, territory are preceded by common or
proper nouns, they do not take the article: Hudson Bay, Lizard Point, Pearl Harbo(u)r, Gilmour Hill,
Tonga Land. * The names of the cardinal points (and of the respective regions) take the definite
article: the east / East, the west / West, the Middle East, the North of France ; the West End (in
London), the East End, etc. (Exception: when used adverbially, showing direction, they do not have
the definite article: “The wind blows south”).
 Names of institutions, such as: hotels and restaurants: the Astoria (Hotel), the Savoy;
Theatre halls, cinema halls, clubs: the National Theatre, the Capitol Cinema;  Museums, libraries:
the British Museum, the National Gallery; the Old Vic (Theatre), (the) Drury Lane (Theatre).
 Names of newspapers: The Times, The Guardian, The Sun, The Mirror, The Independent,
The Morning Star, The Daily Telegraph (unlike the names of magazines, which are not usually used
with a definite article: Newsweek, Life, English Language Teaching Journal.
 Names of ships: The Enterprise, The Moldavia, the SS Titanic; names of planes: the
Concorde.
 Names of well-known buildings, streets, districts, monuments: the Admiralty, the Arch, the
Cenotaph, the Mall, the Mansion House, the Strand, the Tower of London, the Ascot (races), the
Derby. * Exceptions: Pall Mall, Covent Garden, Soho, Belgravia, Mayfair.
 Other remarks: * The proper nouns preceded by titles (academic, aristocratic,
professional, of polite address, etc.) which are immediately followed by the respective name do not
take the definite article: Miss Jones, Doctor Robinson, King Lear, Count Gonzalo, Colonel Brian. *
There are a number of exceptional cases, though: Foreign titles, e.g. the Archduke Franz Ferdinand,
the Caliph Ahmad-al-Jamal; In archaic expressions: the lady Rowena, the lady Anne. * When their
character of uniqueness is lost or when accompanied by qualifications, these proper nouns may have
the definite article: “The colonel inspected the troops”; “The President was re-elected” (But:
“President Nixon addressed the meeting”); “The Misses Brown / the Miss Browns are here”; “The
wise King Solomon”, “the King of Sweden”, “the Prince of Wales” (although, when the of phrase
follows the proper name the title applies to, as an apposition, there is no article: “Charles, Prince of
Wales, is not sure to succeed to the throne”).
Other functions and uses of the definite article: The definite may also precede a cardinal
numeral, turning it into a noun, e.g. the Big Five, the Eleven (= the team); or the ordinal numeral:
the first son, the 12th of April, November the 23rd, the second chapter, the tenth lesson, Richard the
Third. It may also accompany the relative superlative: “He is the strongest of all”; “She is the most
talkative girl I have ever seen”, or it may be used with a comparative form, ascribing to them the
value of the positive or superlative degree: “Cato the Younger”; “He is the bigger of the two”.
The definite article may accompany an adjective to which it lends an abstract meaning (v.
abstractions, nouns designating abstract categories, aesthetic categories, etc.), e.g. the beautiful, the
sublime, the concrete. The same force of substantivization is manifest in those nominal phrases
having as heads an adjective, a participle, an indefinite participle; these act as collective nouns /
group nouns / nouns of multitude; their agreement is generally in the plural, e.g. the English, the
poor, the old, the young, the elder(s), the elderly, the (happy) few, the many, the dead, the dying, the
suffering, the sleeping (but also, when the referent is singular, in the singular: the little, the beloved,
the intended, the accused, the deceased, the elder, etc., e.g. “The blind are always unhappy”).
The definite article may also be used to denote a high degree of notoriety or indisputable
value in the ‘object’ designated by the respective noun: “I think you don’t mean THE Galsworthy (=
the famous Galsworthy)”; “Cotnari is THE wine”; “It’s THE thing at present, isn’t it? (= it is highly
fashionable)”. It is also used with the names of the musical instruments, in conjunction with the verb
to play, e.g. to play the violin / the guitar / the flute / the oboe / the piano / the accordion. The
definite article is also used with nouns denoting parts of the body, after a reflexive pronoun / verbal
construction, e.g. “She hurt herself in the hip”, or when the respective noun is used in a more
general sense, e.g. “You should turn the other cheek every now and then, as a good Christian”. It
occurs in various fixed (or standard) phrases / set phrases / idioms: to put to the test “find out how
useful, strong, or effective someone or something is”, on the whole “taking everything into
consideration / taking all things into account; in general”, in yhe country, on the right / on the left,
on the one hand / on the other hand, on the right / left hand (side…).  When it accompanies an
adjective or an adverb (in the comparative or superlative), the ia an adverb: The more, the merrier!

THE INDEFINITE ARTICLE

The forms of the indefinite article are a and an; the respective pronunciations are: [] (the
‘weak’ form) and [ei] (the ‘strong’ form); an is pronounced [n] (the ‘weak’, or else normal form),
or [n] (i.e. the ‘strong’ or emphatic47 form). A is the rule before consonants and semiconsonants,
and an applies to NP’s beginning with a vowel (it will therefore be the rule with nouns spelt with an
initial h which is not pronounced as well, e.g. heir – an heir, an honest man; in an older
pronunciation, the same an form was the rule before an NP having an h at the initial, and with no
stress on that initial syllable, e.g. an hotel, an historian, an hypothesis, an historical picture, an he-
roic soldier, an habitual greeting, an hysteric laughter). Exception: a Hungarian.
The Indefinite article cannot be used with uncountable nouns, but only with countable nouns
in the singular; the plural occurrences of such nouns (e.g. He is a boy) will have the ‘zero article’ (Ø
art.): They are boys. In a number of set phrases having the sense of ‘a measure’, the indefinite article
may precede a plural noun, e.g. A four months is sufficient to have the work done. We spent a
pleasant three days in the country. They used an incredible three billion dollars’ worth of cement.
(Similarly: He grew another two feet. “A mai crescut doi coţi”).
From a logical(-semantic) point of view, the indefinite article can be said to be used to
indicate the fact that the nouns to which it is applied designate a specimen of a class taken at random
/ an undetermined member of a category / species, e.g. That is a new CD. During the seminar, a
student stood up and asked several interesting questions. A Mr. White is here waiting for you, Sir.
The functions of the indefinite article: 1. The epiphoric function. This is a characteristic
function of the indefinite article, consisting in introducing a notion / an entity which was not
mentioned before / is used for the first time, e.g. There is an orange on the table. I saw a good film
yesterday. The epiphoric function of the indefinite article, besides implying that the respective entity
is unknown to the recipient / listener, may also imply the fact that the speaker does not want to
determine that ‘object / entity (a thing, a person, etc.) in any definite way, but only refers to a
random member of the respective category / class, e.g. “A lady wants to see you”, and: “I saw a cat
under the staircase”, respectively. 2. The numeric function: In this case, the indefinite article has
the value of the cardinal numeral one; it occurs in sequences of singular countable nouns, e.g. “He
bought a tie, an umbrella, two scarves and a kilo of sugar”, or before numerals, thus replacing one,
e.g. a / one hundred, a / one thousand, a / one fifth, a / one fifth, a / one fifth, a / one score (of…), a /
one dozen (of…), a / one gross (of…).48 There are cases when the epiphoric and numeric functions of
the indefinite article overlap / are combined, e.g. “There came a man singing down the road”. 3. The
generic function: When used with singular countable nouns, in order to represent a whole class /
category / species, the indefinite article has a generic function, e.g. “A cow gives us milk”. There is a
slight difference between the definite and the indefinite articles when used generically (compare “A
cow gives milk”, and “The cow gives milk”). When the generic function is conveyed through the
definite article the, the class / species is implied (the whole of the class, seen as a ‘label’), whereas
when it is achieved through a(n), it implies any member of that class / category. (= A cow, no matter
which, can give milk, thus representing the whole of the class / species). 4. Before a predicative
expressed by a singular noun (which functions as a title, or the name of a profession / trade, a
nationality, etc.), e.g. He is a student. I am an Englishman. She is a girl. He was a wine merchant.
She became a teacher. He remained a good Christian. (Remark: When these nouns are ‘unique’ or
47
Emphatic means “showing or giving emphasis, expressed, spoken, or done with emphasis; expressing
something forcibly and clearly”. When you want to underline something, you use an emphatic tone.
48
Gross (PL. same) means “an amount / a unit of quantity equal to twelve dozen; 144: thirty-five gross of tins
of processed milk.”
‘abstract’, they no longer take the article, e.g. “He was elected headmaster” (Cf. He was / became /
remained a headmaster)”, “He had been President of the Union for five years”, “Jones was
manager of the plant”, “They met Miss Smith, daughter of the famous economist” (= here, implying
politeness). Compare also with: “He is / became / remained a student”, “He found / considered Jim
a genius”, and “John turned linguist”, “She acted as interpreter”, “He appointed / made Jim
manager” (= with the use of the Ø article). 5. Various other uses:  The indefinite article is also
used after the phrases the business of…, to get a job as…, the part / role of…, the profession of…,
the trade of…, e.g. “He was acting the part of a judge”, “Sam got a job as a decorator”. (Exceptions:
the office of…, e.g. “She got the office of manager”).  After what and such (in exclamatory
sentences), or without + a singular Count noun: “A seat without a back”, “What an (excellent)
idea!”, “Such a considerate girl!”, “What a big surprise!” (Cf. their corresponding plurals: “What /
Such great ideas!”)  After adjectives qualified by so, as, too, how, however, e.g. “He was not so
good a mathematician as you (are)”, “She got as high a grade as you”, “It is too difficult an exercise
for him”, “How perfect a view!”  Before little and few, conferring them the sense of some and a
number of / several / some (+ plural Count. noun), respectively. (Compare them with little and few,
in the sense of “scarcity / a small number”, e.g. “We had (but) little butter”, “He had (but) few
books”). In fact, both little / few and a little / a few imply the sense of “a small quantity / amount,
extent, or duration of”: the little hope there is left; very little milk. The distinction between the two
phrases is clearly noticeable through their respective stress patterns: a little wìne and lìttle wine,
respectively.  Before the adjectival phrases: and lot of, good many, great many (the last two
expressions, used in the sense of “a large number”, are rather obsolete), e.g. “A good many sailors
were on the docks”, “A good many of us were there”, “A great many apprentices had been tutored by
the foreman”, “They couldn’t see farther than that because there were a lot of trees”.  After many,
quite, rather, followed by a noun in the singular, e.g. “Many a dream has come to your doorstep,
Mona Lisa…”, “He bought quite a nice house”, “She is rather a wonder”.  Remark: The idiom
many a “a large number of” triggers singular agreement, e.g. “Many a good man has been destroyed
by drinking”.  Before a noun preceded by the conjunction as or the phrase no less, e.g. “The player
seemed to be using that tennis rocket as a club”, “He sent her some wild strawberries as a gift”, “I
must appeal to him as a translator”, “As a child, Balzac wanted to become a writer”, “She was no
less a woman than her mother”.  In a large number of common idioms (which have no article in
Romanian): as a reward, at a distance, a long / short time, in a loud / low voice, on a large / small
scale, with a view to, what a pity, it’s a shame, to be in a hurry, to have an appetite, to have an
opportunity, to have a right to, to keep (it) a secret, to make an end of…, to make a fortune, to make
a fire, to make a noise, to make a fuss, to take a seat, to go for a walk / a sail / a drive / a ride , etc. 
In constructions with an emotional tinge of the type: “That rascal of a brother of hers”, “She is an
angel of a woman”, “A shrimp of a man”, “She is a mere chit of a girl”, “What a peach of a shot / a
lass!”, etc.
Cases when the Indefinite Article is not used:  With uncountable nouns. Compare: “This
is a glass”, “This table is made of glass”.  With Count nouns in the plural. Compare: “What a
beautiful watch!”, and: “What beautiful watches!”, “I saw a fine picture”, and “I saw (some) fine
pictures”.  With all those classes of nouns which lack the (normal) possibility of having a plural,
e.g. advice, luggage / (Amer.) baggage, furniture, information, intelligence, knowledge, money,
health, permission, produce ['prdju:s] “things that have been produced or grown, especially by
farming; agricultural products regarded collectively”, work (Rom. “lucru, muncă”), homework,
education, etc. Thence, there can be no such syntagms as: *He bought a fine furniture. *He enjoys a
good health. *He gave me an advice, etc., although phrases and sentences like “His / a considerable
knowledge of antiques”, “Harold received an excellent education at Eton”, and “It would have been
an education to have been in the House of Commons when the Prime Minister spoke” (in the
figurative sense: “an enlightening experience”) are grammatical.  With subjects expressed through
nouns preceded by the adverbs ever or never, e.g. “Never husband was more sympathetic to his
wife”, “If ever author was harder to translate!” (Such instances are stylistically marked as ‘literary’
or ‘formal’).
 Special cases:  Nouns designating parts of the body take the definite article, e.g. “The
hands have five fingers each” (in which case a specimen of a certain class is meant). Compare with
“The lion had a gorgeous head, a fine mane, and the coat an incredible yellow-brownish colour”. 
With the nouns designating diseases, illnesses, derangements, disorders, medical states, etc. both ar-
ticles can occur (yet, the most frequent of the two is the indefinite article), e.g. (1) to catch (a) cold,
to have an appetite / a cold / a cough / a headache / a pain in the back / a pain in the head / a sore
throat / a sore finger / a sore foot / a temperature / a high fever, a touch / an attack of indigestion,
etc. (2) (with the definite or the ‘zero’ article), e.g. to have earache, to have (a / the) toothache, to
have measles / mumps / stomachache / influenza / (the) flu / rheumatism, (the) gout, the hump, (the)
plague, cholera, leprosy, to have / to suffer from the blues / the creeps / the fidgets / the horrors /
rickets, etc.  With names of measures (dimensions, quantity, weight, time, etc.) both the definite
and the indefinite articles are used, implying distributivity / ratio, e.g. “40 p a / the glass of beer”,
”Eggs are 85 p a / the dozen and £ 10 a / the gross”, Running at 200 miles an hour”), to work by the
day, to be paid by the fortnight, once a month, twice a year, etc.  With appositions, any of the three
articles (a, the, Ø) can be used. Yet, the general rule prefers the use of the indefinite article, e.g.
“Eminescu, a poet of great talent, was our finest literary creator”. Contextually or stylistically, the
other two articles still occur, as well, e.g. “The Thames, the river which flows through London, is
one of the longest British rivers”; “The novel was by W. Allen, English critic and theorist”.  With
attributes, the general rule / case indicates the occurence of the Ø article with nouns used
generically, however many attributes (especially adjectives) there may be in the respective NP, e.g.
“Mid-18th century Romantic German literature is fascinating”, “Greek antiquities were Joe’s
passion”, “Modern French fashions in clothes, both feminine and masculine, are authoritative”;
“Man is (supposed to be) an intelligent being”.
The possible exceptions (viz. the use of the definite article the) are due to the selection
operated by further qualifications (relative clauses, etc.), e.g. “The Greek antiquities found in Asia
Minor are most significant and interesting”, “The Cro-Magnon man that palaeontologists imagine
was an early type of modern man, Homo sapiens, who lived in Europe during late Palaeolithic
times, having tall stature, long head, and a relatively large cranial capacity”.  The repetition of the
article: As a rule, when two or more NPs are in succession, being linked by and, there is no
repetition of the article: “A little boy and girl”, “He reads in a slow (and) distinct voice”, “She put
the butter, jam, flour, eggs and salt in front of the new cook”. Repetition of the article is only used
when the speaker wants to emphasize the respective words or phrases / syntagms, e.g. “The
china(ware) she had bought was the best and the most expensive”, or when the two NPs have
different referents (compare “Burns, the poet and ploughman”, and “The poet and the ploughman
can sometimes work together” (= two persons are referred to in this latter case).
The place of the article: The usual / normative position held by the article is prepositive, a
girl, an egg, the boy, the elephant; a car race, the silver medalist. The same goes for the words:
whole (e.g. “The whole park was fragrant with lilacs”, “She had been working for a whole month”),
unlike: all, both, just, quite, when the articles are post-positive, e.g. “All the passengers were
aboard”, “Both (the) parents were there”. Likewise, the adverbials half and double are followed by
articles when expressing measures, e.g. half a dozen eggs, half a litre of beer, half a minute’a si-
lence, half the bottle was filled with wine, double the sum / the amount / the number / the size / the
value. (Yet, when half and double are part of compounds or express a single idea in conjunction with
the following noun, they are preceded by the articles, e.g. “The half-hour has struck”, “He spent a
pleasant half-hour reading”, “The word has a double meaning”, “a / the half-holiday” (Rom. “o
după-amiază liberă; după-amiaza liberă”).
The lack of article: Traditional grammarians refer to three cases of absence / lack of article,
an occurrence which is as relevant as the presence of it. These are, respectively: 1. The omission of
the article; 2. The ‘zero’ article; 3. Nonexistent article.
THE ‘ZERO’ ARTICLE (Ø art.): Significant / relevant absence of the article (having
clearly marked semantic and grammatical values) is known by the name of ‘zero article’ (Ø art.).
These values / cases should be carefully distinguished from either the ellipsis / omission of the
article(s), or the lack / absence of article / nonexistent article. The ‘zero’ article is used with: (a)
Uncountable nouns having a singular form, and denoting mass / material, or abstractions, e.g. “I
don’t have tea in the evening”. See also: coffee, milk, butter, honev, iron, silver, lead, oil, tar, salt,
etc. Instances for abstractions: “He likes (French) literature”. Also: music, love, hatred / hate,
geography, painting, dancing / dance, climbing, surfing, education, assistance, help, health, etc. In
these cases, the Ø article indicates an indefinite / unspecified amount of the respective mass /
substance / material, or the idea of ‘quantity / amount’ in a generic way ( cf. the so-called ‘partitive
article’ in French: “J’ai bu du lait”), e.g. “You can buy sugar, tea, rice, salt, coffee and flour at the
grocer’s”.  Also, when used generically: “Haste makes waste” (proverb); “Light travels faster than
sound”. The fact that such nouns are sometimes preceded by adjectives does not influence the status
of the ‘zero’ article, e.g. “I like boiled milk / hot tea / Colombian coffee / English literature / ancient
history”.  (Exception: When the respective nouns are followed by qualifications that particularize /
restrict their meaning – especially in an N+of+N construction – the definite article will occur: “I like
the (old) literature of the Celts”, “Donald hates the (kind of) literature students are taught at Old
Creek University”). (b) Countable nouns in the plural, having a generic meaning (which actually is
the very characteristic feature of the ‘zero’ article), e.g. “They don’t like travels / long walks /
games”, “She has taken a fancy to speedy cars / china cups / pet dogs”.  Other cases of usage of
the “zero’ article (Ø art.) with common nouns: a) Common nouns having ‘unique’ reference and
denoting: * ‘Institutions’, e.g. (to go to / be at) school / college / university / sea; (to be at / go)
home, (to be in / leave) town, (to be in / go to) bed / hospital (esp. BrE) / class (esp. AmE) / prison.
(Let us compare with: to lie down on the bed, to modernize the hospital, to walk past the school /
prison, to approach the town, etc.); * Means of transportation, e.g. (to travel / come / leave by)
bicycle / boat / bus / car / train / plane / coach. (Compare with: to sit on the bike, to be on the bus,
to sleep in the car, to take the / a train, to be on the plane, to sit in the / a boat ); * The meals of the
day, e.g. (to have / before, at, by, after) breakfast, lunch, dinner, supper, luncheon; “Dinner will be
served at 7.00”. (Compare with: “The breakfast was good”, “She cooked (the) dinner”, “The dinner
they offered us was excellent”). * Parts / moments of the day, e.g. (at, before) dawn / daybreak,
sunrise, sunset, dusk / twilight; (at, around, before) noon, midnight; (at, by) night; (by) day and
night. (Compare with: during the day; admire the sunrise / sunset; see nothing in the dusk; in the
afternoon / evening; wake up in the night; in the daytime) * Seasons: e.g. (in, during) spring,
summer, winter; (Compare with: in the spring / summer(time), etc). * Diseases / derangements /
medical conditions / ailments, e.g. (Ø article +): appendicitis, diabetes, influenza, etc. (But: the
plague, (the) flu, (the) measles, (the) mumps, etc.).
a) In a number of set / fixed phrases and expressions: * Parallel structures, e.g. arm in arm,
hand in hand, day by day, face to face, from dawn to dusk, from morning till (late at) night, from
beginning to end, not for love or money; from left to right, from east to west, etc. (But: “He took her
by the arm”, “Sarah has a book in her hand”, “Read from the beginning of the book to the end of it”,
“Keep to the right”, “He lives in the west”); * Phrases of the type: by mistake, in conclusion, for
money, etc. * (Stylistically) with nouns associated to numerals or the letters of the alphabet, e.g.
page eleven, chapter five, lesson seven, act three, figure b / B / 6, position C / ten, question D, etc.
The (possible) counterparts using the ordinals are nowadays becoming rather infrequent in everyday
use: the eleventh page, the fifth chapter, the seventh lesson, the third act, the sixth figure, the tenth
position, etc.
ELLIPSIS / OMISSION OF THE ARTICLE: Omission or ellipsis of the article (i.e.
leaving it out purposefully) involves stylistic effects (especially conciseness). It is thus different
from the mere generic use of the ‘zero’ article. (Compare: “I like Ø coffee” and “I like the coffee
they make here”, “Take the coffee away!”, “William takes Ø coffee to Ø guests” – in which case the
ellipsis of the article achieves the conciseness required by stage directions in a play).
 Uses: (a) In newspaper headlines (characteristic of the so-called ‘journalese’), e.g. “Serial
killer faces federal court”, “Employees have to obey safety regulations in every field” (Similarly,
ellipsis is used in advertisements, on placards, posters, bills, in telegrams, photograph captions,
headings of charts and tables, schemas, as well as in the scientific style, e.g. “Bombs not wanted
here”, “Action of various electric fields”). (b) In stage directions, e.g. “Old lady goes to settee
right” (meaning “The old lady goes to the settee on the right”). (c) In colloquial speech, e.g. “Car
still out of repair?” (“(Is) the / your car still out of repair?”), “Pity she won’t come” (“It’s a pity she
won’t come”), “Friend of mine told me about it” (“A friend of mine told me…”), “Cigar?” (“A
cigar?”).
PROPER NOUNS AND THE USE OF THE ARTICLE: Proper nouns like John, Bob,
Martha, Smith, Clinton, Chester, Southampton, etc. have a character of ‘uniqueness’, being
uncountable, and so having no (usual / normative) plural. Thence, they will take no article (it is
arguable that this category also includes such common nouns as: autumn, spring, summer, winter,
e.g. “She will go to school in winter” – see the uses of the Ø article, and compare: autumn;
breakfast; Tuesday; June).
Classes of proper nouns taking no article: (a) Names of persons (forenames or surnames),
accompanied by appositions (v. titles) or not, e.g. Stanley, John Smith, Dr. Green, Rev. Jackson, Mr.
and Mrs. Jones, Lord Windermere, Lady Bracknell, Inspector Thomson. This class also incudes
names of the members of the family, which have ‘unique’ reference and are frequently used as
‘vocatives’, e.g. “Father / Daddy / Dad is upstairs”, “Mother / Mummy / Mum is washing”; Uncle,
Aunt(ie), Grandmother, Granny, Grandfather, Grandpa; “Mom! Will you come downstairs?”
(Compare with: “The mother was the fattest in the family”). Similarly, the names of the days of the
week (when used indexically, thus implying time-directed reference ‘uniqueness’: “I’ll see you on
Monday”). (b) Time divisions:  the days of the week, e.g. Monday, Wednesday, Saturday;  the
months of the year: January, May, July, December;  holiday names: Halloween, Thanksgiving Day,
Liberation Day. (c) Geographical names:  continents: Asia, Africa, Europe, America;  countries:
France, Romania, Uganda;  towns and cities: London, Richmond, New York;  lakes: Lake Ontario,
Lake Grasmere, Loch Ness;  mountains / peaks (vs. mountain ranges / chains): Ben Nevis, Mount
Everest.  (Remark: These names do not have an article even when they are preceded or followed
by qualifications, as in: South America, Northern Ireland, Central America, South-Western
Australia, industrial Korea, Muslim China / Tibet, etc. (See also the “zero article above). (d)
Compound proper nouns, having as the second element common nouns, denoting buildings,
streets, bridges, institutions, etc. – e.g. Exeter Abbey, Trinity College Library, Covent Garden,
Oxford Street, Westminster Bridge, Trafalgar Square, Regent Avenue, Charing Cross, Scotland Yard,
etc. (See also above ‘Unique reference with Proper Nouns’).

THE NUMERAL
1. The Cardinal Numeral
The forms of the cardinal numeral in English are:
1 one 2 two 3 three 4 four 5 five 6 six 7 seven 8 eight 9 nine 10 ten; 11 eleven 21 twenty-one 2 two 12 twelve
22 twenty-two 3 three 13 thirteen 23 twenty-threc 4 four 14 fourteen 40 forty 30 thirty 5 five 15 fifteen 50
fifty 6 six 16 sixteen 60 sixty 7 seven 17 seventeen 70 seventy 8 eight 18 eighteen 80 eighty 9 nine 19
nineteen 90 ninety; 100 a (one) hundred; 106 a (one) hundred and seven; 621 six hundred and twenty-one;
1,000 a (one) thousand; 3,749 three thousand seven hundred and forty-five; 11,000,000 a (one) million.
Uses of the cardinal numeral:
The cardinal numeral is used to express a number, a date, the time of the clock, etc. Shorter numerals
are generally expressed in letters: Ten of the crew managed to escape. Longer numerals are usually expressed
in figures: This Chinese philosopher lived some 1,300 years ago.
The numerals hundred and thousand do not take the plural: 400 books - four hundred books; they are
used in the plural when they function as nouns, or when followed by the preposition of: Hundreds have
protested against it. Thousands of people sent her letters. Million may take the plural with the preposition of,
or when no other numeral follows: Millions of people protested against the war, but it was in vain.
When used in the plural, the tens refer to years of life or of a century: This bank was built in the thirties
(i.e. between 1930 and 1939); He was a strong healthy man in his forties (i.e. from 40 to 49).

2. The Ordinal Numeral

The forms of the ordinal numeral in English:
 1st the first 2nd the second 3rd the third 4th the fourth 5th the fifth 6th the sixth 7th the seventh 8th the eighth
9 the ninth 10th the tenth 11th the eleventh 12th the twelfth 13th the thirteenth 14th the fourteenth 15 th the
th

fifteenth 16th the sixteenth 17th the seventeenth 18th the eighteenth 19th the nineteenth 20th the twentieth 21st the
twenty-first 22nd the twenty-second 23rd the twenty-third 30th the thirtieth 40th the fortieth 50th the fiftieth 60th
the sixtieth 70th the seventieth 80th the eightieth 90th the ninetieth; 100th the (one) hundredth; 106th the (one)
hundred and sixth 621st the (one) hundred and twenty-first; 1,000th the (one) thousandth; 1,000,000th the (one)
millionth.
Uses of the ordinal numeral:
The English cardinal numeral shows the order of persons, things, or actions in time and space:
His flat is on the fifth floor. Which is the second largest city in Britain? Richard III (the Third) lived in
the 15th (fifteenth) century. The Second World War started in 1939. The heroine dies in the fifth act.
NOTE: The cardinal numerals are frequently used instead of the ordinal numerals: ACT III (three),
Scene I (one), World War II (two), Lesson 7 (seven), Chapter 12 (twelve), Flat 28 (twenty-eight), etc.

3. The Fractional Numeral

The forms of the fractional numeral:
a) common fractions:
1/2 a (one) half 1/4 a (one) fourth 2/3 two thirds 3/5 three fifths 7 5/6 seven and five sixths
b) decimal fractions:
35.89 thirty-five point eight nine 0.03 (nought) point nought three
Uses of the fractional numeral:
It indicates one or several parts ot a whole: He remained there (for) half an hour / American English a
half hour. The play lasted two and a half hours / two hours and a half. A tenth of the constituency voted for the
new Prime Minister.

4. The Multiplicative Numeral

The forms of the multiplicative numeral
1 x single, once
2 x double / twofold, twice (that amount / the money, etc.)
3 x triple (treble) / threefold, three times (that amount / the money, etc.)
4 x fourfold, four times (that amount / the money, etc.)
10 x.tenfold, ten times (that amount / the money, etc.)
100 x a hundredfold, a hundred times (that amount / the money, etc.)
Uses of the multiplicative numeral:
The multiplicative numeral (used as an adverb or as an adjective) shows the proportion in which a
quantity or a state / an action are present, or are increased:
We have been here only once or twice.
Most goods cost a hundred times what they used to few years ago.
The sum of money must be triple now / three times what it was. The event has a threefold significance.

EXERCISES

I. Read the following numbers; then give their complete written form:
(a) 408; 5,729; 25,100; 721,963; 4,201,953; 22.1
(b) 3; 8; 11; 12; 13; 15; 18; 19; 30; 37; 40; 50; 88; 94; 101; 215; 343; 411; 612; 621, 799; 999; 1,000;
1,001; 2,015; 3,840; 4,008; 5,077; 8,903; 10,008; 11043; 12712; 1,000,000,000.
(c) 0.01; 1.13; 2.19; 3.212; 1/8; 2/3; ¾; 6/9; 7/10; 11/12; 1/20.
(d) 1st; 2nd; 3rd; 5th; 11th; 12th; 22nd; 35th; 48th; 69th; 101st; 103rd; 303rd; 555th; 1,001st; 1,002nd.
(e) 4825 – 3979 = …; 28 : 4 = …; 12512 + 23896 = …; 144 : 12 = …; 3 x 3 = …; 7 x 15 = …; 6 10 = …;
V625 = …
II. Read the following fractions – Model: 1/5 (one fifth);
1/3; 7/8; 9/10; 2/7; 193/4; 69/12; 35/9; 6.08; 0.7; 2.69; 18.259; 3.41; 0.001; 10.64.
III. Read the following dates – Model: 21, June 1994 (the twenty-first of June, nineteen
ninety-four); 2 April 1903 (the second of April, nineteen O [ u] three); 5 August 1800 (the
fifth of August, eighteen hundred); 3 December 1860; 30 May 1701; 28 September 1066; 23
July 1900; 22 February 1918; 1 January 1980; 12 November 1913; 1 December 1918.
IV. Express the time as indicated by the following figures: 0.00; 1.25; 2.15; 3.30; 4.20; 4.45;
23.35; 21.10; 5.20; 19.50; 7.05; 17.32; 3.55; 6.00; 12.00; 13.40; 14.25;
V. Read the following numbers, paying attention to their correct rendering:
(a) Scores – in sports: 0–0; 30–0 (in tennis); 1–1; 3–0; 4–3; 0–0 (in other sports);
(b) Telephones numbers: 216.0438; 758.0060; 844.3773; 1000.788; 0745.334.664;
(c) Room numbers: 003; 012; 202; 111; 122; 344; 412; 038; 300; 313; 1; 513; J28; B26;
K08;
(d) Years: AD 777; 1902; 1849; 1600; 1688; 1944; 1066; 105 BC; 3850 BC; AD 2199; AD
683; 215 BC.
VI. Translate into English: 1. Peste podul acela nu pot trece camioane mai grele de trei tone. 2. Nu cred că
maşina lor rula cu mai mult de 80 km / oră, limita de viteză admisă legal la noi în ţară. 3. Citise mii de pagini
în semestrul acela, nu? 4. Rămâneţi încolonaţi şi intraţi în muzeu doi câte doi! 5. Pentru ce îţi trebuie trei
duzini de cutii de chibrituri? 6. Ţi-am cumpărat un bilet de clasa a doua pentru data de 23 aprilie. 7. Nu e
nevoie să citesc de trei ori lecţia ca să înţeleg esenţialul; cred că dacă o citesc de două ori e de ajuns. 8. Mai
mult de jumătate dinte locuitorii acelei zone trăiesc sub limita sărăciei. 9. Un sfert dintre elevii clasei a V-a C
se îmbolnăviseră de gripă. 10. Numai după ce l-am întîlnit o dată sau de două ori mi-am dat seama cât este de
egoist. 11. Mergeţi la concert săptămânal sau din două în două săptămâni? 12. După grevă, toţi angajaţii se
aşteptau să primească un câştig cel puţin îndoit / dublu. 13. O să-ţi primeşti răsplata întreit, ai să vezi. 14. Se
spune că Nero a fost unul dintre cei mai tiranici împăraţi din istoria omenirii, dar nu putem şti cât de adevărat
este. 15. Numai după ce vei citi toată cartea îţi vei da seama cât de important este capitolul 12 pentru
desfăşurarea acţiunii din partea a doua. 16. Şapte ori doi (este) egal cu 14. 17. 48 împărţit la opt este egal cu
şase. 18. Cinci optimi plus două optimi este egal cu şapte optimi. 19. Nouă la pătrat e egal cu 81. 20. Radical
din 100 este egal cu 10. 21. 85 împărţit la 2 e egal cu 42,5. 22. 3,5 înmulţit cu 4 este egal cu 14, dar şi 1,75
înmulţit cu 8 este egal tot cu 14, nu? 23. Trenul pleacă din Londra la ora 8.22 şi va sosi în Glasgow în jurul
orei 14.25. 24. Ce răspunsuri ai dat la a 11-a întrebare? Dar la a 22-a? 25. După cum bine ştiţi, vacanţa de
iarnă începe anul acesta pe 24 decembrie, dar anul trecut a început pe 21 decembrie. 26. În ce zi a săptămânii
cade 31 martie – într-o marţi sau într-o miercuri?
 REMEMBER, AND PRACTICE WITH, YOUR GRAMMAR

AN ILLUSTRATION OF POLYFUNCTIONALISM / GRAMMATICAL

CONVERSION / THE USE OF WORDS AS DIFFERENT PARTS OF SPEECH
Polyfunc- NOUN ADJECTIVE PRONOUN NUMERAL VERB ADVERB PREPOSI-
tional TION
words:
before „anterior” „înainte” „înainte de”

as * indefinite * of
(such as) comparison
* relative
(obsolete)
but in the phrases: * relative „a „fără”, e.g.
(But me) no („care să nu”) contrazice” the last but
buts „nu mă one
contra-zice”;
ifs and buts
down in the phrases: “coborîtor, „a lăsa jos”, „(în) jos” „în josul…,
the ups and descendent”, e.g. to down mai jos
downs of life e.g. the down tools; „a de…”
“valurile escalator, the doborî”, e.g.
vieţii” down arrow Down the
plane!
O one thing and * indefinite „un, unu(l)”,
ne another „unu(l), una; „o, una”
cineva,
oricine”
since „de atunci „de la…,
încoace” din…”

Up (v. down) „urcător, suitor, „a (se) ridica, „în” „în susul…,

ascendent” a „(se) înălţa” mai sus
de…; pe”

DISTRIBUTION OF THE MEANINGS OF A NUMBER OP

POLYSEMOUS NOUNS IN VARIOUS SEMANTIC – GRAMMATICAL
CLASSES
C = countable (numerabil), CS = countable through special means (prin mijloace
speciale), U = uncountable (nenumerabil)

Classes of IC II CS III U IV U VU VI C
nouns
Animals individual grupul
board scîndură; masă lemn; scîndură întreţinere; consiliu;
de lemn (= material masă; mâncare minister (e.g.
lemnos); carton; the Board of
mâncare Education, the
English Tourist
Board)
brain creier creier (ca inteligenţă
aliment)
Collective definiţie; activitate
Nouns (e.g. descriere;
Parliament, clădire
party)
diamond diamant; piatră diamant (ca
preţioasă; om material)
deosebit
fish specie de peşte peşte (ca
aliment)
fruit (soi / tip de) fructe (ca
fruct aliment) – şi uz
colectiv
good marfă, bun (esp. bine, folos
plural: goods)
people popor, naţiune / popor, naţiune /
naţie; neam naţie, neam
salt sare a unui acid; săruri (de sare de bucătărie umor, haz, spirit the salt of the
substanţă; amoniac, i.e. / clorură de (mai ales acid) earth =
marinar, lup de smelling salts); sodiu; sare gemă truditorii; cei
mare purgativ (e.g. mai vrednici
magnesium oameni
sulphate or
sodium sulphate,
used as a
cathartic)

A SYNTHESIS OF A MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE VARIOUS NOUN

CATEGORIES
(= the grammatical regimen of the eight categories / classes as established by Leon
Leviţchi)

Class / type / Sg. / Sg. / pl. Sg. / pl. Concrete or Countable or Way of forming the Specific
agreement abstract uncountable sing. / the plural; determiners
category of pl. meanin description numericalization
nouns form g
I. Individual sing. sing. sing. concrete / [C] normal
nouns (proper) abstract a
the

II. Defective pl. pl. / sing. pl. concrete / [C] / [U] a pair of – two pairs the
individual nouns abstract of
(=Pluralia
tantum)
III. (Equivalents sing. sing. sing. concrete / [U] / [C] rare (merging with
of) proper nouns / abstract individual nouns) zero / the
names
IV. Nouns of sing., sing. sing., concrete [U] only for varieties /
material / Mass rarely rarely pl. types zero
nouns pl.
V. Abstractions sing. sing. sing. abstract [U] / [C] an item / piece of –
and other two items / pieces zero / the
(unique) abstract of
nouns
VI. Collective sing. sing. / pl. sing. / pl. concrete [C] normal a
nouns {proper) the

VII. Nouns of sing. pl. pl. concrete [C] various specific

multitude (= methods zero / the
plurality)
VIII.Individual / sing. sing. / pl. sing. / pl. concrete [C] invariable in the
defective nouns (according plural the
of multitude to meaning)

REMEMBER, AND PRACTICE WITH, YOUR GRAMMAR

THE ENGLISH ARTICLE

1. The Definite Article: The form of the definite article in English is the (with singular or plural,
masculine, feminine, or neuter nouns): the man, the woman, the table, the egg, the heir. Uses af the
definite article:
a) with nouns already mentioned or known to the speaker: I saw a boy out of the window. The boy
was walking quickly. Have you fed the dog? Did you speak to the manager?
b) with nouns accompanied by a prepositional phrase, a relative clause, an adjective, or an
apposition: The letter from Iran arrived yesterday. This is the girl who gave me the drawings. Mr
Johnson, the fireman, is a handsome fellow. Have you met the new mayor?
c) with adjectives in the superlative degree: That is the tallest building in town.
d) with nouns considered unique: The earth / the Earth moves round the sun / the Sun.
e) with singular nouns used in their most general sense (e.g. in definitions, etc.): The horse is a
useful animal. He can play the harmonica.
f) with nouns converted from adjectives, designating a class, nationality, or an abstraction: We
should help the poor. The Swiss love coffee. The beautiful is always praised. The good is often
forgotten.
g) with proper nouns in the plural, designating a family: The Smiths are nice people.
h) with proper nouns naming countries, if they are in the plural, if they represent a union, or if there
is at least one common noun among them: the Netherlands, the United States, the United Kingdom,
the USSR. (Very few such proper names in the singular have the definite article: the Congo, the
Ukraine, the Lebanon, etc.)
i) with proper nouns denoting groups of islands, ranges of mountains, oceans, seas, rivers, channels,
canals, straits, deserts: the Bahamas [b'h:mz] (or the Bahama Islands), the Andes ['ndi:z], the
Carpathians (or the Carpathian Mountains), the Atlantic Ocean, the North Sea, the Thames, the
English Channel, the Suez Canal, the Straits of Dover, the Sahara;
j) with proper nouns designating hotels, shops, institutions: the Ritz, the British Museum, the
Midland Bank;
k) with proper nouns designating ships, trains, planes: the Conqueror, the Orient Express, the
Enterprise;
l) with proper nouns designating newspapers and magazines: The Times, The Sun (but: Life, Vogue,
Newsweek)
m) after prepositions: at the window, through the tunnel (but: by bus, at night, go to school)
n) in (set / fixed) phrases: to tell the time, by the way, to play the fool, on the whole.

2. The Indefinite Article: The forms of the English indefinite article: before a word beginning with
a consonant or a semi-vowel, the form of the indefinite article is a [; ei], and, before a word
beginning with a wovel, it is an [ən; æn]: a man, a woman, a table, an egg, an heir, a bad egg, an
interesting thing. Uses of the indefinite article:
a) with nouns that name a single item / article belonging to the respective class: Give me a pencil,
will you!
b) instead of the numeral one: I have bought a tray and six glasses.
c) with singular nouns used in a general / generic sense: A baby requires special care (=Any baby
requires special care).
d) with nouns designating a profession, religion, class, after the verb to be or in similar contexts: He
is a student. She is a good Christian. They called him a fool. I can't work as a cook.
e) in certain expressions of measurement, when ratio (Rom. raport, proporţie) is meant: They have
French lessons four times a week. Oranges are 80 p. a pound.
f) with proper nouns designating an unknown person, a member of a family or group, or a person
with certain characteristics (=an individual representing a certain class): The letter is from a Mr
Smith. (Rom. un anume domn Smith). He is a Jones. He is a Don Juan / a Byron of today’s poetry.
g) in (set / fixed) phrases: to be in a hurry, to have a headache, to have a right to…, to have a mind
to…, as a matter of fact, to smoke a pipe (Rom. a fuma pipă), to take an interest in something, on
an average, etc.

3. The Zero Article: Uses of the “zero article” (Ø art.):

a) with uncountable nouns or plural nouns used in a generic / general sense: Gold and silver are
metals. Oil is lighter than water. Wood, brick, stone and metal are used in building houses. The desk
is made of plastic. Books are his best friends. Babies need special care.
b) with proper nouns designating persons: Robert, Jane, Captain Spikes, Professor Lewes, Doctor
Johnson, Colonel Singleton;
c) with proper nouns designating continents, countries, regions, towns and cities: Europe, Asia,
Britain, Shropshire, London;
d) with proper nouns designating mountains (i.e. mountain peaks – “vîrfuri”), lakes, capes: Mount
Everest, Lake Ontario, Cape Cod;
e) with proper nouns designating buildings, streets, bridges: Covent Garden, Fleet Street, Waterloo
Bridge;
f) with proper nouns designating months, festivals, days of the week: August is my favourite month.
She is going to the counstryside at Easter. They are leaving on Friday.
g) with proper nouns designating magazines and periodicals: Vogue, Newsweek, Punch;
h) with nouns like school, church, hospital, university, work, prison, bed, table, when seen as
“institutions” (= whe the regular use made of that place or object is implied): Every day she goes to
school (=to learn). Go to bed, my baby! I am at table now.
i) with nouns designating meals and seasons: We have breakfast at eight. Summer is coming.
j) with nouns designating languages: She speaks English, Bengali and Italian; the use of the definite
article in this case is obsolete, e.g. “Translated from the Portuguese”.
k) with nouns designating a profession or an office held by one person only: He was elected
president. They appointed him manager.
l) in (set / fixed) phrases: day by day, arm in arm, in case of (fire, deflagration, etc.), by sea, by
train, by mistake, in silence, on foot, etc. NOTE: Do not mistake the “Zero Article” for the cases of
(stylistic) omission of the (definite or indefinite) article, such as: Former convict caught robbing a
bank (=A former…).

THE PERSONAL PRONOUNS

Singular Plural
SUBJECT* OBJECT** SUBJECT* OBJECT**
1st Person I Me We us
2nd Person you you You you
3rd Person he / she / it*** Him / her / it*** They them

* SUBJECT implies the Nominative Case, e.g. He cannot do that.

** OBJECT implies the Accusative and Dative Cases, e.g. Can you see him?
(=Accusative); She cannot give it to them. Lend them the books! (=Dative).
[The Genitive Case is actually represented by the Possessive form - i.e. the Possessive
Pronouns - see below].
*** THE 3RD PERSON forms differ through Gender, too: He and him apply to masculine
entities (humans or animals, especially pets); she and her apply to feminine entities (humans or
animals, especially pets), and it applies to neuter or “common” entities (animals, objects), e.g.
Where’s Paul? He’s there. I want to talk to him.
Where’s Pauline? She’s there. I want to talk to her.
Where’s Felix the cat? He’s there. I don’t want to see him.
But: Where’s the record? It’s here. I want to play it.

 REMARKS:
a. It can also replace the name of a person, in situations like this:
There is someone at the door. Who is it? It’s Jim.
b. It is mainly used in impersonal structures, e.g.
It is late.
It is snowing.
It would be nice / a pity if they could come, too.
It was John who wanted to return there.
c. We, You, They and One are frequently used to refer to people in general, or to make up
impersonal sentences, e.g.
We just have to learn geography, you know.
You never can tell („Nu se ştie niciodată”.)
How do you say “book” in French? („Cum se spune… / Cum spunem…?”)
One has to be polite at school. („Trebuie să fii politicos…/ să fim politicoşi”)
They are building a new pub in my street. („Se construieşte…”)
They make very good beer in Denmark. („Se face bere bună…”).
They say she is an excellent cook. („Se spune că (ea) e…, Lumea spune că…”; compare
with: “People say she is an excellent cook”), etc.
* N.B. The use of one can be difficult, so it will be worthwhile considering such Usage
Notes as the following: “USAGE: 1. One is used as a pronoun to mean ‘anyone’ or ‘me and people in
general’, as in one must try one’s best. In modern English it is generally only used in formal and
written contexts, outside which it is likely to be regarded as pompous or over-formal. In informal
and spoken contexts the normal alternative is you, as in you have to do what you can, don’t you? 2.
Until quite recently, sentences in which one is followed by his or him were considered perfectly
correct: one must try his best. These uses are now held to be ungrammatical: one’s should be used
instead.” (Excerpted from The NEW OXFORD Dictionary OF ENGLISH)

THE POSSESSIVE PRONOUNS AND ADJECTIVES

ADJECTIVES PRONOUNS
MY car * the car is MINE **
YOUR book the book is YOURS
HIS dog the dog is HIS
HER pen the pen is HERS
ITS door the door is ITS (own)
OUR house the house is OURS
YOUR books the books are YOURS
THEIR cat the cat is THEIRS

* For the sake of emphasis („pentru întărire”), one can use the structure: It is my own car -
his own dog - their own house, etc.
We can also use the structure: He is a friend of mine / of yours / of his, etc.
** An equivalent structure is: The car is MY OWN / YOUR OWN / HIS OWN, etc.
- Further examples: “Look, this is my new car.” “Whose car did you say it is?”, “It’s
mine!”, “You mean your car!?”, “Yes, my own car!”

THE REFLEXIVE AND EMPHATIC PRONOUNS

(or “THE -SELF PRONOUNS”)

PERSON and FORMS of the TRANSLATION as a TRANSLATION as

NUMBER “SELF” PRONOUNS REFLEXIVE an EMPHATIC
PRONOUN PRONOUN
I SINGULAR MYSELF mă eu însumi / fem. eu
însămi
II SINGULAR YOURSELF te, vă însuţi / fem. însăţi
III SING. MASC. HIMSELF se însuşi
III SING. FEM. HERSELF se însăşi
III SING. ITSELF se însuşi / fem. însăşi
NEUTER
I PLURAL OURSELVES ne înşine
II PLURAL YOURSELVES vă înşivă
III PLURAL THEMSELVES se înşişi / fem. însele,
înseşi

USAGE: a. As a Reflexive Pronoun: She is looking at herself in the mirror. („Ea se

priveşte…”)
He killed himself (= He committed suicide).
That device can switch itself on and off. („Mecanismul se porneşte şi se opreşte singur”).
Teach yourself German („Învăţaţi singuri limba germană”, “Învăţaţi limba germană fără
profesor”).
 Remark: Do not use the Reflexive / “Self” Pronouns with the “morning verbs” (to
wake / to awake, to get up, to wash, to shave, to dress): Don’t say *I dressed myself, *I
washed myself, etc.!!! (at least, if you are not an invalid!)
Always say: I wake late in the morning. Then, I dress and shave, etc.
b. As an Emphatic Pronoun: She can do it herself. („Poate să facă asta singură”)
The President himself visited our faculty three years ago. („Însuşi preşedintele ţării /
Preşedintele însuşi / în persoană…, chiar preşedintele…”).
 That lady herself has been teaching us German for five years. (Or: That lady has herself
been teaching us German for five years).

THE RECIPROCAL PRONOUNS

FORMS: a. EACH OTHER b. ONE ANOTHER
USAGE: a. EACH OTHER is generally used when there are two persons or things between
which there are mutual relations, e.g.
They (= the two lovers) cannot see each other every day.
- Used with a preposition: The two boy are looking at each other.
- In the Genitive Case: They (= the two cousins) often borrow each other’s vacuum cleaner.
b. ONE ANOTHER is generally used when there are more than two persons or things
between which there are mutual relations, e.g.
They (= the 29 classmates) usually see one another once a day.
- Used with a preposition: The twenty-odd boys in the classroom are throwing tennisballs at
one another.
- In the Genitive Case: They (= the schoolmates) often borrow one another’s skateboards to
get to school.

THE DEMONSTRATIVE PRONOUNS AND ADJECTIVES

Type of demonstrative SINGULAR PLURAL

1. For proximity („de THIS THESE
apropiere”)
2. For distance („de THAT THOSE
depărtare”)

USAGE and EXAMPLES: This man (here) is my uncle.

Look at this box / these boxes here.
This is a fine car. / These are fine cars.
Oh, that’s awfully expensive. Would you prefer that one? / those over there?
 Remark: THIS and THAT can also be used to refer to an impersonal or general entity,
e.g.
How would you like that?
That will be too much for her.
All that sounds interesting, but I’m afraid we’ll have to quit… („Toate astea / acestea…”)
Now, listen to this: “Add a pound of flour, stir, then…”

THE PRONOUNS ONE and ONES

These substitutes („înlocuitori sintactici”) allow to avoid repeating nouns or noun phrases /
structures which have already appeared in the discourse, e.g. Do you like a big tent or a small one? I
think the small ones come cheaper.
Would you prefer the German car, or the English one?
I like all these ties, but I think I’ll take the one with green stripes.
You’ve got a lot of PC games. Could you lend me one?
N.B. Do not mistake this use of one for the (indefinite, or generic) pronoun one, e.g. One
should try to be a good Christian. (See also above).

THE INTERROGATIVE PRONOUNS AND ADJECTIVES

I. ADJECTIVES:
FORMS: WHAT; WHICH
USAGE: they identify human beings or things / objects, e.g.
a. WHAT:
 What time is it?
What books by Dickens do you like?
What man is this?
b. WHICH:
Which film did you like best?
Which (two / three / five, etc.) books by Dickens do you like best?
Which colleagues did you meet last night?
Which foreign languages have you studied so far?
 Remark: WHICH implies the idea of selection or choice, it involves more specific
answers.
* Compare: What colours would you prefer? (Possible answer: “Well, I like red, blue,
yellow…”)
Which colours did you finally choose? (i.e. “out of the set / group / batch”). [Possible
translations: “Ce culoare / culori anume…? Care culoare anume…?”].

II. PRONOUNS:
FORMS: WHO; WHOM, WHOSE; WHICH; WHAT.
USAGE and EXAMPLES:
Who came to him? Whom did you see?
Whom were you talking to? What comes next?
Whose book is this? Which of you comes next?
Which (one) follows? / Which of you follows? Which of these books will you have?
 REMARKS:
* When WHO?, WHICH? and WHAT? are syntactic subjects, they do not take the auxiliary
to do, e.g. Who follows? (compare with: Whom do you like? Whom did you see yesterday?)
* In sentences like “Whom were you talking to?”, the more frequent, colloquial form
(„varianta familiară”) is Who were you talking to?

THE RELATIVE PRONOUNS

These pronouns establish a relationship between the noun phrase which it replaces and the
clause which determines a noun (they are called Relative Clauses – in Romanian “Propoziţii
subordonate atributive / relative”), e.g. The man who rang us up was an old friend of mine.
There are two types of Relative Clauses: 1. restrictive (Rom. “determinative”) and 2.
descriptive („explicative” or “descriptive”), e.g.
The country that / which you know very well is typical of Asia.
That country, which everybody knows perfectly, is called France. (Pay attention to the
comma (,)!!!
* The first type of clauses is mainly used to define than to illustrate notions or entities.

Grammatical Case Person Neuter General reference

NOMINATIVE who “care”, “cine” which “care” what “ce”
GENITIVE whose “al / a / ai / ale whose “al / a / ai / ale of what “despre ce”
cărui / cărei / cărora”, cărui / cărei / cărora”,
“al / a / ai / ale cui” “al / a / ai / ale cui”
DATIVE to whom “căruia, to which “căruia, to what “la ce “
căreia” căreia”
ACCUSATIVE whom “pe care” which “care”, “pe what “ce”, “ceea ce”,
care” “lucru care”.

 Remark: The Accusative forms WHOM, WHICH and WHAT can be substituted by
THAT, which can itself be omitted / dropped, e.g.
The man whom I saw yesterday was her uncle. = The man that I saw yesterday was her uncle. =>
The man I saw yesterday was her uncle.

THE INDEFINITE PRONOUNS and QUANTIFIERS

I. The INDEFINITE QUANTIFIERS:

 SOME, ANY, NO
E.g. Will you give him some chocolate?
They have some fruit-trees in the orchard.
Have you (got) any sugar?
She hasn’t (got) any children.
 Remarks:
- SOME is used in affirmative sentences, and ANY – in interrogative and negative
sentences (and also in If Clauses which express uncertainty), e.g.
Have you got any bandages? (Compare with: Have you got some good books?) I didn’t
understand any of the words in the text.
If he understood any of the words he would be able to translate the text. (But: If you find
some bigger snail on the lawn, will you give it to me.)
- SOME is used in interrogative sentences when the obvious answer is / has to be “Yes”,
e.g. Will you have some coffee?
Aren’t there some cups and saucers in the cupboard?.
- ANY in She hasn’t (got) any children. is different from “Any man can do that” („Orice
om”, “oricine”).
 NO - see THE NEGATIVE PRONOUNS below.

II. OTHER INDEFINITE PRONOUNS

 EVERY, EACH, ALL

She has read every magazine on the shelf.
Each player on the team can try three times. (= “Fiecare jucător în parte” – compare with
“Every player can do that”)
All men are said to be equal in the sight of God.
(But, when used with Uncountable nouns, like petrol, water, steel, meat, etc., or Countable
nouns in the singular: He has drunk all the glass; She spent all her life in Boston).
 OTHER, OTHERS, ANOTHER, SOME MORE
They can be used both as pronouns and adjectives, e.g.
Some boys go to school, others go to college. (as a Pronoun)
He lives on the other side of the street.
Tom has arrived, but where are the others? (as a Pronoun)
This orange is better than the other two. (as an Adjective)
Would you like another cup of coffee? (as an Adjective)
Have some more steak. (as an Adjective)
I think I’ll have some more. (as a Pronoun).
They are also called “ADJECTIVAL” PRONOUNS.
 COMPOUNDS with EVERY, SOME, NO
a. For designating persons: Everyone / everybody likes John.
Someone / somebody told me he is a liar.
Has anyone seen him? If anyone / anybody should see the thief, call on me.
I haven’t seen anybody like her. (The negation of the verb implies the use of an ANY–
compound, since double negation is prohibited in grammatical English, e.g. * I haven’t seen
nobody).
No one / nobody can answer the quiz. (In this case we cannot say *Anybody cannot
answer…)
 b. For designating things: Everything was said and done.
There is something I want to add.
Is there anything you want to add? (“I am not sure – and I want to know that”; compare
with: “Can you add something about the Tudors? => “I know you are good at that, so you
certainly have something to add”); I can do nothing about it.
 BOTH, EITHER, NEITHER
BOTH is used as an adjective, and is translated by “amândoi, amândouă”, e.g. Hold the
dictionary in both hands. You can have them both. You can have both of them.
I want both the pens. / I want both of the pens.
(Also, accompanied by demonstratives or possessives: I want both these pens. / I want both
your pens, etc.).
 THE SAME
It is used both as a pronoun and an adjective, and translated by “acelaşi, aceeaşi, aceiaşi,
aceleaşi”, e.g. You are not the same man. (as an Adjective) You are the same.
(as a Pronoun)

THE NEGATIVE PRONOUNS

The negative compounds with -thing and -body / -one are considered negative pronouns,
e.g.
Nothing has happened. Nobody can tell you that.
No one / no-one has seen him. They cannot be used in sentences having a negative verb
(as, in grammatical English at least, double negation is a mistake), so they come in association with
ANY- compounds, e.g. *I haven’t seen no one. (The correct form is: I haven’t seen anyone).

OTHER QUANTIFIERS

 A lot of / lots of, much, many, a little, a few:

We have got a lot of excellent books.
There were lots of people in the backyard.
(A lot of… and Lots of… can be used with both Countable and Uncountable Nouns)
It won’t take much time.
Did you have much trouble working out the sheets?
Were there many people in the shop?
I haven’t seen many students at the meeting.
(Much and Many are mainly used in interrogative and negative sentences – in affirmative
sentences we usually prefer A lot of…)
The difference between Much and Many is the following: Many is used with plural
Countable nouns – e.g. Many books / girls – while Much is used with Uncountable nouns -
e.g. I don’t have much ink / glue / interest).
 Several, Enough, Plenty of: I have read this book several times. („… de mai multe ori”).
 THE ENGLISH ADJECTIVE

The adjective is the part of speech which expresses the quality of an object, qualifying (i.e.
describing)49 or determining nouns or pronouns, e.g. a clever man, a pretty girl, most people, it is
cold. From a syntactic point of view, the adjective discharges the functions of an attribute,
apposition, predicative, predicative adjunct. (Examples, respectively: the red sun, the sun is red, the
sun rose red).
There are two main kinds of adjectives: a) Descriptive adjectives (= ‘adjectives of
quality’), e.g. a little boy, a rectangular box, the taller girl, and: b) Determinative adjectives (=
‘pronominal adjectives’), e.g. this portrait, many books. These may be:  Demonstrative, e.g. this,
that, these, those;  Distributive, e.g. each, every, either, neither;  Quantitative: some salt, any
coffee, no water; many copies, much information, little interest, few boys; one chapter, two desks,
etc;  Interrogative, e.g. which car?, what house?, whose book?;  Possessive: my book, your cat,
his hat, her pen, its milk, our home, their villa.
a) Descriptive Adjectives / Adjectives of Quality.  Form and Use: Descriptive
adjectives, which are actually thought of (and dealt with) as the adjectives proper, qualify an
‘object’. In English, descriptive adjectives / adjectives of quality have (with very few exceptions)
the same form, irrespective of the gender, number or grammatical case of the noun that they qualify;
it means that there is no agreement of the descriptive adjective with the noun (or its substitute /
equivalent) which it qualifies, e.g. “A new typist was working in the office”. (= Nominative,
feminine, singular), “The leaves of the old trees were withered” (= Genitive, neuter, plural). Their
only inflected forms (having, in fact, grammatical suffixes) are the comparative and the superlative
forms of the monosyllabic / one-syllable (Germanic) adjectives, e.g. young–younger–the youngest. 
An Adjectival Phrase is a group of words whose overall value is that of an adjective, e.g. “Haven’t
you found anyone glad to help you?”; “The roses in that garden were all red”, “The man drawing in
the office is Tom”, “Where is the book lent to Ted?” They are in fact relative clauses without the
relative pronoun and the verb / predicate: “The flowers (which are) in the garden are beautiful”.
Position of the adjective of quality:  If attributive, the adjective generally stands before the
noun it qualifies, e.g. a handsome man, a nice old lady, a white house, a difficult case, a red and
blue scarf.  If predicative, a descriptive adjective follows the verb, e.g. “That car is wonderful”,
“Roses smell sweet”, “The milk tasted good”, “That sounds perfect”, “At college she came out
first”, “John felt ill”, “She was sitting perfectly silent”.  The list of the verbs that demand adjectives
(and not adverbs) after them includes such verbs as: to be (quiet, young, old), to seem, to become, to
continue (e.g. The weather continues fair), and their synonyms: to appear, to look (fine), to grow
(hungry), to get (tired), to go (red), to run (dry), to turn (sour); to keep (good, silent), to remain
(loyal), to stay (true). All the above verbs are called ‘link verbs’. They can be subcategorized as: *
Verbs of perception / sensorial processes: to feel (cold), to smell (good, nice, sour, strong), to sound
(beautiful, good), to taste (bitter, good, sour); * Other cases, e.g. to die innocent, to fall dead, to lie
buried, to paint green, to prove correct, to shine bright, to sit quiet, etc. (In all the cases when the
adjective is used instead of the adverb, its syntactic functions are, respectively: Subjective
Complement, e.g. “He looks ill”; and Objective Complement, e.g. “I poured the glass full”, “I saw
her face grow pale”). When two or more adjectives follow a verb, we must put and before the last
one: “The day was cold, wet and windy”. If there is a contrast of ideas, we should use but: “The
briefcase was small but heavy”. When two or more adjectives of colour precede a noun, we put and
before the final one, but we do not need and when there is only one adjective of colour. Compare: a
green and brown box; a big green carpet.
When used attributively, the adjective is placed before the noun it determines. Yet there are
a number of exceptions such as: * the set phrases, e.g. Ambassador Extraordinary, President-elect
(“a person who has been elected president but has not yet entered / taken up office” – plural form:
49
In grammar, to qualify means “(of a word or phrase) to attribute a quality to (another word, especially a
preceding noun”. It is virtually synonymous with modify (in the sense “(of a word or group of words) to bear
the relation of modifier to (another word or group of words)”).
presidents-elect), secretary general, attorney general / Attorney-General (“(1) a country’s principal
law officer and senior legal adviser to its government, who represents the Crown or the state in legal
proceedings; (2) (in the U.S.) the chief law officer and legal adviser of a state government” – plural
forms: attorneys general or attorney generals), postmaster general (“the executive head of the
postal service in certain countries; abolished in the UK as an office in 1969”), court martial, knight
errant, heir apparent, poet laureate (“the poet appointed as court poet of Britain, who is given a
lifetime post as a member of the British royal household / an officer of the Royal Household; (the
first was Ben Jonson in 1616, but the title became established with the appointment of John Dryden
in 1668)” – plural form: poets laureate / Poets Laureate), from time immemorial; * indefinite
pronouns having as the final element -body, -one, -thing: “I bought something nice”, “She said
nothing interesting”, “Someone better than you”. When several adjectives qualify / modify a noun,
the order of their succession is in keeping with the relative importance of the qualification the
respective adjective conveys; thus, the more significant (or ‘objective’) an adjective, the closer to
the noun it is placed. This order is rather arbitrary (and, in most cases, context-dependent), still
various normative grammars do offer some cues as to it, e.g. Quality / Description – Dimension /
Size – Shape – Age – Colour – Nationality / Origin – Verbal adjective, as in: “three tall young
French girl students”, “a few large red apples”, “the small round ancient Chinese box”.
In Thomson and Martinet’s Practical Grammar (p. 20), the matter is dealt with along the
following lines: “Several variations are possible, but a fairly usual order is: 1. possessive adjectives
(my, etc.) and this, that, these, those; 2. size (big, small); 3. general description (dirty, small); 4. age
(old, young) and the adjective little; 5. shape (round, square); 6. colour (blue, green); 7. material
(steel, wooden); 8. origin (Austrian, French); 9. purpose (dining, reading), e.g. a green plastic
bucket, my smart new velvet curtains, an elegant little French clock, a small round dining table .
Nice, fine and lovely can go before adjectives of size, shape etc., when used to express approval: a
nice big room shows that we like big rooms. The room is nice and big has the same meaning.
Similarly, a fine sandy beach”. Other sources (e.g. BBC Professor Grammar’s Rule Book) indicate a
somewhat different order: Determiner – Opinion / Quality – (Size) – Shape – Age – Colour – Origin
– Material + Noun, as in: a nice big oval old green Chinese silk carpet. (It will be fair to recognize
that the above order allows for a serviceable mnemonic formula / pattern: OPSHACOM).
When a noun is qualified by two adjectives having the comparative form, one of which is
short (Germanic) and the other long (especially of Romance origin), the short one comes first: “He
was taller and more intelligent”. An adjective which has its own qualification comes after the
respective noun: “It was a house ugly with decay.”
From a syntactic angle, the adjectives can be: 1. Attributive, e.g. a new dress; 2. Pre-
dicative, e.g. The dress is new. (As said before, this latter class of adjectives can go with verbs like:
be, appear, seem, look, stand, remain, become, grow, get, turn, keep, continue (i.e. link / linking
verbs), e.g. “She looks tired”, “He grew older”. A number of verbs expressing sensorial perception
have the same syntactic behaviour, e.g. look, smell, sound, taste, feel, e.g. “The soup smells / tastes
good”, “You look fine”).
ATTRIBUTIVE AND PREDICATIVE ADJECTIVES: In keeping with their (attributive or
predicative) function / use / grammatical distribution, the English adjectives fall into three broad
groups: (a) those which can be used both attributively and predicatively: “Here is an old man”, “He
is old”; (b) those adjectives which have the attributive distribution only: e.g. a woollen dress, the
main road, a mere song, our chief concern, the poor man (i.e. “unfortunate”), “Jim gave a contented
little smile” (i.e. “expressing happiness and satisfaction”), etc. There are several subgroups / sets of
adjectives included in this class:  Adjectives ending in -en, originating in ‘concrete’ nouns / nouns
of material (sometimes, these adjectives are called ‘relative adjectives’), e.g. a wooden shield, a
woollen jumper, a golden ring, earthen banks / pots;  Adjectives naming the cardinal points:
Eastern Europe, northern / northerly winds;  Adjectives derived from nouns: medical school,
atomic energy, chemical plant, a criminal attack / criminal record;  Adjectives which cannot be
derived as adverbs: my former friend, her late husband, an utter fool / in utter amazement, the main
part, the chief device, the principal cities, as well as a number of specialized / ‘technical’ adjectives
should be added. (c) Adjectives which can be used only predicatively:  Such adjectives as: drunk,50
ill, well, worth, etc.  The adjectives derived with the prefix a- (e.g. ablaze, awake), sometimes cal-
led ‘statives’ or ‘adverbial adjectives’; here are some of them: afire, aflame, afloat, afoot, agape
(“very surprised, expectant, or eager, especially as indicated by a wide open mouth; (of a person’s
mouth) wide open, especially with surprise or wonder”), aghast (“filled / overcome with
amazement, horror or shock”), aglow, agog (“very / highly impatient, eager, or curious (to hear or
see something)”), ajar (“(of a door, window or other opening) slightly open”), akin (“(1) related by
blood; of the same kin; (2) (often followed by to) of similar character, having similar characteristics,
properties, etc.”), akimbo (“with hands on the hips and elbows turned / projecting outwards”), alight
(“burning; on fire”), alike, alive, alone, amiss (“not quite right, in an incorrect, inappropriate, or
defective manner; out of place”), ashamed, askew (“not in a straight or level position, at an oblique
angle; towards one side; awry”), aslant (“at an angle or in a sloping direction, at a slant”), asleep,
awake, aware, awash (“covered or flooded with water, especially seawater or rain, washed over by
the waves (also used figuratively, e.g. “The city was awash with journalists”)”), awry (“away from
the appropriate, right, planned, or expected course; amiss”), etc.), e.g. “The little boy was asleep”. 
Remarks: * Some of the above adjectives have a synonym which can be used attributively: ablaze–
blazing, afloat–floating, akin–kindred, alike–like, alive–living / live (as in “Dan could see lots of live
African animals at the zoo”), alone–lonely / lonesome, askew–oblique, asleep–sleeping, drunk–
drunken; some of these synonyms may be rather dissimilar in form: aghast–amazed, aflame–
burning (although the attributive form flaming is also current, e.g. “They dragged him away from
the flaming car”) / fiery, afoot–walking, agog–eager / expectant, aware–conscious, awry–crooked
['krukid], etc. Some of these attributive (or merely ‘postpositive’) adjectives are (sometimes, or also)
considered adverbs, e.g. akimbo, awry. * Still some can be used as attributes when preceded by
adverbs, e.g. a fully awake person, a very / fully ashamed girl, the half asleep infant. Similarly, there
are cases when the -en attributive adjectives can be used predicatively:  in figurative speech, e.g.
“In the sun her hair had turned golden”, “The sky was leaden”, “Her tresses shone silken”, “His
movements were wooden” (the meaning of the adjective is “stiff and awkward / clumsy (in
movement or manner)”).
THE COMPARISON OF ADJECTIVES: The only grammatical category that is marked
(realized / actualized through relevant inflections) in the English adjectives is comparison.51 These
markers are grammatical suffixes (-er, -est), applying to adjectives like long, big, etc., or free
morphemes like more and (the) most, applying to such items as: beautiful, comfortable,
uninteresting, etc.
The category of comparison relies on the differences that can be established between the
various qualities that speakers assign to certain referents / ‘objects’/ ‘realia’ (linguistically expressed
as ‘Nomina’); the extent to which these qualities can appear may be unequal (e.g. “That boy is
cleverer than this girl”) or equal (e.g. “He is as clever as that girl”). The three degrees of
comparison of adjectives (and adverbs, for that matter) are, very much as in other (Indo-European)
languages: * The Positive degree: It expresses the respective quality, without any comparison being
implied, e.g. “Thomas Evans is a wise man”; “Susan Brown is kindly”. * The Comparative degree:
The quality is designated in two or more objects as being: (a) equally present, e.g. “Henry Smith is
as strong as his brother” (i.e. the so-called “comparison of equality); (b) unequal, implying: (b')
superiority, e.g. “I am taller than her (or: than she is)”; “He is the taller boy (of the two (boys)”; or
(b'') inferiority, e.g. “He is less kind than your uncle (is)”; “He is not so / as kind as your uncle”. *
The Superlative degree: (a) The Relative Superlative, which expresses the topmost extent / degree
50
The adjective drunk (“affected by / intoxicated with alcohol to the extent of losing control over one’s
normal physical and mental functions / one’s faculties or behaviour”: Sam was so drunk he staggered from
wall to wall; to be drunk on gin) normally occurs in predicative position, unlike drunken (“drunk /
intoxicated with, or as if with alcohol”: Gangs of drunken sailors roamed the streets), but the form drunk
used attributively position is also possible, although less frequently.
51
Here are the dictionary definitions of the term comparison in its grammar meaning: “The formation of the
comparative and superlative forms of adjectives and adverbs” (in The NEW OXFORD Dictionary OF
ENGLISH), and: “Also called degrees of comparison. Grammar: The listing of the positive, comparative, and
superlative forms of an adjective or adverb” (in Collins Electronic Dictionary Data).
to which the respective quality is evinced by an ‘object’ as compared with other similar ‘objects’ (in
a certain group), or in time (e.g. “She is the cleverest girl (of all / of the group / in her form / here)”;
“Bill Smith was our most reliable accountant”; “I have been ill all week but I feel worst today”; (b)
The Absolute Superlative, expressing a high / top degree for the respective quality, without
establishing direct comparison, e.g. She is very intelligent. Thank you for your most kind letter”,
“He was most rude to her”, “It was an extremely / awfully cold day for June”.
 REMARKS:  The two degrees may appear in (logical) conjunction, as in: “He is the
least kind of all”, i.e. a superlative form showing inferiority.  The ‘analytic’ (absolute) superlative,
e.g. “She has a most interesting Mona Lisa smile” (i.e. “a very interesting smile”), which is felt as
‘formal’, ‘bookish’, should be distinguished from the ‘analytic’ relative superlative proper, e.g. “She
was the most interesting girl (of all)”. The respective stressing patterns are also different: “A most
'interesting face” (i.e. an Absolute Superlative with most) vs. “The 'most interesting of those books.
 When only two notions / ‘objects’ are compared, a comparative preceded by THE should be used,
e.g. “Take the bigger apple” (i.e. “The bigger apple of the two”) vs. “That was the biggest of those
apples” (i.e. “The biggest apple in a group of more than three”). Cf. the corresponding situation in
Romanian: “Erau două fete; cea mai mică era tare harnică” (i.e. “fata mai mică”); vs. “Rodica, fata
cea mai scundă / cea mai scundă fată din şcoală”.
SYNTHETIC VS. ANALYTIC COMPARISON: A. The Synthetic Comparison of the
English adjectives is also known as the ‘comparison of short adjectives’, (sometimes also as the
‘Germanic’ or ‘Saxon’ comparison), as it applies to one-syllable / monosyllabic adjectives (of
Germanic origin), adding, respectively, the suffixes: -(e)r (for the Comparative degree) and -(e)st
(for the Superlative degree), e.g. long – longer – (the) longest; big – bigger – (the) biggest; dry –
drier – (the) driest; gay – gayer – (the) gayest; nice – nicer – (the) nicest.
A number of two-syllable adjectives (ending in: -y, -ly, -er, -ow, -le, -some, -ure) also take
the -(e)r, -(e)st endings / grammatical suffixes: happy – happier – the happiest, lovely – lovelier –
the loveliest, clever – cleverer – the cleverest, narrow – narrower – the narrowest, subtle – subtler –
the subtlest, handsome – handsomer – the handsomest, obscure – obscurer – the obscurest, etc. *
Exceptions: eager, proper, fertile, fragile, hostile, e.g. “A more eager audience”, “The most fragile
curio”.
B. The Analytic Comparison of the English adjectives (and adverbs) applies to longer
adjectives (i.e. adjectives of more than two syllables), e.g. careful – more careful – (the) most
careful; difficult – more difficult – (the) most difficult. It is also used for compound adjectives such
as: a) well-known – (comparative form: better-known; superlative form: the best-known; the first
element has kept its meaning); b) far-fetched – (comparative form: more far-fetched; superlative
form: the most far-fetched; in this case, the two elements constitute a single whole / unit).
 Remarks: Currently, the two ways of forming the comparative and the superlative
degrees coexist in a number of cases / for certain adjectives (or adverbs), e.g.:  a) (With preference
for the synthetic / inflectional forms): * A large number of one-syllable adjectives, e.g. calm, drunk,
fit, fond, frank, free, glad, grave, huge, just, keen, kind, pale, plain, prompt, rare, scarce, stiff, true,
vague; * Certain two-syllable adjectives (ending in: -y, -le) having front stress, e.g. angry, clumsy,
cosy, dingy, funny, tidy, worthy;  b) (With preference for the ‘analytic’ forms): * Some other two-
syllable adjectives, e.g. sober, tender, feeble, noble; hollow, yellow; gruesome, mature; able, active,
common, civil, fertile, constant, real, sudden; and even one-syllable adjectives such as foul; * Two-
syllable adjectives having late stress: absurd, discreet, profound, concise, minute ['mainju:t], polite,
remote, severe, sincere; [Remark: The two-syllable adjectives ending in two consonants nearly
always use the analytic forms – for the sake of pronunciation, e.g. correct, distinct, exact, intact: “a
more exact account”]; * Three-syllable adjectives having a negative prefix: e.g. uncanny, uneasy,
unhappy, unkindly, unlucky, impolite.
Irregular comparison: The following (Germanic) adjectives have irregular (i.e.
etymological) forms of the comparative and superlative degrees: good and well (the latter adjective
is used as a predicative) – better – the best; bad and ill (the latter adjective is used predicatively) –
worse – the worst; little – less / lesser – the least / littlest; few – less / fewer – fewest;52 much – many
– more – (the) most; old – older / elder – oldest / the eldest; far – farther / further – the farthest
(farthermost) / the furthest (furthermost); near – nearer – nearest / the next; fore – former – the
foremost / first; late – later / latter – the latest / the last; hind – hinder – the hindmost / hindermost.
Most of the parallel forms in the above list have specialized semantically (and contextually);
compare: the nearest shop and the next shop, etc. On the other hand, words like fore and first, late
and last, and near and next, respectively, are no longer recognized as related semantically by the
common speakers. A number of comparative and superlative (irregular) forms actually originate in
adverbs, e.g. nethermost < nether “beneath”, inmost / innermost < inner < in, outermost < outer <
out (also utter and utmost / uttermost), upmost / uppermost < upper < up. In addition to these, there
are some other irregular superlatives ending in -most: e.g. aftermost, lowermost, highermost,
midmost, topmost (“The topmost book of the pile”), undermost, etc., as well as a number of irregular
comparative and superlative forms coming from the names of the cardinal points: e.g. eastmost,
easternmost < most eastern < eastern < east, westernmost < west, etc.
Non-Gradables: Some adjectives cannot take comparative or superlative forms: they are
said to be non-gradable. Gradable adjectives are words that can be used in the comparative and
superlative and take a submodifier, because in their meaning there is some implicit relationship to a
standard: big and small are gradable adjectives. The notion is contrasted with classifying and
qualitative adjectives. Classifying adjectives are those adjectives that describe the class that a head
noun belongs to, and characterized by not having a comparative or superlative (for instance African,
mortal). Qualitative adjectives describe the quality of something in size, appearance, value, etc;
qualitative adjectives can be submodified by words such as very, and have comparative and
superlative forms. The non-gradables are either ‘technical’ (i.e. specialized) terms (e.g. the
adjective descriptive in “descriptive syntax”) or adjectives the meaning of which does not allow the
idea of comparing (e.g. adjectives like equal, optional, oval, principal, general, wrong, entire, etc.).
Sometimes, their meaning itself represents a comparative or a superlative (some of these are taken
over from Latin comparative or superlative forms, e.g. inferior, superior, junior, senior, major,
minor, interior, posterior, optimal, ultimate, excellent, splendid, extraordinary, supreme, unique,
etc.).
COMPARISON OF EQUALITY AND OF INFERIORITY: The comparison of equality is
expressed through the pattern: as + adj. +as, e.g. “I am as pleased as he / (colloquial) him / he is”
(the last variant can be considered ‘formal’, i.e. the most ‘grammatical’ variant, although the other
two are also acceptable). This pattern remains unchanged irrespective of whether the sentence in
which it occurs is affirmative, interrogative, negative or interrogative-negative, e.g. “Isn’t he as
pleased as I /me?”, etc.
The comparison of inequality (a ‘negative’ kind of comparison) uses the pattern: not so +
adj. + as… (or, as an increasingly frequent variant, not as + adj. + as…), e.g. “He is not so kind as
Elvis”, “He isn’t as kind as Elvis” (it seems that the latter variant is more favoured by colloquial,
52
The usage of few, fewer, little, less may be rather disconcerting, and so errors often arise. Here is the Usage
note in The NEW OXFORD Dictionary of ENGLISH (s.v. few: “Strictly speaking, the rule is that fewer, the
comparative form of few, is used with words denoting people or countable things (fewer members; fewer
books; fewer than ten contestants). Less, on the other hand, is used with mass nouns, denoting things which
cannot be counted (less money; less music). In addition, less is normally used with numbers (less than 10,000)
and with expressions of measurement or time (less than two weeks; less than four miles away). But to use less
with count nouns, as in less people or less words, is incorrect in standard English. It is perhaps one of the most
frequent errors made by native speakers of English, although in written sources the error is found less
frequently (around 8 per cent in the British National Corpus)”.
informal speech). Until quite recently, the comparison of inferiority was exclusively assigned to the
pattern: less + adj. + than… (e.g. “She is less pleased than I / me / I am”). Currently, this pattern is
only preferred in formal speech / writing.
MISCELLANEOUS REMARKS:
 The case of the second term of a comparison (i.e. the noun coming after than) should (at
least theoretically) be the same as that of the first term, e.g. “They gave me better reasons than she
(did)” [= Nominative]. Contemporary English has ceased to observe this rule (the more so in
colloquial, informal speech, e.g. “She is kinder than him”, a variant far more frequent than “She is
kinder than she (is)”; or: “Is she as tall as me?” instead of “Is she as tall as I am?”, etc.). On the
other hand, there are unfortunately cases of ambiguity, e.g. “I like her more than him”. The two
possible interpretations are: (1) “I like her more than (I like) him”; (2) “I like her more than he (likes
her)”.
COMPARISON OF COMPARATIVES AND SUPERLATIVES: This is a means of
emphasizing the idea of an intense comparative / superlative, e.g. “She is far gentler than he (is) /
than him”, respectively: “The weather is (very) much worse today”.
 (For superlatives): “She is the very nicest kind of girl”, “He is my very best friend”, “That
is by far the most comfortable car I’ve ever seen”, “This is the worst novel imaginable / conceivable
/ possible”, “It’s too, too charming!”
IDIOMS EXPRESSING INTENSE COMPARISON / THE COMPARISON OF
INTENSITY:  The comparative form + and + comparative form structure (= Romanian “din ce în
ce mai…”, “tot mai…”), e.g. “Earning money is getting more and more difficult”, “The novel grew
less and less interesting”, “Greater and greater attention was paid to practising cricket”.  Other
patterns are: ever + the comparative form: “Ever greater / ever more significant attention is being
paid to yoga”, “Eating avocado sounds ever more interesting”.  Increasingly + the positive form:
“Times are getting increasingly difficult”.
VARIOUS PATTERNS FOR EXPRESSING THE SUPERLATIVE DEGREE: 1. The most
frequent patterns assume one of the following plus-adverb patterns: “He is a very naughty boy”,
“The play was very good indeed”, “I am (very) much obliged”, “You look too lovely!” (rather rare in
use, in fact).
2. Using intensifying adverbs (i.e. submodifiers) such as: admirably, awfully (informal),
colossally, completely, considerably, dreadfully (informal), entirely, exceedingly, extraordinarily,
extremely, greatly, highly, hugely, infinitely, perfectly, remarkably, shockingly, singularly,
staggeringly (informal), strikingly, stupendously, terribly (informal), terrifically, thoroughly,
uncommonly, unusually, utterly, vastly (informal), wonderfully, etc. Examples: “It was awfully kind
of him!”, “Donald has been terrifically busy lately”.
3. Using adverbs like: just, quite, positively, really, simply: “It is just splendid!”
4. Using prefixes like: hyper-, extra-, over-, super-, ultra-: e.g. hypersensitive, oversized,
superfine, ultra-critical.
5. Using the relative superlative without mentioning the second term (or mentioning it
rather generally), e.g. “He has the worst of tempers”, “She was the funniest child”, “He wasn’t the
tiniest bit moved”, “She is the noisiest creature”, “He is most annoying!”
6. Exclamatory patterns like: “What a fine speech!”, “You were so kind to me!”, “How
green was my valley!”, “Isn’t she the most exquisite girl!”
7. A noun or a superlative in a genitival phrase such as: a / the knave of knaves, the virtue
of all virtues, in her heart of hearts, the lowest of the low.
8. Repeating an adjective or adverb: “She’s goody-goody”, “He’s clever-clever”, “The
never-never system”, “Naughty-naughty!”
9. Prolonging and emphasizing vowels: “I haven’t got the least idea” [li:i:st]; “He’s the
rudest ['ru:u:dist] fellow here”.
10. There are comparative patterns conveying the idea of a superlative (especially as
idioms, and having a colloquial, or jocular tone), e.g. as blind as a bat, as bold as brass, as close as
an oyster, as cool as a cucumber, as dead as mutton, as dumb as a fish, as good as gold, as hard as
nails, as keen as mustard, as mad as a March hare / as a hatter, as poor as a church mouse, as
sharp as a needle, as tall as a maypole, etc.
SUBSTANTIVIZATION OF ADJECTIVES: 1. When preceded by the definite article,
adjectives become nouns (with a collective sense, or nouns of multitude / plurality), e.g. the young,
the wise, the deaf, the living, the dead, the dying, the naked, the poor, the criminal, the accused, the
unemployed, the workless, the jobless, the military, the judiciary, the English, the Swiss, the
Japanese, the noble, the best informed.
Some other such substantivized adjectives are also employed with a singular meaning, e.g.
the accused, the beloved, his bethrothed, the deceased, the departed, his intended, etc. (Let us
compare: “The accused have left the court” and “The accused is still on trial for murdering innocent
people”).
2. When used only in the singular, substantivized adjectives name languages: “Hassan
knows little English, and even less Arabic”, “Finnish and Hungarian are non-Indo-European
languages, unlike Lithuanian and Latvian, which are Baltic languages”, or abstractions, e.g. the
unknown, the sublime, the fashionable, the extreme, the terrible; the newest, the latest, the very
best / worst.
3. Some substantivized adjectives have turned into actual nouns, e.g. a cannibal, a daily,
an initial, a particular (“Tim is wrong in every particular”), a sweet, a criminal, a lunatic, a liberal,
a native, a patient, an equal, an inferior, a junior, a minor (“In music, a scale having intervals of a
semitone between the second and third degrees is a minor”), a third (“An interval spanning three
consecutive notes in a diatonic scale, from C to E, is a major third, equal to two tones”), etc.
4. Some other such nouns are used only with a plural form: his betters, my / one’s elders
(“He tried to educate the young to respect their elders and betters”), chemicals, the commons (“land
or resources belonging to or affecting the whole of a community”), the Commons (“the House of
Commons”), movables / moveables (“(law) denoting or relating to personal property as opposed to
realty”), eatables (“Whole parcels of eatables and gifts”), greens (“green vegetables, e.g. Eat up
your greens!”), goods, particulars (“detailed information about someone or something, e.g. A clerk
took the woman’s particulars”), valuables, riches, shorts, theatricals (“dramatic performances:
Sarah could not be persuaded to act in those silly amateur theatricals”), tights (“(chiefly British
English) a woman’s thin, close-fitting garment, typically made of nylon, cotton, or wool, covering
the legs, hips, and bottom; a similar garment worn by a dancer or acrobat”), etc.
ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS: There are a number of adjectives that can be used as
adverbs, too (or rather adverbs having the same form as the respective adjectives, which goes
against the more general rule stating that an adverb can be made up starting from an adjective, by
adding the -LY ending / suffix, e.g. brave + -ly = bravely). Examples: “An early train” – “They came
early”, “A fast car” – “Don’t walk fast”, “A long face” – “Don’t stay too long”, “He is well now” –
“The work was well done”, “A straight back” – “She went straight back”, “She was wearing a light
(= adverb) blue dress”.
ADJECTIVES AND PREPOSITIONS: Many adjectives take special / obligatory
prepositions after them (which, moreover, are more often than not highly dissimilar from their
Romanian counterparts), e.g. deficient in wit, different from the others, fond of sweets, impatient /
glad at the news, keen on learning, liable to a tax, popular with everybody, sympathetic with their
colleagues, qualified for the job, specific to a domain, characteristic / representative / suggestive of
a field, dependent on oil exports, independent of central government, similar to pressed cheese,
dissimilar from the other novels, etc.
ADJECTIVES + ONE / ONES: If one wants to refer to a noun that has just been mentioned,
one can use most adjectives followed by one / ones: “I lost my old camera. This is a new one”,
“Don’t buy expensive apples. Get cheap ones”, “I don’t like Italian cars; I rather prefer German
ones”. Similarly, with a number + adjective: “We haven’t got a large loaf. Will two small ones do?”
We can use ordinal numerals, e.g. (the) first / second, etc. with or without one / ones:
“‘Which train did you come on?’ ‘Oh, I caught the first (one)’”.
OTHER DISTRIBUTIONAL REMARKS: Thomson-Martinet’s Practical Grammar
indicates the following special cases: (p. 26) “They are divided into groups according to their
meaning. In most of these groups the construction begins with it. For example: “It was good of you
to call. A. Character or sense: brave, foolish, clever, generous, good, nice, kind, idiotic, sensible,
silly, stupid; of + object is usual here: “It was kind of you to wait”, “It was stupid of him to leave his
car unlocked”. B. Ease or safety: dangerous / safe, easy / difficult, hard (= difficult), possible /
impossible; for + object is optional: “It is safe (for children) to drink this water”. C. Feelings and
reactions: 1. amusing, annoying, awful, disappointing, dreadful, exciting, interesting, lovely,
marvellous, nice, terrible, wonderful: “It was interesting to watch the team training”; 2. amazed,
annoyed, astonished, delighted, disappointed, glad, happy, interested, pleased, relieved, sad, sorry.
“He was disappointed to find nobody at home”. D. Willingness: anxious, prepared, ready, reluctant,
unwilling, willing: “He’s not prepared to lend you any money” (‘anxious’ used alone, or ‘anxious
about’, means ‘worried’). E. Necessity: advisable, better, best, important, necessary: “It’s best to
buy tickets in advance. It’s not necessary to help him”.
ADJECTIVES + INFINITES OR THAT-CLAUSES: A. afraid + infinitive / that-clause: “I
was afraid to speak / (that) he couldn’t help you”. B. bound, certain, sure, likely + infinitive: “Tom
is bound / certain / sure / likely to win the race”. C. certain and sure + that clauses: “Tom is certain /
sure that he will win the race”. D. “It is probable / likely / possible + that-clause. We can say: “It is
probable that George will come last”. But more often we use the adverb probably or be + likely +
infinitive: “George will probably come last. George is likely to come last.”
USING VERY AND MUCH: Before a past participle, very is replaced by (very) much, e.g.
(very) much obliged, although there are many past participles which take the adverb / intensifier
very: very complicated, very distinguished, very pleased, very tired (as they have become
adjectives).

THE DISTRIBUTION IN VARIOUS CLASSES / SEMANTIC-GRAMMATICAL

CATEGORIES OF THE UNCOUNTABLE NOUNS (U) OR THE UNCOUNTABLE
MEANINGS OF A NUMBER OF POLYSEMOUS NOUNS
N.B. All the following nouns / uses have in common the Ø article

Class III: a) some geographical names (most names of countries, regions, provinces,
shires, districts, counties, ‘cantons’, (Romanian) ‘judeţe’, states of a confederation, towns and cities,
mountain peaks, hills, lakes, villages, capes) – e.g. Great Britain, (Mount) Olympus, Lake
Windermere;
b) singular proper nouns – e.g. Ferguson, Thomas (the exceptions to this rule are provided
by metaphoric usage and / or antonomasia53 – e.g. He is a Michelangelo of our days);
c) some names of institutions, organization, bodies, enterprises, firms, etc. – i.e.
universities, high schools, colleges, schools, churches, cathedrals, monasteries, convents
(exception: places of entertainment / public shows) – e.g. Chelsea Hospital, Magdalen College (at
Oxford University), St.Paul’s;
Class IV: a) names of material (substances, stuff / matter, kinds of rock, earth, etc.) – e.g.
timber, cement, sand;
b) chemical elements and substances (including compounds and medicine substances) –
e.g. chlorine, oxygen, hydrogen, common salt, streptomycin;
c) foods and beverages, e.g. rice, cheese, lemon juice, gin, brandy;
d) materials / objects grouped / in sets – viewed as assemblages / collections, e.g.
luggage, furniture;
Class V: a) abstract states – e.g. hunger, despair, innocence, fear;
b) human activities (including names of scientific disciplines, studies, sciences, arts), e.g.
53
Antonomasia is, in linguistics and rhetoric, the substitution of a title or epithet for a proper name, e.g. the
Maid of Orléans for Joan of Arc, or His Highness; also, the use of a proper name for a (general) idea, e.g. a
Scrooge for a miser, or he is a Daniel come to judgment (from the proper name Daniel, a Hebrew prophet (6th
century BC), who spent his life as a captive at the court of Babylon; in the Bible he interpreted the dreams of
Nebuchadnezzar and was delivered by God from the lions’ den, into which he had been thrown as the result of
a trick; in the apocryphal Book of Susanna he is portrayed as a wise judge).
learning, painting, history, maths;
c) products of human activities, e.g. information, news;
d) qualities and features (both concrete and abstract), e.g. kindness, wickedness, boldness,
width;
e) intellectual activities, e.g. thinking, meditation;
f) feelings and emotions, e.g. adoration, hatred, self-conscioussness;
g) sensations and pains, e.g. cold, suffocation;
h) diseases, illnesses, derangements, e.g. scarlet fever, bronchitis, diabetes, angor
pectoris;
i) natural elements / forces and phenomena, e.g. thunder, cold, frost, sultriness;
j) human age periods, e.g. youth, adolescence, childhood.

THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE MEANINGS OF THE NOUN BOARD IN

VARIOUS CLASSES AND SUBCLASSES OF NOUNS

Nr. of Meaning / Translation(s) Class (L. Leviţchi)-(l) Subcategory (v. A. Bantaş)-

mea- Subclass (A. Bantaş)-(2) (3)
nings
1. material lemnos, lemn IV–1: nume de materie (28)
2. scîndură (subţire) I–3: subst. individual (6)
3. raft, poliţă I–3 (6)
4. panou, tablou, avizier, afişier I–3 (6)
5. (mar.) bord(aj); bordee; (av.) bord I–3 (6)
(cu determinare zero, m. ales în
locuţiuni şi expresii, e.g. on board
the ship)
6. (constr.) cofraj I–3 (6)
7, (constr.) pardoseală; planşeu I–3 (6)
8, (numai pl., cu art.hot., teatru): scenă, II–3 plurale tantum (18)
estradă
9. carton, mucava; placaj etc. IV–1 nume de materie (28)
10. bucată de carton sau placaj etc. I–3 (6)
11. (numai pl.) coperte / coperţi, copertă IV–2 nume de materie pl. (30)
de carte
12. masă de lemn (de sufragerie) I–3 (6)
13. hrană, mâncare VI–1 (28)
14. întreţinere, pensiune, masă (şi casă) V–1 abstracţiune (31)
15. comitet, comisie; consiliu, colegiu VI–1 subst. colectiv (38)
(de avocaţi etc.)
16. minister, departament VI–l (38)

NOUNS (AND PROPER NAMES) PRECEDED BY THE DEFINITE ARTICLE

(for their main generic sense – indicative of the category in which they are usually
included) – (N.B. The nouns marked with an asterisk (*) are preceded by the Ø article – when
belonging to subclass III 5 – i.e. names of languages)
Noun Agreement Class
the afflicted pl. VII 1
the air sg. III 5
the Alps pl. III 3
the aristocracy pl./sg. VI 1
the army sg./pl. VI 1
the audience sg./pl. VI I
the ballad sg. I5
the beautiful sg. V1B
the Bible sg. VI
the bourgeoisie sg./pl. VI 1
the British pl. VII I A
the Carpathians pl. III 3
the cinema sg. VIA
the clergy ['kl:di] pl. (rare sg.) VI 1
the constanbulary pl. VI 1
the Danube sg. III 2
the dead pl. III 1
the dispossessed pl. VII
the Dutch * pl. VII 1 A (but Ø sg.
III 5 as language)
the earth / Earth sg. III
the élite sg. VI
the English * pl. VII 1 A
the Enlightenment sg. V1A
the French * pl. VII 1 A
the gendarmerie (or gendarmery sg./ pl. VI 1
['d:mri]
the gentry pl./ sg. VI 1
the Hague sg. III 1 A
the Himalayas pl. III 3
the injured pl. VII 1
the intelligentsia [inteli'dentsi] pl./ sg. I1
the Irish pl. VII 1 A
the Kremlin sg. III 1 A
the laity ['leiti] pl. VII 1 / VI
the lees pl. IV 2
the / Our Lord sg. III 1 B
the military pl. VII 1
the militia sg./ pl. VI 1
the moon / Moon sg. III 5
the needy pl. VII 1
the Netherlands sg. III 1 A
the oppressed pl. VII 1
the Papacy pl./ sg. VI 1
the peasantry pl./ sg. VI 1
the police pl. VII 1
the poor pl. VII 1
the press sg./ pl. I 3 / VI 1
the proletariat pl./ sg. VI 1
the public pl./ sg. VI 1
the rabble pl. VII 1
the Renaissance sg. V1A
the rich pl. VII 1
the riff-raff pl. VII 1
the sick pl. VII 1
the sky sg. III 5
the sonnet sg. V1B
the Soviet Union (outdated) sg. III 2
the State sg. III 5
the States pl. III 2
(the United States)
the sun / Sun sg. III 5
the telephone sg. I5
the Thames [temz] sg. III 2
the underprivileged pl. VII 1
the unemployed pl. VII 1
the United Nations sg./ pl. III 2
the USA / the United States of America sg./ pl. III 2
the USSR (outdated) sg. III 2
the Vatican sg. III 2
the wealthy pl. VII 1
the Welsh * pl. VII 1 A
the wounded pl. VII 1
the yeomanry pl. VI 1
the young pl. VII 1

TYPES OF GENITIVE AND GENITIVAL RELATIONS

(after Scheurweghs – Present-Day English Syntax, Bristol, 1959, and: Kruisinga, Barbara Strang)

1. The genitive of possession – Harry’s dog;

2. The genitive of appurtenance – door-handle;
3. “Subjective” genitive (indicating the agent / the doer of an action) – time passage,
traffic flow, Borgia’s crimes;
4. The genitive of dependence – the button of the coat;
5. The genitive of qualification – the winds of the South (= Southern winds);
6. The genitive of family relationship (= „genitivul rudeniei / înrudirii”) – Peter’s
brother;
7. The genitive of authorship / of origin – Joyce’s Ulysses, the novels / works of
Hemingway;
8. ‘Objective’ genitive (indicating the object / the patient of an action) – a writer of
stories, the murder of Caesar / Caesar’s assassination;
9. The descriptive genitive – a feeling of joy, an achievement of merit;
10. The ‘appositive’ / ‘appositional’ genitive – the town of Appleford, the city of
London, the month of June;
11. The ‘partitive’ genitive – a slice of cake, some of the pupils, part of the audience,
most of the people there, a bottle of beer;
12. The genitive of gradation (= „genitivul superlativului” / cu valoare de superlativ) –
the beauty of beauties, the wonder of wonders;
13. The genitive of measure – a ten minutes’ walk, a day’s journey, three pounds’ worth
of cloth / flour; (Compare with: a three-meter-long cable, a three-wheeled vehicle)
14. The genitive expressing time (= „genitivul temporal”) – today’s rain, yesterday’s
newspaper;
15. The genitive of material – a ring of gold, a house of brick;
16. The ‘locative’ genitive – at Timothy’s, in Pigalle’s (v. also the greengrocer’s
genitive);
17. The genitive in predicative function – it is my brother’s;
 18. The genitive used absolutely – Levi’s;
19. The specifying genitive (= „genitivul particularizator”) – the man’s voice, the
elephant’s trunk;
20. The classifying genitive – a man of genius / of high morals, a lad of many talents;
21. The post-genitive – your book is bigger than Tim’s;
22. The double genitive – a friend of Toby’s.

Neuter nouns which are attributed / conferred [+HUMAN] gender through

personification (especially in poetry, fairy tales, etc., sometimes even in common speech,
especially to convey emotional nuances)

NOUN Gender of NOUN Gender of perso-

perso- Remark nification Remark
nification
adversity Feminine poetic Natural ele- Feminine poetic
ments – benign /
beneficial forces;
fer-tile, delicate
forces
Aircraft Feminine emotional Natural forces Masculine poetic
airplane / Feminine emotional Nature Feminine poetic
aeroplane
ager Feminine poetic (the) night Feminine poetic
Arts Feminine poetic the ocean Masculine poetic
Autumn Masculine poetic Passions, Masculine poetic
violent transports
Cars Feminine emotional Pets Masc./Fem. emotional
Charity Feminine poetic pity Feminine poetic
Countries Feminine emotional, pride Feminine poetic
political
Courage Masculine poetic prosperity Feminine poetic
Craft / ships Feminine general Rivers Masculine poetic
Crime Masculine poetic Sciences Feminine poetic
(the) day, daylight Masculine poetic the sea Feminine poetic
Death Masculine poetic Ships, boats Feminine general
Delicate / Feminine poetic sleep Masculine poetic
affectionate
feelings
despair Masculine poetic Small animals Feminine poetic
(the) evening Feminine poetic spring Feminine poetic
faith Feminine poetic Streams Masculine poetic
fear Masculine poetic summer Masculine poetic
fury Masculine poetic the sun / the Sun Masculine poetic
the grave Masculine poetic sympathy Feminine poetic
hatred, hate Masculine poetic terror Masculine poetic
one’s homeland Feminine poetic thunder Masculine poetic
hope Feminine poetic time Masculine poetic
jealousy Feminine poetic Towns and cities Feminine poetic
Large animals, big Masculine poetic train Feminine emotional
game, predators
lightning Masculine poetic Universities Feminine poetic
Locomotives Feminine emotional Vehicles Feminine emotional
love Masculine poetic Vessels, ships Feminine general
Luck Masculine poetic violence Masculine poetic
modesty Feminine poetic Violent actions Masculine poetic
the moon / the Feminine poetic war Masculine poetic
Moon
(the) morning Feminine poetic Waterways Masculine poetic
Motorcars Feminine emotional Winds Masculine poetic
Mountains Masculine poetic winter Masculine poetic

REMARK: On the other hand, the nouns baby, infant and (small) child are especially used
as neuter nouns (their substitute is the personal pronoun it).

SPECIAL QUANTIFIERS : NUMERICALIZATION OF MASS NOUNS

THROUGH SPECIAL MEANS

A. Used both for concrete and abstract nouns:

a piece of: advice (= un sfat), evidence (= o probă / dovadă), furniture (= o mobilă / un
obiect / o piesă de mobilier), information (= o informaţie), land (= o bucată / un petic / o fîşie de
pămînt), luggage (= un bagaj / o valiză), news (= o ştire / o noutate / informaţie), meat (= o bucată
de carne), sugar (= o bucată de zahăr).
an amount of, a small amount of: butter, cruelty, perfidy, politeness, Quixotry, regret
a (little) bit of: coffee, kindness, justice, selfishness, wisdom
a scrap of: iron, paper, green land, information, love, aggression, consolation, honesty;
scraps of discarded food
a touch of “a small amount; a trace of”: vinegar, flu, vanity.
B. Used only for concrete nouns: an article / item of furniture
a bar of chocolate / soap a blade of grass
a cake of soap / ice / dough a clod of earth
a cup of cocoa / coffee / milk / tea a fall of snow – a drift of snow
a glass of beer / milk / water / wine a grain of barley / rice / wheat
a heap of rubbish / refuse a loaf of bread / sugar / cooked meat
a lump of sugar / ice / clay a heap / pile of rubbish
a peck of dirt a pinch of salt / pepper
a pint of beer / milk a rasher of bacon / ham
a reel of film / thread / wire a roll of toilet paper
a set of furniture a sheaf of corn / wheat (pl. sheaves)
a sheet of paper – a slip of paper a skein [skein] of wool
a slice of bread / bacon / ham a sliver of cheese / of (broken) glass
a squeeze of lemon juice a stack of hay / straw
a strip of linen / leather / land a whiff of air / smoke / perfume
B'. Measures / metrical units can also be used as special means of numericalization:
an acre of land
a bushel of grain / corn / liquid a degree of heat
a fathom of water a foot of rope / ribbon
a cubic foot of concrete a gallon of oil / petrol
a league of ocean a mile of road
a square mile of forest an ounce of candies / gold (cf. ‘an ounce
of prevention’, ‘every ounce of strength’)
a quart of milk / beer a peck of flour / salt
a pint of beer / oil a pound of sugar / meat / butter
a stone of meat / lard a chain of arable land
 a yard of silk / wire a ton of ore / cement
Similarly: a block of ice, a bowl of soup, a bottle of wine, a roast of meat, a spoonful of
medicine / sugar, a stick of chalk, a suit of armour, etc.
C. Used only for abstract nouns: an act of justice / kindness / love
a flutter of excitement a pang of jealousy / guilt / loneliness / hunger
a stroke / streak of luck
a word of abuse / advice an item of information / news (but also: ‘an item
of furniture’, cf. ‘an article / a piece of furniture’).

NORMS REGARDING THE ORDER OF THE ENGLISH ADJECTIVES

General norms concerning the series / sequences of adjectives:

a) Adjectives of the same kind are separated by the conjunction and, e.g. “She wore a red
and white hat” (= both adjectives designate colours).
b) When there are more than two adjectives of the same kind, the conjunction and occurs
before the last adjective in the series, e.g. “The red, white and black flag was flapping in the
wind”.
c) When the adjectives in the sequence belong to different types / semantic categories, the
OPShACOM rule is to be applied (the acronym OPSHACOM, or OpShACOM, stands for:
Opinion-Shape-Age-Colour-Origin-Material), as proposed by the BBC Professor Grammar’s
Rule Book as a didactic mnemonic rule / formula – e.g.

(Determiner) Opinion (or Shape* Age Colour Origin I

Quality)
“It was a lovely (little) round old brown Dutch wooden table” (* The notion of Shape
logically includes the notion of Size. Thus, ‘Size’ will precede ‘Shape’, e.g. “A big square table”.

Det. Quality Size Shape Age Colour Origin Material Noun

(= Opinion)
= SHAPE
a beautiful thin round old green Chinese glass bowl
two nice big old Russian wooden houses
four horrible small orange plastic chairs
a few long narrow red and triangles

black
a nice big rectan- old dark blue Indian silk carpet

that luxurious gular white German marble bathtub

the best long cream- velvet evening

coloured dress.

SET PHRASES / COMPARATIVE IDIOMS WITH SUPERLATIVE VALUE

EXAMPLES: ROMANIAN EQUIVALENTS:

as black as coal „negru ca tăciunele / abanosul
 / pana corbului / smoala”
as blind as a mole / a bat „orb ca o cîrtiţă”
as bold as a lion „curajos ca un leu”
as bold as brass „neruşinat la culme”
as bright as day „strălucitor ca lumina soarelui”
as changeable as weather „schimbător ca vremea / vîntul”
as cold as ice „rece ca gheaţa”
(as) cool as a cucumber „rece ca un sloi de gheaţă”
as dead as mutton „mort de-a binelea”
as deaf as a post „surd ca un lemn”
as drunk as a lord / skunk „beat criţă / ca un porc”
as dry as dust „uscat ca iasca”
as dull as ditchwater „plicticos la culme; complet neinteresant”
as fresh as a daisy „proaspăt ca un boboc de trandafir”
as good as gold approx. „cuminte ca un mieluşel”
as greedy as a dog approx. „hapsîn ca un diavol”
as green as grass „verde ca smaraldul / ca bradul”
(as) hard as nails „tare ca stînca; sănătos tun; complet nesimţitor”
as hard as iron „tare ca oţelul / ca piatra / o stîncă”
as large as life „în mărime naturală; ca în realitate”
as light as a feather „uşor ea un fulg”
as like as peas „(asemănători) ca două picături de apă”
as miserable as sin „amărît(ă) ca vai de el / ea”
(as) mad as a March hare „nebun de-a binelea / de legat”
(as) mad as a hatter „nebun de legat, complet ţăcănit
/ sărit de pe fix”
(as) meek as a lamb „blând ca un miel(uşel)”
as mute as a fish „tăcut / mut ca un peşte / ca mormîntul”
as obstinate as a mule „încăpăţînat ca un catîr”
as old as the hills „vechi de când lumea (şi pămîntul)”
as pale as death „palid ca un mort”
as poor as a church mouse „sărac lipit pămîntului”
as proud as a peacock „mîndru ca un păun”
as quiet as a mouse „tăcut ca un peşte / un chitic”
as rapid as lightning „iute ca fulgerul”
(as) right as rain „ca nou, perfect sănătos”
as silent as the grave „tăcut ca un mormînt”
as silly as a sheep „prost ca o oaie / ca oaia”
as slippery as an eel „alunecos ca un ţipar / peşte”
as smooth as oil „lins-prelins”
as sober as a judge „perfect treaz, nebăut / negustat nici un pic”
as soft as wax „moale ca ceara”
as steady as a rock „neclintit ca o stîncă, tare ca stînca”
as stiff as a poker „ţeapăn de parcă ar fi înghiţit un băţ / baston”
as strong as a lion „puternic ca ursul / ca leul / ca un urs / leu”
as sweet as sugar „dulce ca mierea”
as tall as a lamp-post / as a maypole „înalt cât o prăjină / cât un stîlp de telegraf”
as tender as a chicken „slab / fraged ca un pui de găină”
as thin as a lath „slab ca o scîndură”
as timid as a hare „fricos ca un iepure”
as ugly as sin „urît(ă) ca moartea / Muma Pădurii”
as wise as a serpent „înţelept ca un şarpe”.
 NON-GRADABLE ADJECTIVES – WITH EXAMPLES

Those adjectives which do not usually have comparative forms – viz. in keeping with the
patterns valid for most adjectives – are commonly called non-gradable adjectives; they fall into the
following subclasses:
a) those which are already explicit superlatives (the last, the latest, etc, or derived from
Latin adjectives in the superlative – cf. corresponding Romanian forms: e.g. optimum, maximum,
minimum, supreme), or implicit superlatives – in which case the adjectives can be compared with
themselves, so they can possibly evince the form of an absolute superlative (most excellent, most
exquisite, etc.), but not the comparative degree;
b) those which are already comparatives (either Latinate forms, most of them also to be
found in Romanian, or made up of native elements), e.g. major, minor, superior, lesser, the latter;
c) determinative adjectives, e.g. both, own, very;
d) ‘relative’ adjectives (referring to the substance, stuff / material an ‘object’ is composed
of), many of which have the –en suffix, e.g. wooden, silken, earthen, etc;
e) similarly, those adjectives referring to chemical substances, e.g. chlorinated, hydric,
sulphurous (AmE sulfurous), etc;
f) adjectives similar to articles, e.g. any, either, some, neither;
g) adjectives referring to nationality or geographical units, e.g. English, German,
Russian, British, South-American, North-Korean, Peruvian, European;
h) adjectives referring to languages, dialects, etc., e.g. Romance, Germanic, Hindi, Welsh,
Singhalese, Australian;
i) ‘adverbial’ adjectives (having the initial particle a-), also called ‘statives’,’categories of
state’, or ‘adjectival adverbs’, e.g. ablaze, agape, aslant, afire, akimbo, awry;
j) various adjectives in postposition (predicative, determinative, etc.) e.g. below, alone,
abroad, above, errant (in knight errant “especially in medieval romance) a knight wandering in
search of deeds of courage and chivalry / chivalrous adventures”), marshal (in knight marshal
“(formerly in England) an officer of the royal family / household or court, esp. one in charge of
protocol, or having judicial functions”), elect (in the phrase the president elect / the President Elect
“elected to, or chosen for a position / voted into office, but not yet in it / not yet installed”), etc.;
k) ‘technical’ adjectives – such as ‘comparative’ in comparative grammar / method,
‘binocular’ in binocular vision, or atomic in atomic bomb;
l) numerous adjectives derived from past participles (which, however, agree with a
number of pre-modifiers), e.g. departed, escaped, bereaved, wounded, written; to these are added a
great deal of negative forms such as unwritten, unbroken, unrelieved, unscathed; misunderstood,
misspelt, etc. (although adjectives like: blessed, crooked, dogged, learned, or: uneducated,
unembarrassed, etc. can take comparative and superlative forms).

A FEW NON-GRADABLE QUALITATIVE ADJECTIVES

Similar list of
Adjective Translation Superlative (absolute Romanian adjectives
only) (cf. Ion Coteanu,
Gramatica de bazã a
limbii române, p. 92)
absolute absolut; perfect most absolute absolut
almighty atotputemic most almighty (cf. anual)
attributive atributiv – atributiv
capital capital, de căpe-tenie; – capital
formidabil
complete complet most complete complet
daily zilnic; cotidian – cotidian
definitive definitiv – definitiv
double / twofold dublu, îndoit – dublu
enormous enorm, imens – enorm
entire întreg – integral
essential esenţal; cel mai – essential
important
exquisite desăvîrşit; rafinat most exquisite desăvîrşit
former anterior – anterior
inferior inferior – inferior
infinitive infinitiv – –
junior junior; mai mic – –
latter ulterior; ultimul (din – ulterior
doi); recent
main principal – fundamental
maximum maxim – maxim
minimum minim – minim
monthly lunar, mensual – lunar
now actual; de moment – –
optimum optim; cel mai bun – optim
perfect desăvîrşit; perfect most perfect perfect, desăvîrşit
predicative predicativ – predicativ
principal principal; conducător, – principal
de căpetenie
quadruple / fourfold cvadruplu, împătrit – cvadruplu
– – – rarisim (cf. Eng.
extremely rare; most
unusual)
secondary secundar; auxiliar – secundar
senior senior; mai mare – senior
sublime sublim most sublime sublim
subsequent ulterior – ulterior
– – – substantial (cf. Eng.
most substantial, very
significant)
superior superior; mai bun – superior
supreme suprem; cel mai înalt – suprem
tantamount (to…) egal (cu…) – egal
then de atunci – –
top de vîrf; eel mai bun – –
total total – –
treble / triple / triplu, întreit – triplu
threefold
ultimate ultim, final; desăvîrşit, – ultim
excepţional
unique unic; excepţional most unique unic
weekly săptămânal; – săptămânal
hebdomadar
yearly anual – anual.

ADJECTIVES THAT HAVE GENDER / SEX PECULIARITIES (SEMANTICALLY AND

STYLISTICALLY RELATED TO ONE GENDER / SEX)
MASCULINE Meanings FEMININE Meanings

Examples (translations) Examples (translations)

burly “solid, bine făcut” beautiful “(prea)frumoasă;

minunată”

effeminate “efeminat” buxom “plinuţă (şi

ispititoare)”

handsome “chipeş, arătos; fair “frumoasă, mîndră”

mîndru”

Lanky “slab, deşirat” plump* “dolofan(ă), durduliu /

durdulie”

lubberly “mare, mătăhălos, pregnant “gravidă, grea”

greoi”

Portly “corpolent, masiv, pretty* “drăguţă, frumoasă”

trupeş”

* Also used for little babies / infants or very young boys – rather rarely for men. Note: The
adjectives portly, but especially burly are considered offensive to women – so they are to be
avoided when a woman is addressed to.
The adjective handsome (meaning “chipeş”, “bine făcut”, “trupeş”) is preferably used for
the masculine (as a counterpart of beautiful – which is even rarer than pretty when referring to
women, as well). When handsome is used in reference to women – especially mature or elderly
women – it can be translated by “impozantă”, “de statură impozantă / impresionantă”,
“prezentabilă”. Good-looking (“arătos”, “chipeş”, “bine făcut”) can be used for both sexes.
Xxxxxxxxx completari pt adjective:

A CONTRASTIVE APPROACH

A. The Adjective as a Word Class

The adjective has traditionally been considered a part of speech, and
this term is currently used to denote an English and Romanian word-class,
although the two grammars may vary.
The adjective denotes some characteristics of an object, interpreted-in
both grammars-either as a quality (positive or negative, objective or subjective).
From the semantic-morphological viewpoint, therefore, it is either a
modifier or a determinative of the noun or of the noun –equivalent (pronoun,
phrase, sentence), e.g.:
A long street (long is a modifier)
The third street (the third is a determinative)
The differences between Romanian and English are not very obvious.
We can observe the contrariety concerning this class of words in the two
languages.
In English adjectives have no number, e.g.:
The right answer the right answers
And no gender, e.g.:
An old man
An old woman
An old copy
But it may be said to have cases, depending on the case in which stands
the noun with which the adjective is connected with.
In Romanian, adjectives have number, gender and case (depending of the
case of the noun or noun-equivalent).
If in Romanian there are questions such as: „ ce fel de ?” and „ care ?” in
English the questions are what is … like?, which?, what? But many of them depend
on case and syntactic function, e.g.: The weather was fine. (what was the weather
like? ).
 In Romanian, the questions for syntactic function are very important.
They can have two main functions: attribute and predicative adjective but they can
occur as indirect object or adverbials.
In both languages, there are gradable and non-gradable adjectives and the same degrees of
comparison but, in Romanian, there are more ways to carry out these degrees.
The position of the adjectives is free in Romanian. They can come
before or after the noun when they occur in the attributive position or the
predicative one.
When they are attributive in front of the noun, they are inflected. The
noun can have one or more adjectives placed in both positions.
They are in the same case.

Caracteristics of Adjectives
The form of a word does not necessarily indicate its syntactic function.
An item may belong to more than one class. Many common adjectives, e.g: good,
hot, little, young, fat , are like ’round ’ in the examples below, in having no
identifying shape:
……..a round of golf (noun)
They came round the corner (adverb)
……..a round object ( adjective)
He came round to see us (adverb)
They sat round the table (preposition)
Nor can we identify a word as an adjective merely by considering its
potentialities for inflection or affixation. Many adjectives inflect for the
comparative and superlative, e.g.: great-greater-the greatest , but many do not
allow inflected forms, e.g.: disastrous, disastrouser, disastrousest . Moreover, a
few adverbs can be similarly inflected e.g.: He works hard, harder, hardest . It is
also true that many adjectives provide base from which adverbs are derived by
means of an-ly suffix, e.g.: happy (adjective), happily (adverb). Nevertheless,
some do not allow this derivational process, for example there is no adverb oldly
from the adjective old. And there are a few adjectives that themselves derived
from an adjective base in this way, e.g.: kindly, an item functioning also as an
adverb.
Then how can we distinguish the adjectives?
Four features are generally considered to be characteristic of the
adjective .
1. They can freely occur in attributive position, e.g.:
 The happy children
2. They can freely occur in predicative position, e.g.:
The man seemed old
Or as an object complement, e.g.:
He thought the painting ugly.
3. They can be pre/modified by the intensifier very, e.g.:
The children are very happy
4. They can take the comparative and superlative forms whether
inflectionally, e.g.:
The children are happier now .
Or by periphrastic, e.g.:
These students are more intelligent .
They are the most beautiful paintings I have ever seen.
However, not all words that are traditionally regarded as adjectives posses all of
these features. Moreover, some of the features are applied to words that are generally considered to
belong to other classes. R. Quirk selects eight words of different types of adjectives including
borderline cases, and at the same time words assigned to the traditional classes of adverbs and nouns
to which he applies five criteria. The first four criteria are an exploration of the four features that are
considered characteristic of the adjectives, while the fifth criterion introduces a feature that is
characteristic of nouns. The words are placed in the context on a sentence in order to clarify which
use of word is being tested.
The five criteria R. Quirk applies are:
1.The item can function in attributive position.
2.The item can function in predicative position following the intensive
verb seen.
3. The item can be pre-modified by the intensifier very.
4.The item can accept comparison (comparative and superlative forms,
whether inflected or periphrastic).
5. The item can function as direct object.
And here are the eight words in the contexts: (1)
a) John is hungry.
b) The universe is infinite.
c) Bob is an utter fool.
d) His reply was tantamount to an ultimatum.
e) Their house is ablaze.
f) Peter is abroad .
g) His favourite meat is lamb.
h) The meeting is soon.
Conclusion:
 a) Adjectives can function attributively (criterion 1) and/ or predicatively after seem
(criterion 2). Those that function both attributively and predicatively are central to the class of
adjectives, while those that are limited to one or other function are peripheral adjectives. Of the five
adjectives in the examples taken hungry and infinite are central adjectives, while utter, tantamount
and ablaze are peripheral adjectives. Ablaze can be included in the adjective class since we have:
Their house seemed ablaze.
where ablaze is functioning predicatively after seem and cannot function as direct object:
*I like ablaze.
*I like an ablaze.
b) Adjectives cannot function as direct object if they are required to take the indefinite article
or 0 article (criterion 5). Adjectives can function as direct object if they take a definite determiner:
He will feed the hungry.
but not otherwise:
*He will feed a hungry.
*He will feed hungry.
Under the same condition they can also function as subject, indirect object, and complement
of preposition.

Classification According to Syntactic Function

One important way in which adjectives can be classified is according to the syntactic
function thy can perform. Thus, adjectives can function:
Both attributive and predicative e.g.:
A hungry man the man is hungry
Attributive only, e.g.:
An utter fool the fool is utter
Predicative only, e.g.:
- a loath woman the woman is loath to admit it
Both Attributive and Predicative
Most adjectives can be both attributive and predicative. They constitute the central adjectives
and no more need be said about them.
Peripheral adjectives, those that are restricted to attributive or predicative position have
homonyms that occur both attributively and predicatively, and these need to be talked about.
Non-inherent adjectives occur attributively but some of them occur also predicatively. In
part, non- inherent adjectives appear to be excluded from predicative position because of the
pressure from homonyms that commonly occupy that position. But the reasons for the restrictions
are not always clear. For example, both a new student and a new friend are non-inherent, yet only the
former can be used predicatively:
That student is new.
The amplifiers are central adjectives if they are inherent and denote a high or extreme
degree:
A complete victory the victory was complete
A great destruction the destruction was great
Several of the attributive amplifiers have homonyms that can occur both attributively and
predicatively, e.g.:
I drank some pure (clean) water. –The water was pure.
Those are real flowers. – those flowers are real, not artificial.
Examples of intensifying adjectives occurring predicatively include:
The disaster was complete.
His condemnation was extreme.
The earthquake was strong.
Some restricted adjectives and some adjectives that can take coplementation and are
restricted to attributive position also have homonyms that can occur both attributively and
predicatively. For example certain in a certain person is a restrictive (equivalent to a particular
person ) while in a certain winner it is an intensifier (equivalent to a sure winner). The same:
The conscious patient - the patient is conscious
With some adjectives that take complementation there appears to be no semantic distinction,
and we must say that they freely occur in both positions, e.g.: eager, surprised, indignant. Some
adjectives that have the same form as participles can also occur in attributive and predicative
position, e.g.:
The results were surprising The surprising results.
The man seemed very offended. The offended man.
Blessed event I’m blessed if I know.
Note also the pronunciation of a few adjectives in order to be differentiated from participles:
the vowel of the participle suffix -ed is not pronounced, whereas in the adjective the suffix is treated
as a separate syllable pronounced /id/:
Blessed, crooked, dogged, learned, ragged.
The suffix of aged is pronounced as a separate syllable, /id/ when the word is predicate of a
personal pronoun or modifies it:
The man is aged. An aged man
But not, for example, in an aged wine.
Attributive only
Although most adjectives can be either attributive or predicative, some can only be used in
attributive position or can occur predominantly in attributive position.
Adjectives that are restricted to attributive position or that occur predominantly in
attributively position do not characterize the referent of the noun directly. They are termed non–
inherent and appear to be excluded from the predicative position because of the pressure of
homonyms that commonly occupy that position, e.g.: old in the usual sense of an old friend of mine
(a friend of old, a longstanding friend), is restricted to attributive position and cannot be related to
My friend is old. In this case old is opposite to new (recently acquired). The person referred to is not
identified as old: it is his friendship that is old. Similarly, the attributive adjective in the wrong
candidate does not refer to the wrongness of the person but to the mistake in identifying the person
as a candidate.
Intensifying adjectives occur in attributive position, too. Downtoners, which are relatively a
few, e.g.: slight in a slight effort feeble in a feeble joke, can be ignored since they are generally
central adjectives.
Emphasisers are generally attributively only. Examples include:
A certain sign a clear failure
A definite loss a mere repetition
An outright lie plain nonsense
Pure (sheer) fabrication
A real (undoubted) hero
The simple truth a sure sign
Amplifiers are attributively only:
1. When they are non-inherent:
A complete fool - the fool is complete
A firm friend - the friend is firm
Complete refers to the completeness of the folly, and firm to the firmness of the friendship.
2. when they are used as emphasisers, conveying principally emphasis rather than
degree. For example, total in total nonsense is emphatic, while in total destruction has a literal
application (the destruction of everything). Hence the contrast
Total nonsense - the nonsense was total
Total destruction - the destruction was total
Examples of adjectives as amplifiers that are attributively only:
The absolute limit a great supporter
A close friend a perfect idiot
A complete fool a strong opponent
An extreme enemy total nonsense
 A firm friend utter folly
His entire salary the very end
Restricted adjectives restrict the reference of the noun exclusively, particulary or chiefly.
Examples:
A certain person the precise reason
His chief excuse the principal objection
The exact answer the same student
The main reason the sole argument
The only occasion the specific point
A particular child the very man
Some adjectives that are attributively only can be related to adverbials. These non-inherent
adjectives include:
My former friend formerly my friend
An old friend a friend of old
Past students students in the past
A possible friend possibly a friend
The present king the king at present
An occasional visitor occasionally a visitor
Some require implications additional to the adverbial:
The late president till lately the president
(now dead)
If the adjectives pre-modify agentive nouns, the latter suggest as well a relationship to the
verb base or to an associated verb:
A hard worker someone who works hard
A big eater someone who eats a lot
A good thief someone who thieves well
We normally cannot use these adjectives predicatively in the intended sense when the noun
is pejorative:
A good thief that thief is good
A poor liar that liar is poor
On the other hand, one thief might say well of another:
That thief is good
But, in that case he is not using thief pejoratively, of.: He is good at stealing, but bad at
lying.
Some adjectives derived from nouns are restricted to attributive position.E.g.:
A criminal lawyer - a lawyer specializing in criminal law
An atomic scientist - a scientist specializing in atomic scientist
A woollen dress - a dress made of wool
The first two examples contain agentive nouns with denominal adjective (non –inherent)
referring to the activity of the agent, while the third example contains an adjective denoting material.
The same item may also be a central adjective. For example, a criminal lawyer can be lawyer who is
criminal, in which case criminal is a central adjective.
The adjectives ending in –en, denoting material or cardinal points occur in attributive
position only. A few adjectives that come from participles take the –en suffix where participles with
the same base have the –ed suffix or are without a suffix (drunk, shrunk): shaven, drunken,
shrunken, in order to be differentiated from participles e.g.:
A leathern purse the western countries
A drunk (en) man a shrunken face
Predicative only
The adjectives that are restricted or virtually restricted to predicative position are most like
verbs and adverbs. They tend to refer to a (possibly temporary) condition rather than to characterize.
Perhaps the most common are those refering to the health or lack of health of an animate being:
Ill (especially BrE) faint
Unwell well
 However, some people use ill and (to a lesser extend) unwell as attributives, too.
Note: sick (especially in AmE) is the exception among these health adjectives in that its
attributive use is very common:
The sick man the man is sick
A larger group comprises adjectives that can take complementation. Among them are:
Able (to) afraid (that, of, about)
Averse (to, from) aware (that, of)
Conscious (that, of) fond (of)
Glad (that, to, about, of) happy (that, to, with, about)
Loath (to) tantamount (to)
Some of these adjectives closely resemble verbs semantically:
He is afraid to do it = He fears to do it
They are fond of her = They like her
That is tantamount to = That amounts to an ultimatum
Able to is equivalent to the modal auxiliary can in the ability sense.
Some of these adjectives that are restricted to attributive position have homonyms that can
occur in both positions.
Most of a- adjectives are predicative only, e.g.:
They look asleep.
John and Mary are alike.
Several of them can take complementation.
It is not usually possible for the adjective to be complement if the subject is undefined, and
hence the oddness of
- A street is wide
The exception is with the generic use of the indefinite article:
A tiger is dangerous.

Gradability
Gradability refers to the form assumed by an adjective to show that a quality may exist in
various degrees with two objects or with one and the same objective in various moments.
Gradability is realized by comparing two or more terms or by intensifiers. So gradability
includes:
1. Comparison
2. Other forms of intensification
1.Comparison
Comparison refers to:
a) The inflected forms in –er and –est
b) Their periphrastic equivalents in more and most
c)The similar, lesser and least degrees of comparison for which there are no inflected forms
available and for which we most commonly use pre-modifiers as less, least.
Gradability can be applied to all dynamic adjectives and most stative adjectives. But there
are some principally technical adjectives and adjectives denoting provenance which are
non/gradable. Let’s be more specifically and list the types of adjectives that generally do no accept
intensification or comparison.
1. Some intensifiers such as: slight, feeble, certain, clear, definite, mere, real, true,
great, complete in: a slight effort, a feeble joke, a certain winner, a clear failure, a definite loss, a
mere repetition, a real hero, a true scholar, a great destruction, a complete victory.
2. Restrictives:
A particular child
The only occasion
His chief excuse
The main reason
3. Adjectives denoting provenance (nationalities, languages or substances)
An English book Spanish castles
 An Italian girl Wool/l/en
NOTE: when they refer to style they broke the rule:
A more Parisian citizen (of: a very British attitude)
4. Most adjectives referring to time:
The extremely present occasion
Very then
5. Adjectives referring to definite frequency of time:
Very daily
More once
Daily
Weekly
Yearly
6. Most adjectives indicating time relationship:
Very previous
7. Most adjectives referring to place:
Very here, more below
8. Some adjectives expressing an extreme degree never take intensifiers or
comparison:
More, utter, exquisite, maximum, optimum, unique, excellent.
Note: In informal Br. E, especially in women’s language often in the man’s one there are
forms like:
The most perfect little hat
The divinest music
The wizzardest jazz band
A very unique child
9. Some adjectives expressing a quality cannot take the comparison e.g.:
Equal, optional, oval, principal, general, wrong, entire, etc.
Comparison can be made from three points of view:
- to express equality
- to express inferiority
- to express superiority
To that grammatically correspond three degrees of comparison.
The positive degree, when the adjective is not compared to any other (the basic form of
the adjective) e.g.
Mrs. Brown is a pretty woman.
It’s a grey rabbit.
It’s a big grey animal.
He is a tall man.
The women’s dresses were elegant.
The comparative degree, which expresses a comparison between two objects or groups
of objects having the same quality or between the qualities of the same object, e.g.:
Tom is taller than Dan.
Mary is prettier than Betty.
It is hotter today than yesterday.
The comparison can be made from three points of view:
- to express superiority, e.g.
Bigger more important
Better more interesting
Higher more famous
Stronger more beautiful
- to express inferiority, e.g.:
Not so big as less important than
Not so/as good as less interesting than
Not so/as strong as less famous than
 Not so/as high as less beautiful than
- to express equality, e.g.:
As big as as important as
As good as as interesting as
As strong as as famous as
As high as as beautiful as
The superlative degree is required for comparison where more than two are involved,
and shows the quality in its highest degree.
The superlative can be:
- absolute, e.g. :
Very good extremely important
Quite fine exceeding prosperous
- relative, e.g.:
The best the most important
The tallest the most famous
The cleverest the most interesting
The superlative is sometimes used for a comparison between two entities, e.g.
He is the youngest (of the two brothers), but this is considered informal by many.

Formation of Comparison degrees

There are two ways to compare things or groups which differ:
Synthetic Comparison
Analytical Comparison

a) Synthetic Comparison
The synthetic Comparison is formed by adding –er for comparative and –est for superlative
to base word of the adjective, e.g.:
Yong younger the youngest
Tall taller the tallest
Slim slimmer the slimmest
Fast faster the fastest
Hard harder the hardest
Old older the oldest
Poor poorer the poorest
Wide wider the widest
Low lower the lowest
The adjectives that can form their comparison by inflection are:
a) Monosyllabic adjectives:
Long longer the longest
a) Disyllabic adjectives ending in: -y, -er, -ow, -le,ly:
Busy busier the busiest
Happy happier the happiest
Narrow narrower the narrowest
Shallow shallower the shallowest
Clever cleverer the cleverest
Tender tenderer the tenderest
Gentle gentler the gentlest
Some disyllabic adjectives having the second syllable stressed, e.g.:
profound, sincere, concise, intense, polite.
c) Other two – syllable adjectives outside above-mentioned categories that can take
inflectional forms include:
common, handsome, quiet, correct, polite, sincere, precise, exact, abrupt, honest, stupid,
simple.
Note: Paralleled form occur frequently, e.g.:
 My jokes are funnier – funniest
more funny, the most funny
His children are politer, politest
more polite, the most polite
With more they seem to do so more easily when they are predicative and are followed by
than clause:
John is more mad than Bob is.
It would be difficult to find a man more brave than he is.
He is more wealthy than I thought.
The periphrastic forms are usually used in comparative construction with the:
The more old he is, the wiser he becomes.
Periphrastic forms are, however, abnormal with a number of monosyllabic adjectives.

Spelling Rules
With adjectives taking the regular inflections, certain regular changes in spelling and
pronunciation may be introduced in the base of the adjectives when the suffixes are added.
1. The Doubled Final Consonant. When the adjective ends in a consonant preceded by a
stressed vowel final consonant is doubled, e.g.:
Sad sadder the saddest
Big bigger the biggest
Fat fatter the fattest
Thin thinner the thinnest
Wet wetter the wettest
Slim slimmer the slimmest
Red redder the reddest
Final – 1 also disabled when preceded by an unstressed vowel (but only in Br E),e.g.:
Cruel crueller the cruellest
Careful carefuller the carefullest
Cheerful cheerfuller the cheerfullest
2. The -y to -i Change
When the adjective end in -y preceded by a consonant it is changed to –i, e.g.:

Heavy heavier the heaviest

Easy easier the easiest
Angry angrier the angriest
Early earlier the earliest
Dirty dirtier the dirtiest
Lazy lazier the laziest
Happy happier the happiest
Note 1. When preceded by a vowel it does not change to -i, e.g.:
Gay gayer the gayest
Coy coyer the coyest
Note 2. Sly, shy, dry, wry, spry, keep final-y, because it is part of base:
Shy shyer the shyest
Sly slyer the slyest
Spry spryer the spryest
hence, dry dryer the dryest
Dry drier the driest
Wry wryer the wryest
Wry wrier the wriest
1. The Dropping of Final –e
If the base ends in a mute –e, it is dropped before the inflectional suffix:
True truer the truest
Large larger the largest
 Pure purer the purest
Brave braver the bravest
Safe safer the safest
Ripe riper the ripest
Nice nicer the nicest
The same applies if the base in -e is stressed:
Free freer the freest
Pronunciation Rules
Between base and their inflection there may be modification of boundary phonemes:
1. Disyllabic base ending/1/normally loses its second syllable before the inflection:
simple : /'simpl/ /'simplə(r)/ /'simplist/
humble : /'hmbl / /'hmblə(r)/ /'hmblist/
able: /eibl/ /eiblə/ /'eiblist/
2. For speakers that to not give consonantal value to a final r in spelling, the /r/ is
pronounced before the inflection: poor
Poor poorer poorest
Rare rarer rarest
3. /ŋ/ becomes / ŋg/:
Long longer longest

b) Analytical Comparison
1. Multi-syllabic adjectives form their comparative and superlative analytical, by
putting more and the most before the positive:
Interesting more interesting the most interesting
Frightening more frightening the most frightening
2. Adjectives of two syllables follow one or other of the above rules. We have
already established that those ending in –er,-y, -ly, -ow, -le, usually follow the rule of synthetic
comparison.
Those ending in –ful, -re, -ous, -ive, -usually, take more and the most:
Doubtful more doubtful the most doubtful
Careful more careful the most careful
Obscure more obscure the most obscure
Attractive more attractive the most attractive
Famous more famous the most famous
Many adjectives with the first syllable stressed, e.g.:
Agile, docile, fertile, fragile, hostile, acid, livid,
Abject, adverse, nervous, proper, sudden, tiresome, etc.
Those ending in: -ic, -ish, -ive, -less, -ous:
Active more active the most active
Comic more comic the most comic
Foolish more foolish the most foolish
3. Adjectives identical in form with present and past participle:
Worm more worm the most worm
Skilled more skilled the most skilled
Charming more charming the most charming
Note: crooked and wicked use inflected forms, too.
4. Some a- adjectives, e.g.: afraid, alert, alike, aloof, ashamed, and averse freely take
pre-modification by very and comparison:
Afraid more afraid
Alone more alone
Very much afraid
Very alone
 But attention! A person is either asleep or awake, either dead or alive. A statement is usually
true or false, an answer is right or wrong. Words describing such absolute situations are not used in
comparative or superlative patterns, except figuratively, for example:
Dead as a doornail.

Irregular Comparison
A small group of adjectives have their corresponding comparatives and superlatives formed
from different items:
Well
Better the best
Good
Bad
Worse the worst
Ill
Farther the farthest
Far
Further the furthest
Older the oldest
Old
Elder the eldest
Later the latest
Late
Latter the last
Old. Older: elder. Oldest: eldest.
Old is regularly inflected as older, oldest, but in specialized use, restricted to human beings
in family relationship, the irregular forms elder, eldest are normally substituted:
My elder brother is an artist.
His eldest son is still at school.
She is my eldest sister.
Elder and the eldest imply minority rather than age. (They are chiefly used form comparison
within a family –his eldest boy/girl/nephew).
Elder cannot be place before than, so older must be used here:
He is older than I am (elder would not be possible)
Some times these forms are not applied to people within a family, e.g.:
The elder boys at school were coaching the younger.
Pliny the older was a roman naturalist.
Both William Pit, the Elder, and William Pit, the Younger were famous British statesmen.
In this case they are equivalent with competence.
Far. Farther. Further. Farthest. Furthest.
Far has two comparatives:
Farther
Further
And two superlatives:
Farthest
Furthest
Farther, the farthest are used for distance only:
The chalet is on the farther side of the mountain.
The Floral Clock is a little farther on.
I live farther from school than my desk-mate.
Further, the furthest refers to distance, quantity or degree suggesting the idea of additional,
supplementary: e.g.:
The further development of the industry of computers ….
We could see the further end of the street.
Late. Later. Latter. The latest. The last.
 Later, the last refers to time:
Later rumours say that he is dead.
This is the latest fashion.
This is Graham Green’s latest work (the author is still living)
This is Dickens’s last work (the author is dead).
Latter is used for second one of two people or things:
Those are Dan and Peter; the latter is my cousin.
The latter half of January was very cold.
Ill. Sick.
In Br. E. ill in the sense of sick is only used predicatively, e.g.:
You look ill.
He had been ill for a week.
Attributively or as a noun - adjective it is replaced by sick: e.g.:
He is a sick men.
The sick must by cared for.
In the sense of “bad” it is used attributively, occurring in:
Ill repute/fame ill luck
Ill health ill temper/humour
Ill will
Sick used predicatively means “a-i fi / a avea greaţă” or “a fi sătul peste măsură de ceva sau
cineva”, “a-i fi silă”:
You look livid, are you sick?
As sick as a cat.
I am always seasick when I cross the Channel.
I’m sick of telling her to do her job properly.
In Am E ill is equivalent to sick (formal).
The quantifiers much, many, little, have also special comparative and superlative forms, as it
follows:
Much more the most
Many more the most
Little less the least
Little less least
Less and least are the comparative forms for quantity. Contemporary
English also uses the form less in order to express numbers:
Less troops, less clothes, less people.
There were less than ten people in the waiting room.
Less, least referring to quantity or duration are used, only with uncountable nouns
(substances, abstractions, etc.):
little money little time
little wine little interest
she has little knowledge of English to read this book.
less joy, less air, less work, less English, less noise.
He took the line of least resistance and accepted to be put on diet.
Little – younger, youngest – informal: littler, littlest, -followed by a plural noun refers to little
children and young animals:
John is a little boy.
He is my youngest one, much younger than your Willy.
The sparnow was feeding her little ones.
The littler kids shrieked in delight.
He is our littlest (one) (informal).
Little – less, lesser –least, littlest –informal –refers to size or importance:
The little toe, a little (short) man, little minds.
The lesser rogue, the lesser towns of Devon, the lesser Antilles, the lesser bear, his lesser
works, the lesser poets.
 He not no less a man than the manager.
They fought no less daring than skill.
Of two evils choose the lesser.(proverb)
I haven’t the least idea about it.
Cinderella bad the littlest feet.
The littlest things of daily life.
Little referring to age or size gets an affective nuance and meaning is diminutive:
My darling little girl.
Bless your little hart.
Modern English replaces little by small-smaller-the smallest when refers to size especially
with concrete nouns:
I saw a sweet little house, much smaller than yours, the smallest house I have ever seen.
Comparison of Compound Adjectives
1. The first element takes degree inflectional when it is a short adjective:
ill–paid worse-paid worst-paid
low-priced lower-priced lowest-priced
well-known batter-known best-known
He is greyer-eyed than his portrait.
She is stronger-minded than I expected her to be.
His prejudices are deeper-rooted than I thought.
2. They form comparative and superlative with more and most when the two elements
form an entity:
narrow-minded more narrow-minded most narrow-minded
far-fetched more far-fetched most far-fetched
old-fashioned more old-fashioned most old-fashioned
short-sighted more short-sighted most short-sighted
intelligent- more intelligent- most intelligent-
looking looking looking
When the first element is a word with has no comparison degrees compound adjectives form
comparative and superlative with more and most:
double-faced more double-faced most double-faced
heartbroken more heartbroken most heartbroken
offhand more offhand most offhand
I found him more downhearted today than yesterday.
She is most self-conscious girl I ever came across.

Comparison of Equality
For an equal comparison we use as + adjective + as either in affirmative, interrogative or
negative statements, e.g.:
George doesn’t work as hard as Dan.
George’s marks aren’t as good as Dan’s.
Jane dances as well as I do.
I can swim as well as she does.
Isn’t David as pleased as I/me?
Is David as pleased as I/me?

Negative Comparison
British English has so before the adjective when the verb is negative, e.g.:
George doesn’t work so hard as Dan.
So is sometimes used in Am E, but as is more frequent.
Set Phrases with as ……as
Every language has certain figures of speech which are so frequently used that they become
almost alike single words. English is particularly rich in comparative phrases of the
as …….as patterns.
 Here is a short list of some similes we often hear. They are not usually used in formal
writing.
as white as sheet as warm as toast
as blind as a bet as good as gold
as brown as a berry as hard as nails
as busy as a bee as large as life
as cool as a cucumber as old as the hills
as dead as a doornail as pale as a ghost
as deaf as a post as proud as a peacock
as easy as ABC as close as an oyster
as thick as thieves as dumb as a fish
as keen as mustard as mad as a March hare
as sharp as a needle as quiet as a mouse
as right as rain as stubborn as mule
Such comparatives have value of superlative.
Comparison of Inferiority
Inferiority is expressed by less and least followed by adjectives:
John is less pleased than I/me.
John is the least pleased of us all.
Jill is less tall than Jack.
The negative form of the comparison of equality (not as……as, not so…….as) has the same
meaning with the comparison of inferiority and colloquial are preferred especially for short
adjectives. The comparison of inferiority is considered more pedantic.

2.Intensification
Intensification refers to a quality of adjectives that is thought as having values on a scale.
The intensification as well as comparison is allowed by the some range of adjectives, those
that are gradable.
Certain type of adjectives that generally do not accept intensification:
1. Some intensifiers: very utter folly,
2. Restrictives: main, certain, principal, precise, sole,
 the very main reason.
3. Additives:  very additional.
4. Adjectives denoting provenance, but not when they refer to style:
 a very British army
a more Parisian citizen
5. Most adjectives referring to time when:
the extremely present occasion
6. Adjectives referring to definite frequency of time:
very daily
7. Most adjectives indicating time relationship:
very previous
8. Most adjectives referring to place:
very here more below
Exception: the adjectives bottom and may take degree intensifiers including very. Some
placed adjectives may take degree intensifiers but not very.
extreme right
due east
far south
9. Some adjectives expressing an extreme degree never take intensifiers or comparison:
more utter very complete
Types of intensifiers
Many adjectives can be used as intensifiers, usually with severe restrictions on the nouns
they modify, e.g.:
a great fool (‘very foolish’)
a great baby (‘very babyish’)
a great friend (‘very friendly’)
The range of emphasisers and those of downtowners not expressing degree (e.g.: virtually) is
much wider, as we can wee from their co-occurrence with a non-gradable adjective much as non-
Christian.
He is definitely
virtually
non-Christian
more
very
Emphasisers, amplifiers and downtowners have a general heightening effect, on scale
upward and down stairs from an assumed noun.
Degree adverbs and degree phrases can sometimes act as modifiers:
-indicating extreme position on the scale words: very, absolutely, completely, entirely, totally, utterly.
He is very friendly.
The story is totally false.
-intensifying the meaning slightly: quite, rather, fairly, pretty.
It’s quite expensive.
He was rather annoyed.
-downing or decreasing the effect of the scale word: a bit (informal), a little, slightly:
it’s slightly uncomfortable.
With limit words the same adverbs can function as modifiers. The two main classes of such
adverbs are:
a)Those indicating that the limit words’ meaning is used to its fullest extent: absolutely,
altogether, completely entirely, quite totally, utterly.
The story is totally false.
I completely disagree with you.
I was utterly dismayed.
b)Those indicating a position near the limit of the scale:
almost, nearly, practically (informal), virtually.
The bottle is almost empty.
I’ve nearly finished my work.
Note: Quite has two meanings: considerably, goes with scale words and absolutely, goes
with limit words.
The adverb used as modifier in general precedes the adjective:
He’s rather tall for ten years old.
It’s extremely good for you to do this.
In familiar speech, some adjectives and adverbs such as: terrific, tremendous, awfully,
terribly have little meaning apart from their emotive force. Thus terrific, great, grand, fantastic are
simply emphatic equivalences of good or nice. Awfully and terribly can be used in a good sense as
well as in a bad sense:
She’s terribly kind to us.
One adverb, enough, is placed after the adjective:
Too and how (i.e. how in interrogative and exclamatory sentences) are exceptional. When
they modify an adjective in a noun phrase, the indefinite article is placed after the adjective:
He’s too good an actor to forget his lines.
How tall a man is he?
How strange a feeling it was. (formal)
But with masculine and plural nouns, where no indefinite article is present, these adverbs
cannot pre-modify the adjective. Instead how (in exclamations) is replaced by what:
What strange idea you have.
 Not  How strange ideas.
In both Am E and Br E there is a tendency to use absolute most with a preceding definite
article to express an even higher degree:
Isn’t she the most beautiful woman? (an extremely, extremely beautiful woman) as compared
with ‘a most beautiful woman’.
In Australian English, too is common in the sense of absolutely in responses:
A. He’s clever
B. Too right, he is (That is absolutely true).
Too can be synonym of extremely in informal speech:
It’s too kind of you.
That’s too true.
It is also commonly used (especially in Am E) as a synonym of very in negative sentences:
I don’t like it too much.
I don’t feel too good.
Some degree adverbs, although they have the same meaning with respect to scale and limit,
tend to be distinguished in terms of positive and negative attitude:
It’s quite warm today (positive attitude).
She’s entirely satisfied (positive attitude).
It’s rather cold today (negative attitude).
She’s completely/utterly dissatisfied (negative attitude).
Fairly (considerably) and entirely (sometimes suggest a negative or a bad meaning). Thus
fairly warm implies that warmth is a good thing: if someone said It’s rather warm today, on the other
hand, he would probably be thinking that the weather was a little too warm. The expressions a bit
and
a little also tend to go with negative meaning:
These boxes are a bit/little heavy.
In familiar speech some adjectives such as terrific, tremendous, hardly meaning apart from
their emotive force. Thus: terrific, great, grand, fantastic are simply emphatic equivalents of good or
nice:
The weather was terrific.
It was a great show.
Awful, and terrific can be used in good sense as well as in ‘bad’ sense.
It’s an awful weather for this time.

Pre-modification of comparatives and superlatives

The comparatives of the adjectives whether inflected or periphrastic, can themselves be pre-
modified by amplifying intensifiers:
that much better
(so) (very) more
careful
less
Comparative adjectives are modified by the degree words which function elsewhere as
adverbials:
I am feeling much
a great deal more healthy than I was
a lot (informal)
(not  I am feeling very more healthy…..)
superlatives can be intensified by degree adverbs which apply to limit words:
it is a quite (esp. Br E) /altogether) absolutely the best show in town.
Some of intensifiers can be repeated indefinitely for emphasis, e.g.:
very very … much sooner
far far … more carefully
so so … much better (repeated so in Br E only)
 Very can also have an intensifying effect if places directly before the superlative word (but
not before most):
This is my very best suit.
You an also intensify meaning by repeating the word very, or by adding very …indeed, e.g.:
Very, very large: very quickly indeed.
A number of noun phrases (most of them informal) are also available for the degree
intensification of comparatives.
a hell of a lot (familiar)
a heck of a lot (familiar) better
a damn sight (familiar) more careful
a good deal less
a great deal
a good bit
Similarly, many downtowners may pre-modify the comparatives:
rather
somewhat
scarcely better
hardly more careful
a little less
a (little) bit
The inflectional superlative may be pre-modified by the degree intensifier very: the very
best, the very least.
If very pre-modifies the superlative, a determiner is obligatory:
She put on her very best dress.
They are working the very least they can.
The analytic superlative not normally pre-modified by the intensifier very.
the very most careful man.
More and most have other uses, in which they are both equivalent to comparison inflectors:
He is more than happy about it. (He is happy about it to a degree that is not adequately.
expressed by the word happy.
He is more good than bad. (It is more accurate to say that he is good than that he is bad).
The uninflected form cannot be substituted in this function:
 He is better than bad.
(But of.: It is worse than useless. He is worse than bad).
Most in: She is most beautiful, is not the superlative in Br E, though it can be in Am E. In Br
E, the sentence can only mean she is extremely beautiful and not that she is more beautiful than all
the others. The absolute sense of the most is common in Am E too.
Absolute most is restricted as to the adjectives with which it occurs, perhaps pre-modifying
only those expressing subjective rather than objective attitudes:
She is most unhappy.
In Br E most is a superlative only when preceded by the definite article: She is the most
beautiful (woman) or when the basis of comparison is made explicit by a post-modifying
prepositional phrase e.g.: (that) most beautiful of woman.

Other Remarks Concerning Adjectives

Position of Adjectives
Adjectives are attributive when they pre-modify nouns.
Preposition is characteristic of the English noun phrase.
Attributive adjectives appear between the determiner and the head of the noun phrase, e.g.: a
beautiful painting, a beautiful woman.
Adjectives are some times post-modifiers, they follow the item (the noun or pronoun) they
modify. Such an adjective can usually be regarded as a reduced relative clause:
The people (who were) involved were reported to the police.
 The men (who were) present where his supporters.
Complex indefinite pronouns ending in –body, -one, -thing, -where, can be modified only
postpositively.
Anyone (who is) intelligent can do it.
I want to try on something (that is) larger.
Of course, adjectives that can occur only attributively are excluded.:
 sometimes (which is) main.
somebody (who is) mere.
Postposition is obligatory for a few adjectives, which have a different sense when they occur
attributively or predicatively.
The most common are probably elect (‘soon to take office’) and proper (‘as strictly defined’)
as in:
the president elect
the City of London proper.
The adjective is post-modifier in several compounds:
attorney general notary public (Am E)
court martial body politic
Postposition (in preference to attributive position) is usual for a few adjectives and for the
four adjectives: absent, present, concerned, involved, which normally do not occur attributively in
the relevant sense, e.g.:
The house (which is) ablaze is next door to mine.
The boats (which were) afloat were not seen by the bandits.
The men (who were) present were his supporters.
Some post posed adjectives, especially those ending in –able
or –ible, retain the basic meaning they have in attributive position but convey the implication
that what they are denoting has only a temporary application. Thus, the stars visible refers to stars
that are visible at a time specified or implied while the visible stars refers to a category of stars that
can (at appropriate times) be seen. We have a similar distinction between the temporary and the
permanent in rivers navigable and navigable rivers, actors suitable and suitable actors.
With a singular noun, postposition is common in construction with only: the only actor
suitable.
Attributive present has the same sense as post-posed present in the stereotyped expression:
“present company excluded” (when perhaps it has been transposed from its usual position because
the participle has occupied that position) and in expressions that seem to be based on it (e.g.:
“excluding present company”, if we exclude present company). In Am E, attributive and post-posed
noun phrase is party or parties: the involved party, the concerned parties.
For most adjectives postposition is possible if there is complementation if the adjective:
The boys (who were) easiest to teach were in my class.
They have a house (which is) larger than yours.
On the other hand, if the adjective is alone or merely pre-modified by an intensifier,
postposition is not normally allowed:
The soldiers (rather) timid approached their officer.
However, if the noun phrase is generic and indefinite coordinated adjectives or adjectives
with some clause element added can be post-posed, though constructions are not frequent, e.g.:
Soldiers timid or cowardly don’t fight well.
Soldiers normally timid don’t’ fight well.
The more usual forms are:
Timid or cowardly don’t fight well.
Soldiers who are timid or cowardly
The adjective of an adjective phrase can often be pre-posed leaving its complementation in
post-position, e.g.:
The easiest boys to teach were in my class.
They have a larger house than yours.
 If there is no complementation of adjectives, they are modified by such adverbs as enough or
too, the adjectives with their modifiers may be pre-posed:
Brave enough students deserve to succeed.
Brave enough student deserves to succeed.
On the other hand, if there is complementation and the adjective has such a modifier, pre-
posing of the adjective and its modifier is often excluded:
Brave enough students to attempt the course deserve to succeed.
A brave enough student to attempt the course deserves to succeed.
But the adjective and its pre-modifiers may even then be pre-posed if they are placed before
the indefinite article, though this construction seems possible only if the adjective phrase is post-
posed the subject complement:
He is (not) too timid
A student to attempt the course.
brave enough
Note: a) A few set phrases allow both attributive and postpositive position with little or no
semantic difference, perhaps the most common being positive proof – proof positive.
Postposition is more usual in set phrase the answer pure and simple and obligatory for the set
phrase: from time immemorial.
b) We find the postposition of adjectives in poetry in cases where attributive position is the
norm elsewhere in the language.
c) Galore and (Am E) a plenty are post-posed obligatorily:
There were presents galore.
Both are restricted to informal speech.

Nationality Words:
The adjectives denoting provenance are virtually restricted to words ending in:
a) –ish: British, Cornish, Danish, English, Irish, Spanish, Turkish, Welsh;
b) –ch: Dutch, French;
c) –ese: Chinese, Japanese, Maltese, Portuguese;
d) –an : Romanian, Bulgarian, Brazilian, Indian, Norwegian, Belgian.
Swiss is an exception. It does not belong to any of these groups.
We can use a nationality word:
a) as an adjective: I’ve bought some Italian shoes.
It’s a Japanese radio.
Was it an English film?
b) as the name of a language:
Can you speak Italian?
I’m trying to learn Japanese.
My English is getting better.
c) to talk about a person or a group of people:
The owner is an Italian.
A lot of Japanese come here in summer.
d) to talk about a nation as a whole:
Italians/The Italians are very artistic.
Englishmen/The English love dogs.
Some adjectives denoting nationalities can be noun phrase heads:
You British and you French ought to be allies.
The clever Swiss have preserved their neutrality for centuries.
They can be a noun phrase heads with generic reference and can take plural concord.
They cannot be modified by adverbs. They can be modified by adjectives which are
normally non-restrictive, i.e. the industrious Dutch is interpreted as the Dutch, who are industrious.
Some names of nations appear with or without an uninflected plural, e.g.: Eskimo, Navaho,
Bantu. The uninflected form is used as the head of a noun phrase.
Post-modifying prepositional phrases and relative clauses can be either restrictive or non-
restrictive:
The Irish (who live) in America retain sentimental links with Ireland.
The Polish, who are very rebellious, resisted strongly.
These adjectives are sometimes used not to refer to the nation as a whole but to some part of
it, for example, troops or tourists:
The French invaded England in 1066.
The British retain central of the bringe.
Except for the type exemplified, the reference is to the power of the nation.
Names of languages (some of them identical with the adjectives listed above) are used as full
nouns. They can take possessive pronouns and a restricted range of adjectives.
He doesn’t know much English.
Russian is a difficult language.
He speaks excellent English.
My Spanish is very poor. (My knowledge of the Spanish language is very poor).
The adjectives denoting nationality do not allow amplifiers or comparatives if they refer to
someone’s nationality, which is not a quality of his/her. However, if they refer to the way someone
behaves, they are admitted.
John is very English.
more English than the English.
The following table shows the names of some countries and the corresponding
adjectives and nouns:

Name of the Adjective Singular Plural

country
China Chinese Japanese a Chinese the Chinese
Japan Portuguese a Japanese the Japanese
Portugal a Portuguese the Portuguese
Switzerland Swiss a Swiss The Swiss

Iraq Iraqui an Iraqui the Iraquis

Israel Israeli an Israeli the Israelis
Germany Greece German a German the Germans
Greek a Greek the Greeks
Italy Italian an Italian the Italians
Belgium Norway Belgian Norwegian a Belgian the Belgians
Romania Romanian a Norwegian the Norwegians
a Romanian the Romanians
Denmark Finland Danish a Dane the Danes
Poland Finnish a Finn the Finns
Polish a Pole the Poles
Spain Spanish a Spaniard the Spanish
Sweden Swedish a Swede the Spaniards
the Swedes
 England English a Englishman the English
Englishman
France French a Frenchman Frenchmen
the French
Holland, the Dutch a Dutchman Dutchman
Netherlands the Dutch
Ireland Irish an Irishman Irishmen
the Irish
Wales Welsh a Welshman Welshmen
the Welsh
Britain British a Briton the British
Britons
Scotland Scots a Scotsman Scotsmen
Scottish a Scot the Scots

Note: The noun Briton is not often used.

CONCLUSIONS

EXERCISES

“(Eu) sunt Maria. Sunt din România . Sunt româncă. Ea este Debbie. Debbie este
prietena mea. Ea este din Anglia. Este englezoaică.
Pe tine cum te cheamă? De unde eşti ?
Profesorul meu de engleză este american. Numele lui este Martin. El este din America”.

EXERCISES

1.Underline the adjectives in the following proverbs:

1) Good counsel never comes too late.
2) If you wish good advice, consult an old man.
3) A fool may give a wise man counsel.
4) The rich man spends his money, the poor man his strength.
5) The rich man may dine when he will, the poor man when he may.
6) Poverty is the mother of all arts.
7) A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
8) Little strokes fell great oaks.
9) The more you plunder a Turk the richer he is.
10) It is a great victory that comes without blood.

2. Underline the adjectives in the following proverbs:

1) Death is the poor man’s physician.
2) Little thieves are hanged but great ones escape.
3) Great things are done more through courage than through wisdom.
4) It is better to be a coward for a minute than dead for the rest of your life.
5) Sometimes severity is better than gentleness.
6) In a calm sea every man is a pilot.
7) The more danger, the more honour.
8) Dying is as natural as living.
9) Praise no man till he is dead.
10) The receiver is as bad as the thief.

3. Underline the adjectives in the following proverbs:

Still waters run deep.
Beauty opens locked doors.
Any publicity is good publicity.
Fame is thin shadow of eternity.
A good name is better than riches.
Fear is stronger than love.
A good painter can draw a devil as well as an angel.
Children and fools have merry lives.
Wise men have their mouth in their heart, fools have their heart in their mouth.
10) The noblest vengeance is to forgive.

4. Underline the adjectives in the following proverbs:

1) An ill tonque may do much.
2) To a grateful man give money when he asks.
3) Half a loaf is better than no bread.
4) A bad excuse is better than none at all.
5) Gratitude is the least of virtues, but ingratitude is the worst of vices.
6) The highest tree has the greatest fall.
7) In the country of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
8) A truly great man never puts away the simplicity of a child.
9) All things that great men do are well done.
10) From small beginnings come great things.

5. Underline the adjectives in the following proverbs:

1) The devil temps all, but the idle man tempts the devil.
2) Every task is easy to a resolute man.
3) Ignorance and curiosity are two very soft pillows.
4) The best cart may overthrow.
5) Kindness is the noblest weapon to conquer with.
6) Kind hearts are soonest wronged.
7) There is great force hidden in a sweet command.
8) Poverty is the common fate of scholars.
9) He that lives well is learned enough.
10) Better late than never.

6. Make this conjugation negative, interrogative and negative – interrogative:

I am at school with my friends.
You are at school with your friends.
He is at school with his friends.
She is at school with her friends.
We are at school with our friends.
You are at school with your friends.
They are at school with their friends.

7. Make the following conjugation negative, interrogative and negative – interrogative:

I am playing with my friends in the schoolyard.
You are playing with your friends in the schoolyard.
He is playing with his friends in the schoolyard.
She is playing with her friends in the schoolyard.
We are playing with our friends in the schoolyard.
You are playing with your friends in the schoolyard.
They are playing with their friends in the schoolyard.

8. Translate into Romanian:

I have a house. My house is big. My house is not small.
You have a house. Your house is big. Yours house is not small.
He has a house. His house is big. His house is not small.
She has a house. Her house is big. Her house is not small.
We have a house. Our house is big. Our house is not small.
You have a house. Your house is big. Your house is not small.
They have a house. Their house is big. Their house is not small.

9. Fill in the gaps with the missing possessive adjectives:

1) I’ve bought a new car
2) … car is expensive
3) I am writing with … hand.
4) Are you not writing with … hand?
5) They are sleeping in … bedroom.
6) Ann’s fountain pen is on … desk.
7) Where is … fountain pen?
8) The boys’ T-shirts are clean before … football match.
9) What about … T-shirts afterwards?
10) Bill’s birthday is on August, 21st. When is … birthday?

10. Underline the interrogative adjectives in the sentences:

i) Which boy is your cousin?
j) Which girl is Mary Smith?
k) Which man knows your brother?
l) Which house is their house?
m) Whose car is this car?
n) Whose car is very expensive?
o) Whose sister is she?
p) Whose friend are you?
q) What house are you going to buy?
r) What answer can you give to that question?
11. Underline the interrogative adjectives.
1) Whose is that house?
2) Which boy is your brother’s friend?
3) Which of the houses is the biggest?
4) That tree is this one?
5) What question can you not answer?
6) Which man knows us?
7) What books do you want?
8) Whose sister lives in Italy?
9) Which boy is good at mathematics?
10) Which days are holidays?

12. Underline the relative adjectives in the following sentences.

1) The man who speaks five languages lives in Prague.
2) The house whose entrance door is locked belongs to my uncle.
3) The boy whose mother is an opera singer is John Jackson.
4) The flower whose petals are white is a rose.
5) The girls whose eyes are blue was born in Germany.
6) The children whose parents live in France attend a good school in our town.
7) Do you know the dog whose master lives in that house.
8) The man whom you see in the car is a rich man.
9) The country whose mountains are the highest is China.
10) The boy whom you give the book to is my cousin.

13. Make these sentences plural:

1) This house is very big.
2) That flower is a carnation.
3) Is this book interesting?
4) That boy is my class-fellow.
5) Do you know that this girl is very good at tennis?
6) This book is an English book.
7) This school is my school.
8) I do not know that man.
9) That actor is famous.
10) This man is an economist.
 14. Rephrase the following sentences after the model below
The picture at which you are looking was brought by me.= The picture you are looking
at, was brought by me.
1) The pencil with which you are writing was made in China.
2) The novel to which you are referring was written by John Fowles.
3) The chairs on which you are sitting are rather expensive.
4) The money for which you are looking in on the book-shelf.
5) The dog of which you are afraid is quite friendly.
6) The child after whom Mary is looking is Ada’s.
7) The exercise on which you insist so much is quite simple.
8) The boy for whom we have been waiting for ten minutes is Peter.
9) The tree under which we‘re having our picnic is a nut-tree.
10) The book into which you are looking is an English-Romanian dictionary.

15. Which words in this exercise are indefinite adjectives?

1) Some people work hard.
2) Some days are hot, others are cold.
3) Any man knows what cars are expensive.
4) You can come to see us any day.
5) No tragedy is like Hamlet.
6) Some books are very important.
7) Some people prefer to spend their holidays abroad.
8) You can do this exercise without any difficulty.
9) You can find us at home at any hour of the day.
10) We see some red flowers in this garden.

16. Fill in the blanks with some, any, no:

A
1) …. man is content with his lot.
2) To dead men and absent there are … friends left.
3) Good counsel has … price.
4) Do right and fear … man.
5) …. Protection is as sure as innocence.
6) A dead bee makes … honey.
7) Praise … man till he is dead.
8) To deceive a deceiver is … deceit.
9) …. Reply is best.
10) …. Flying from fate.
B.
1) I see …. interesting books on this desk.
2) We’ve got … English books to read.
3) Have you got … exercises to do?
4) He must write … letters.
5) I have …. pen to write with.
6) Has she (got) … friends to talk to?
7) Do you see …. people in the street?
8) They have …. Second-hands cars for sale.
9) …. people work hard and have much money.
10) Do you know … man, who knows where he lives?

17. Fill in the blanks with any, either, neither, one, ones, no, none, all, both, every:
1) …. pain, … gain.
2) Half a loaf is better than … bread.
3) If a man receives … guests at home, when abroad he’ll have …hosts.
4) Idleness is the root of … evil .
5) …. man has his weak side .
6) …. path has a puddle.
7) Ignorance of the law excuses … man.
8) …. man can do two things at once.
9) Love makes …. fit for … work.
10)…. love like the first love.

18. Fill in the blanks with one the following words: another, other, the other, the others.
1) John bought … interesting book.
2) …. Boys are playing football on the football ground.
3) …. Book is more expensive than this one.
4) Where are …?
5) I’d like to have … cup of coffee.
6) …. Countries are making movies that are both skilful and artistic.
 7) …. Technical advance is the use of the wide screen which makes the objects of the
film much larger.
8) In the 1880s and 1890s large numbers of skyscrapers were built in Chicago, and the
design spread to …. cities as well.
9) They will two … new cars and … computer because … are not enough.
10) In Scotland and … parts of the British Isles the r’s are pronounced.

19. Underline the indefinite adjectives in the proverbs:

1) There is a remedy for all things but death.
2) Fortune knocks once at least at every man’s gate.
3) In the land of hope there is never any winter.
4) Too much liberty spoils all.
5) It is good to learn at other men’s cost.
6) There are many ways to fame.
7) Idleness is the route of all evils.
8) Have but few friends, though many acquaintances.
9) One man’s is another man’s gain.
10) There is no smoke without fire.

20. Finish the following sentences:

1) Few questions …
2) The fewest mistakes were made by …
3) A few people understand …
4) I know few people who …
5) There are quite a few …
6) Little farmers …
7) There’s a little ice cream …
8) The little fellow …
9) The water level …
10) Try to think a little before you …

21. Which of the adjectives between the brackets suits its sentence?
1) There is (plenty of, many) milk in the fridge.
2) I don’t want (any more, any little), thank you.
3) How (much, many) do you want?
4) There’s (some, any) bread in our bread-bin.
5) He didn’t understand (some, no) of the information.
6) Not (few, many) people know about my past.
7) One of the (many, few) people I know here might help me with my car.
8) (Any, no) student can understand this book.
9) We’d need (a little, a few) time to think about it.
10) (Several, fewer) videos have been sold this month than last months.

22. Choose the right word in brackets:

1) One can buy (a lot of, much) books in this book-shop.
2) (Many, few) of those books were imported from Germany.
3) I can see (little, few) coffee in the coffee-pot.
4) (Each, few) book was important to me.
5) Are there (any, each) apples on this apple tree?
6) There is (no, many) milk in our fridge.
7) Does your child drink (a lot of, few) milk?
8) Do you see (some, any) books on that desk?
9) One can hardly buy (any, each) eggs in winter.
10) (Every, few) couple is not a pair.
11) If you run after two hares you will catch (every, few, neither).
12) He, that is master of himself, will soon be master of (few, every, others).
13) There is no (every, little, much) enemy.
14) Books and friends should be (few, plenty) but good.
15) Virtue is praised by (few, all), but practised by (all, few).
16) An ill tongue may do (little, much).
17) Two heads are better than (none, one).
18) The honest have (little, nothing) to be ashamed of.

23. A. Put in few, little, many, much, quite:

1) Wealthy people have … money.
2) Jim is poor because he has … money.
3) …. meals, … diseases.
4) Too … hope deceives.
5) The married man has … cares, the unmarried one … more.
6) …. strokes fell great oaks.
7) So … servants, so … enemies.
8) So … heads, so … minds.
9) He, that travels far, knows ….
10) …. travelling teaches one how to see.

24. B. Use much or many in the following sentence:

1) How … people are waiting inside?
2) How … money do you have about you?
3) How … boats can you see on the lake?
4) How … books has your school library got?
5) How … sugar does he take in his tea?
6) How … money do you want?
7) How … centimetres are there in a metre?
8) How … seasons are there in two years?
9) Do you know how … he loves you?
10) He knows how … stars are in the sky.

25. Make these sentences negative:

1) This is a better answer to that question.
2) Paul is a better boy than Ben.
3) Is this a better house than the one we live in?
4) I know a better football player than Hagi.
5) This is the worst choice.
6) He has more patience than Alice.
7) We drink less tea than other people.
8) The least boy is very intelligent.
9) Your last decision is very good.
10) Better to go about than to fall into the ditch.

26. Make the right choice:

1) The coldest / hottest season of the year is winter.
2) The hottest / coldest season of the year is summer.
3) The longest / shortest days of the year are in winter.
4) The strongest / weakest man in the world is the president of the U.S.A.
5) Oceans are bigger / smaller than seas.
6) Lions are smaller / bigger than cats.
7) Lions are shorter / taller than giraffes.
8) Dogs are taller / shorter than cats.
 9) Everest is the tallest / lowest mountain in the world.
10) The pen is mightier / weaker than the sword.

27. Choose the right word between the brackets:

1) London is the most important (city /village) in Great Britain.
2) Japan is one of the most fascinating (countries /continents) in the world.
3) A gun is a very (important /interesting) item of a police officer.
4) San Francisco is one of the most beautiful cities in
(Germany /America).
5) Texas is three times the (size /fame) of Great Britain.
6) Greece is the name of a very beautiful country in (Asia /Europe).
7) William Shakespeare is the best known (writer /politician) in the world.
8) Mozart is the name of one of the most famous (musicians /engineers) of all times.
9) Julius Caesar is the name of one of the bravest and most polished Roman
(emperors /historians).
10) Washington is the capital of the most important country in
(Asia /America).

28. Make the right choice:

1) You can buy the most expensive car if you have (time /money).
2) David Copperfield is a very famous (fish /novel).
3) You can arrive at the remotest place soonest if you travel by (car /plane).
4) Apples are as good as (books /pears).
5) She is as young as her (sister /house).
6) Ann is as tall as my (sister /giraffe).
7) He is more intelligent than a (mathematician /statue).
8) Texas is three times as large as (Russia /Great /Britain).
9) This house is as small as that (mouse /house).
10) Are you as cunning as a (butterfly /fox)?

29. Translate into English:

1) W. Shakespeare este cel mai mare dramaturg al tuturor timpurilor.
2) Cel mai scurt drum spre fericire trece prin multă muncă.
3) Biserica era cea mai mare clădire din satul lor.
4) Daca inveti mai multe proverbe ajungi să fii mai înţelept decât eşti acum.
 5) Mr. Jones este la fel de înalt ca Mr. Smith, însă Mr. Drake este cel mai înalt om din
comunitatea lor.
6) Tom este mult mai înalt decât m-am aşteptat eu.
7) Femeile care nu mănâncă mult sunt mai zvelte decât celelalte.
8) Mrs. Jones este la fel de slab ca Mrs. Smith, dar Mrs. Drake este cea mai slabă
femeie din satul nostru.
9) Jane este o fată frumoasă, Betty este mai frumoasă decât Jane, dar Alice este cea mai
frumoasă fată dintre toate.
10) Jane nu este aşa de frumoasă ca Betty, iar Betty este mai puţin frumoasă decât Alice.

30. Choose the right word and make these sentences affirmative.
1) John is not as busy /lazy as a bee.
2) She is not as cunning /stupid as a fox.
3) You must not be as brave /shy as a lion.
4) I think he is not as firm /mobile as a rock.
5) This boy is not as gentle /old as a lamb.
6) My cousin is not as happy /active as a king.
7) Sometimes he is not as mute /agile as a fish.
8) My neighbour is not as poor /rich as a church mouse.
9) Her face is not as red /blue as a rose.
10) Today he is not as silent /noisy as the grave.

31. Write all the degrees of comparison of the adjectives in the following proverbs:
1) Virtue never grows old.
2) It is not how long, but how well we live.
3) Small gifts make friends great ones make enemies.
4) Sometimes the best gain is to lose.
5) A good conscience is a soft pillow.
6) Better an open enemy than a false friend.
7) Little things please little minds.
8) Better untaught than ill taught.
9) A good heart cannot lie.
10) Many dishes make many diseases.

32. Make the adjectives negative by adding one of the following prefixes:
un -; in -; im -; dis –
 - polite - practical
- honest - kind
- correct - friendly
- comfortable - perfect
- selfish - expensive

33. Use the prompts to give your opinious.

Use a comparative adjectives each time:
1) Fruit /chocolate (good for you).
2) Paris /New-York (safe).
3) Japanese cars /German cars (expensive).
4) Elephants /tigers/ (dangerous).
5) The Nile /the Amazon (long).
6) Cars /computers (useful).
7) Elephants/whales (heavy).
8) Cars /planes (safe).

34. List the words in the following groups. Some can go in more than one group.
WEATHER FOOD PLACE PEOPLE
Fine, delicious, beautiful friendly interesting, helpful, exciting lovely, boring, nice
windy, fantastic, awful, friendly, horrible.

35. Choose the right word:

. Lucy is quite (handsome /good –looked /good –looking).
. She has to wear glasses. She is (sight –shorted /short –sighted /short –sighting).
.Your brother must be the most tall (the tallest /taller) in the class.
. Victor is (gooder /better /the best).

36. Find the antonyms for:

interesting; light; cloudy; tall; young; ill; difficult; clever; long.

37. Find the adjectives corresponding to the following nouns:

generosity; comfort; delight; charm health; length, pity, strength; misery, storm.

38. Match the adjectives with the suitable meaning:

1) ashamed of a) părtinitor cu
 2) dexterous at b) priceput la
3) intent on c) lacom / avid de
4) partial to d) ruşinat de
5) greedy of e) atent la

39. Write the missing forms:

. bad / worse /the ….. /.
. good / …… /the best/.
late {…..{ the last
{…..{ the …..

40. Write sentences with the following words:

1) elephant /big animal /long trunk.
2) ostrich /tall bird /long neck.
3) dolphin /big animal /strong teeth.
4) eagle /bird /long wings.
lizard /small reptile /long toil.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BĂDESCU, A., Gramatica limbii engleze, E.Ş.E., Bucureşti, 1984, pp. 123-164
BANATHY, B.H., and MADARASZ, P.H., Contrastive Analysis and Error Analysis, in
Journal of English as a Second Language, 4:2, 1969
BROUGHTON, G., BRUMFIT, C., FLAVEL, R., HILL,P., PINCAS, A., Teaching English
as a Foreign Language, University of London. Institute of Education, 1978, Chapter 9, pp. l 33-
143
CHIŢORAN, Mariana, Error Analysis Revisited, Strategies of Communication,
Strategies of Learning, in MIROIU, M., (editor), Further Studies in English Language and Literature
for Refresher Courses, Bucureşti, 1987, pp 131-151
CHIŢORAN, M., An English Language Teaching Reader, Bucureşti, 1986, pp. 149-159
CORDER, S.P., The Significance of Learner’s Errors, in International Review of
Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 5:4, November, 1967, repr. in Richards, J.C., ed. 1974
CORDER, S.P., An Intermediate English Practice Book, Longman, 1970, pp. 49-51;
120-224; 188-196
DUBROVIN, M.T., Situational Grammar, Moscow, Prosveshchenye”, 1978, Part I
 EASTWOOD, J., MACKING, R., A Basic English Grammar, Oxford, University Press.
FÂRNOAGĂ, G., Communicative Activities for Young Learners, in MIROIU, M.,
(editor), Further Studies in English Language and Literature for Refresher Courses, Bucureşti,
1987, pp. 153-167
FINOCCHIARO, M., Teaching Learners of Various Ability Levels, in ELTJ, Vol. 33,
no.1, 1978
HORNBY, A.S., A Code of Patterns and Usage in English, Oxford University Press,
1975, pp. 139-154
HAYCRAFT, J., An Introduction to English Language Teaching, Longman, 1991
ILOVICI, E., Îndreptar de ortografie şi punctuaţie a limbii engleze, Bucureşti, EDP,
1972, pp. 33-41
JAIN, N.P., Error Analysis: Sources, Courses and Significance, in RICHARDS, 1974,
pp.189-215
JOHANSON, K., and MORROW, K., (ed.), Communication in the Classroom,
Applications and Methods for a Communication Approach, Longman, 1983
KLASSEN, J., Using Student Errors for Teaching, in Forum 1:1, 1991, pp.- 10-16
LADO, R., Predarea limbilor, o abordare ştiinţifică, EDP, Bucureşti, 1976
LEECH, G., SVARTVIK, J., A Communicative Grammar of English, Longman, 1978,
pp. 99: 104 –107: 189 – 196
MIROIU, M., (editor), Further Studies in English Language and Literature For
Refresher Courses, Bucureşti, 1987
MOLINSKY, S., BLISS, B., Side by Side, English Grammar through Guided
Conversation, Prentice Hall Regents, Englewood Cliffs.
MURCIA, CELCE, M., McIntosh, Lois, Editors, Teaching English as a Second or
Foreign Language, Newbury House Publishers, Inc., Rewley, Massachusetts, 1979
PRANISKAS, J., Rapid Review of English Grammar, New Jersey, 1975.
PRODROMOU, L., The Good Language Teacher, in Forum, 214, 1991, pp. 2-7
SHARMA, S.K., Error Analysis: Why and How?, in Forum, 19, no, 3, pp25 – 30, July,
1981
STRANG, B., Modern English Structure, pp. 132 – 135
THOMSON A. J., MARTINET, A. V., A Practical English Grammar, Third Edition,
Oxford University Press, 1980, pp. 15 – 42
QUIRK, R., GREENBAUM, S., LEECH, G., SVARTVIK, J., A Grammar of
Contemporary English, Longman, 1972, pp. 231 – 296; 1004; 1006; 1019; 1012 – 1014
A Forum Anthology – Selected Articles from the English Teaching Forum, 1979 – 1983
A Forum Anthology – Selected Articles from the English Teaching Forum, 1984 – 1988.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

EXERCISES

I. Turn the italicized nouns into the plural and make all the other necessary changes in the
sentences:
1. The chicken was eaten by a fox. 2. Have you seen this interesting phenomenon? 3. That knife
should be wiped at once. 4. Last night a house was robbed by a thief. 5. A child in that family has
bad manners. 6. The farmer has a hen, a goose, and a sheep. 7. My sister-in-law is a teacher. 8. My
cat never catches a mouse. 9. That businessman is considering the new tariff. 10. She has lost the
key to that door. 11. The housewife and the middle-aged woman are the principal consumers of this
product. 12. The inspector will speak to the witness who has seen the accident.
II. Explain the make-up of the following genitive forms:
1. the wall of his room 2. the students’ parents 3. earth’s distance 4. that woman’s lies 5. the world’s
natural wonders 6. the country’s future 7. the bottom of the stairs 8. Helen’s words 9. today’s
newspaper 10. the leg of the table.
III. Make up the plural and the genitive / possessive forms of the following nouns:
1. footballer, (football) player 2. explanation, behaviour 3. curiosity 4. beginning, ending 5.
difference 6. description 7. visitors 8. advertisement.
IV. Make up the plural of the following nouns:
1. apple-trees, farmhouse 2. headache 3. handshake 4. raindrops 5. window-pane 6. seaside, sunrise
7. birthplace.
V. Explain the grammar rules behind the nouns in the following sentences: 1. Significant progress
has been made in this area of knowledge. 2. Gilbert White, the father of English natural history,
lived in the 18th century. 3. The police claim that their relationship with the public is getting better. 4.
I’ve got much homework to do for tomorrow. 5. Do you eat much fruit? 6. I can give you some
information on / about this matter. 7. There are some interesting pieces / items / bits of news in
today’s paper. 8. Last year’s prize was awarded to a very young musician. 9. You needn’t leave so
early, the station is ten minutes’ walk from the hotel. 10. Do you believe that the rich have any
worries? 11. My son’s new girl friend is a charming young woman. 12. Diana, the goddess of
hunting, was called Artemis in Greek mythology. 13. At the beginning of this century there were few
female students in the English colleges. 14. Danilă Prepeleac, the hero of Creangă’s story, traded a
she-goat for a gander, and the gander for an empty bag. 15. Education is always necessary, although
the youth do not seem to fully realize it.
VI. Translate: (a) 1. Familia ei locuieşte într-o casă nu prea mare, în cel mai îndepărtat colţişor al
sătucului, unde însă împrejurimile sînt încântătoare. 2. Verişoara noastră ne vizita de fiecare dată în
ajunul Crăciunului şi aducea cadouri pentru toţi membrii familiei, de la mătuşi şi cumnate pînă la
nepoţei şi surori vitrege. 3. Ai auzit ştirile de pe TV5? Fosta ministră de externe a Olandei a hotărît
să-i dea demisia în faţa întregului Parlament, care a rămas literalmente stupefiat. 4. Veştile pe care
tocmai le-a adus nu par deloc îmbucurătoare: de-abia au trecut bagajele prin vamă, când au aflat că
ginerele unchiului Mike a suferit un atac de cord. 5. Credeau că biliardul este un joc la îndemâna
oricui, dar au renunţat curînd la ideea de a-l juca şi s-au apucat de popice. 6. Dacă aveaţi o busolă la
voi, nu vă mai rătăceaţi. De fapt, nu ştiu la ce v-aţi gîndit când aţi pus în rucsac cleştele şi compasul
şi aţi uitat ce era mai important: sfoară, săpun, busola şi ochelarii de soare. 7. Am rugat-o pe
secretară să renunţe la maşina aceea veche de scris şi să-mi scrie rapid pe computer cuprinsul tezei
de doctorat şi un proces verbal al şedinţei de la sfîrşitul săptămânii. 8. Ipotezele lor s-au dovedit
întru totul false, întrucât au pornit de la nişte premise eronate, pe baza cărora nu se putea ajunge la
rezultate rezonabile. 9. Vom merge într-o excursie în nordul Scoţiei şi, dacă vom avea un dram de
noroc, vom vedea ruinele unui castel din Evul Mediu despre care se spune că e bîntuit de duhuri. 10.
Din patru foarfeci pe care le foloseam la croitorie poţi alege şi tu una.
(b) 1. N-ai vrea să laşi puţin compasul şi rigla şi să-mi calci pantalonii aceia noi? 2. Spuneai că
foarfeca este lîngă ochelarii de distanţă ai bunicii sau lîngă penseta cumnatei tale? 3. Salopeta ei era
pătată îngrozitor cu felurite tipuri de cărbune. 4. Informaţiile lui erau extrem de precise, dar rata
întotdeauna ultima veste din ziua respectivă. 5. Mi-a cerut cu lacrimi în ochi să-i dau un sfat bun. 6.
Nu cred că ai să te descurci numai cu ciocanul, cleştele şi nicovala; ţi-ar mai trebui un patent şi o
teslă. 7. Îi plac mobilele scumpe şi bijuteriile placate cu aur sau bătute în diamante. 8. Mi-a spus că
are cunoştinţe solide de limbi clasice şi de lingvistică generală. 9. Chiar dacă-mi tot repeţi că pentru
tine banii mei nu sînt buni, cred că tot am să găsesc un mijloc de a te împiedica să-i mai cheltuieşti
pe nimicuri.
(c) 1. Nu-mi plac deloc gîscanii şi răţoii, în schimb ador lebedele şi egretele. 2. Pentru fiecare
căprioară vînată, ţăranii trebuiau să-i ofere cavalerului în schimb câte un berbec, doi păstrăvi, o
mînză şi o vulpe pentru blană. 3. Contele tocmai discuta înflăcărat cu proprietăreasa hotelului, care
era mama unui holtei cu care ar fi vrut să mă căsătorească sora vitregă a soacrei prietenei mele. 4.
Pun pariu că ai da cinci făzăniţe pe vrăbioiul acela voios la care latră acum căţeaua curierului poştal.
5. Spune-i „binefăcătoarei” tale să-şi caute alt logodnic mai înainte de a rămâne o eternă celibatară,
care suspină fără încetare după moştenitori scăpătaţi. 6. Adu mai repede mîţa din dormitorul
guvernantei să prindă şoarecii care o sperie mereu noaptea pe marchiză, făcînd-o să alerge fără
papuci în camera oaspeţilor, unde marchizul joacă şah, domino, dame şi popice cu fostul soţ al
marchizei. 7. Chiar dacă mi-ai spus că e protejata ta, pentru mine nu e decât o fetiţă de şcoală
indisciplinată şi pe deasupra obraznică. 8. Poftim! A vrut un ginere destoinic pentru această
ţărăncuţă cu priviri îndrăzneţe, care era de fapt în căutarea unui tutore, şi nu a unui mire. 9. Se spune
că ţarína era o femeie foarte atrăgătoare, dar plină de ifose, mai rău chiar decât soacra primarului,
poreclită fie „dictatoarea”, fie „executoarea” de către naşul patroanei de la brutărie. 10. Un călugăr
nu se adresează unei abatese cu asemenea vorbe pline de ocară, care l-ar face de ruşine şi pe un biet
funcţionar public. 11. Şi-a dorit foarte mult să ajungă preoteasă, dar, de când i-a devenit soţie, nu
vrea să i se mai spună altfel decât „zeiţa mea”…

EXERCISES

I. Insert the definite article or the “zero” article:

1. He ran into ... house and shut ... door. 2. ... milk is good for ... children. 3. ... food in ... restaurant
near me is very good. 4. Please, put ... butter, ... bread, and ... eggs in ... refrigerator. 5. ... lions are ...
wild animals. 6. One of Mark Twain’s works is Life on ... Mississippi. 7. In ... Asia ... elephants are
used for carrying ... goods. 8. ... man on her right is ... English. 9. We often go to ... Manchester
by ... train. 10. How many rockets have been sent to ... moon? 11. He came to his room late at ...
night and told ... Uncle Theo how he had spent ... evening at ... theatre. 12. We have .. breakfast
rather early. 13. Lizzie, ... cook, left ... Chapmans three weeks ago. 14. All the people in ... village go
to ... church on ... Sunday. 15. In some houses ... dinner is ... biggest meal of ... day.
II. Insert the indefinite article or the “zero” article:
1. He made ... mistake in his addition. 2. Would you do me ... favour? 3. The electric light was ...
important invention. 4. Where there’s ... smoke, there’s ... fire. 5. Meeting you has been ... great
pleasure. 6. He is studying ... religion. 7. They asked him ... difficult question. 8. She wants to
become ... nurse. 9. The lawyer gave his client ... very good advice. 10. She likes to eat ... good.
11. ... honesty and ... loyalty are ... rare virtues. 12. Eggs are 80 p. ... dozen. 13. What ... bad weather
we are having today! 14. She bought ... yellow dress and ... pair of ... shoes. 15. ... Glasgow is …
city in Scotland.
III. Translate into English:
1. Oamenii de ştiinţă au căzut de acord că ghepardul este cel mai rapid animal terestru. 2. Nu ştiam
că bătrânii vor fi cazaţi pe acelaşi palier cu răniţii. 3. Îţi place literatura sau preferi arta barocă? 4. Ce
păcat că nu voia nici în ruptul capului să-şi asume riscul de a spune adevărul despre crima comisă la
gară! 5. Ştiaţi că europenii au adus cartoful din America, iar amerindienii au „importat” variola şi
pojarul din Europa? 6. - Ştii cumva cum se numeşte fluviul care trece prin Viena, Bratislava şi
Budapesta? - Nu ştiai? Este Dunărea; despre acest curs de apă s-a scris şi un vals celebru în toată
lumea. 7. Vă aşteaptă un oarecare domn Smithson, fiul unui negustor din Elveţia, care tocmai a
terminat facultatea în Marea Britanie. 8. Tom este contabil, dar tare mult ar fi vrut să devină avocat.

THE ADJECTIVE
1. The Comparison of Adjectives
Adjectives have the following degrees of comparison:
a) positive: tall, good, comfortable, interesting;
b) comparative * of superiority: taller, better, more comfortable, more interesting (than…); * of
inferiority: not so tall as, not so good as, not so / as interesting than, less interesting than… ; * of
equality: as tall as, as good as, as comfortable as, as interesting as;
c) superlative: * absolute: very tall, extremely good, very interesting, absolutely marvellous; *
relative: the tallest, the best, the most comfortable, the most interesting.
There are two main patterns of comparison:
I. The Synthetic Comparison: (adjective) + -er for the c o m p a r a t i v e of superiority; the
(adjective) + -est for the relative s u p e r l a t i v e used for:
a) monosyllabic / one-syllable adjectives: sweet - sweefer - the sweetest, fine - finer - the finest, dry -
drier - the driest, big - bigger - the biggest;
b) disyllabic / two-syllable adjectives ending in -y, -ow, -er, -le (or syllabic [l]): pretty - prettier - the
prettiest, narrow - narrower - the narrowest, clever - cleverer - the cleverest;
c) other disyllabic / two-syllable adjectives: quiet, common. pleasant, handsome, concise, e.g. quiet -
quieter - the quietest.
II. The Analytic(al) Comparison: more + (adjective) for the c o m p a r a t i v e of superiority; the
most + (adjective) for the relative s u p e r l a t i v e.
It is used for plurisyllabic adjectives: rapid - more rapid - the most rapid,
comfortable - more comfortable - the most comfortable.
III. Irregular Adjectives (The Irregular Comparison):
good - better - the best; bad / ill - worse - the worst
old - older / elder - the oldest / the eldest
NOTE: elder and the eldest are used only attributively, for group relationships: his elder brother, the
eldest member of the club.
far - farther / further - the farthest / the furthest
NOTE: further has the meaning of “additional”, “more”: further news
little - less / lesser - the least
NOTE: lesser means “smaller”, “not so important”, “minor”
much / many - more - the most
fore - former - the foremost / the first
NOTE: former means “of an earlier period” or “the first of the two”; the foremost means “chief,
principal, main”: He is the foremost author of that period; first means “initial”: He was the first settler
there.
late - later / latter - the latest / the lost
NOTE: latter means “the second of (the) two”: I’ve met Bill and Tom; the former is a student, and the
latter is an engineer; the latest means “the most recent”: This is his latest novel: the last means “final”:
Eminescu’s last poem.
near - nearer - the nearest / the next
NOTE: the nearest is used for distance: Can you show me the nearest bank? The next refers to order:
The next bus is at eight.
in - inner - inmost / innermost
out - outer / utter - outermost / utmost / uttermost
up - upper - upmost / uppermost
NOTE: In, out, up are adverbs in the positive degree, but they are adjectives in their comparative and
superlative forms. Inmost and innermost mean “most private / deepest”: my inmost feelings. Utter means
“complete”, “total”: utter contempt, an utter stranger. Utmost and uttermost mean “greatest / highest”, e.g. the
utmost importance. Upmost and uppermost mean “predominant, at the very top”: These concerns were
uppermost in her mind.

IV. Special Constructions

 a) In order to show intensification by gradation, the comparative + and + comparative or more +
adjective and more + adjective patterns are used (Rom. „din ce in ce mai”, „tot mai” + adjective), e.g.
She is getting better and better. The task is easier and easier.
Her questions are more and more interesting.
(Other possibilities of saying the same thing: She is getting ever better / increasingly better / far better
(every day).
b) In order to show intensification by parallel gradation, the the + comparative…, the + comparative
(with -er), or the more + adjective, the more + adjective patterns are used (Rom. „cu cât mai ... atât mai”), e.g.
The more we are together, the merrier we are.
c) A the + comparative pattern is used when two things or persons are compared, e.g.
John is the taller of the two brothers.

2. Classification of Adjectives
- From a syntactic standpoint (i.e. according to their syntactic function / position in the sentence), English
adjectives can be:
a) both predicative and attributive, e.g. black, big, red, etc.: He’s reading a good book. That book is
good.
b) attributive only: woollen, sheer, main, total, mere, etc.: She likes that wooden stool. He is a mere
liar.
c) predicative only: alive, afloat, awake, asleep, worth, etc.: When I entered the room, she was asleep.
NOTE: Adjectives can be: subject complements, e.g. The coffee tastes good. The cake smells good,
or: object complements, e.g. She flung the door open. I like my coffee strong. (Both these
constructions can be compared to Rom. „element predicativ suplimentar”, e.g. Fumul se ridica gros.)
- From the standpoint of word-formation, English adjectives can be:
a) simple: old, cold, warm, empty; b) derived: tasteful, untrue, blonde-haired, pointless; c)
compound: homesick, self-made, well-meaning.

3. Position of Adjectives
When adjectives are attributes, they are placed:
a) before the noun: long hair, heavy box, large box;
NOTE: If there are several adjectives modifying a noun, their order from the noun to the left (i.e. in the
order of their objectivity) should generally be: (noun) + material, origin / style, colour, age, shape,
size, quality / opinion, e.g. a pretty young Italian lady, a long green woollen dress, an extraordinary
French jet plane.
b) after the noun: court martial, knight errant, somebody / something important, a carpet four metres long, a
man difficult to please, the bird singing in the breezy air.

EXERCISES

I. Supply the comparative or superlative form of the adjective in brackets:

1. She is (lazy) student in the class. 2. She is looking for a (big) flat than the one she has
now. 3. Jane is (good) cook I know. 4. He is much (familiar) with modern painting than with
modern music. 5. What is (late) news of him? 6. He was able to get (far) information at the
railway station. 7. “The Tempest” is Shakespeare’s (late) play. 8. Her (old) sister is five
years (old) than you. 9. The (far) house from the beach belongs to the Joneses. 10. John’s
(far) interest in music can be easily accounted for. 11. They got (big… and… big) marks.
II. Translate into English:
A. 1. Nu e la fel de uşor să scrii scrisori de recomandare sau invitaţii de nuntă. 2. Sora mea
mai mare e puţin mai scundă decât mine, dar ceva mai grasă. 3. Gara este mult mai uşor de
găsit dacă mergem pe scurtătura aceea. 4. E mult mai simplu să-i dai un telefon decât s-o
deranjezi acasă la o oră aşa de târzie, nu? 5. Cu cît (sînt) mai mulţi, cu atât (e) mai bine. 6. E
mai puţin convenabil să mergi cu metroul. 7. Se făcea din ce în ce mai frumoasă, ca o zînă
din poveşti. 8. Este mult mai scurt drumul dacă mergi pe şoseaua de centură. 9. S-au
descurcat mult mai greu la proba orală. 10. Ultimul său roman este şi cel mai lung. 11. Cu
cât citeşti mai multe cărţi, cu atât vei dobîndi cunoştinţe mai variate. 12. A fost cel mai slab
roman de aventuri pe care l-am citit vreodată. 13. Ca să poată demara investigaţiile, aveau
nevoie de informaţii în plus. 14. Ai putea să-mi spui care este cel mai mare dintre cei trei
fraţi ai tăi? 16. Învaţă să urmezi sfaturile celor mai în vîrstă decât tine! 17. Scrisese ultimul
său roman cu mult înainte de a muri. 17. Poţi să-mi spui şi mie care mai sînt ultimele veşti?
18. Cine este următorul, în ordine alfabetică? 19. Serile sînt din ce în ce mai răcoroase şi
mai întunecate. 20. Pentru ce ai tu nevoie de relaţii suplimentare? 21. Nu voia să meargă
mai departe nici în ruptul capului. 22. Aveau două animale de casă simpatice: un hamster şi
un căţeluş; primul rodea firele ce contact de la telefon, iar cel de-al doilea zgîria covorul cu
lăbuţele. 23. Relaţiile dintre cele două ţări erau din ce în ce mai rele.
B. 1. Corespondez de câtva timp cu două prietene care locuiesc în Londra, Jane şi Audrey; prima este galeză,
iar cea de-a doua e irlandeză. 2. Ne-au rugat mult să nu sunăm mai târziu de ora 21.30; cu cât mai devreme,
ziceau ei, cu atât mai bine. 3. Eram din ce în ce mai îngrijoraţi de starea sănătăţii bunicii, după ce a suferit
atacul de cord. 4. Nu crezi că poate fi la fel de interesant să audiezi o prelegere despre istoria civilizaţiilor sau
una despre istoria limbii literare? 5. Mi-a spus că a cumpărat mai puţin zahăr, dar mai multă făină, pentru că
aşa îi ceruse gazda, o femeie nu prea în vîrstă, dar o desăvîrşită bucătăreasă. 6. Cu cît vei călători mai mult, cu
atât vei afla mai multe lucruri fascinante despre cultura popoarelor pe care ai să le cunoşti. 7. Ar trebui să
urmezi sfatul fratelui tău mai mare: dă-le dreptate celor care ştiu să-şi argumenteze deciziile luate – iar cei
vîrstnici să ştii că au adesea argumente solide când afirmă ceva! 8. Mi s-a spus că n-a mai fost văzut în
ultimele trei luni. 9. Nu ştiau încă ce piesă vor vedea sau cât de târziu vor rămâne la spectacol. 10. Mi-a
povestit cartea pînă la cel mai mic detaliu şi mi-am dar seama că filmul n-a fost aşa de interesant ca romanul,
ci mai prost. 11. Tower Bridge nu este printre cele mai mari poduri din lume, dar se numără desigur printre
cele mai frumoase. 12. Dacă aş avea mai mult ulei, aş face o plăcintă cu mere, am însă prea puţin şi cred că
nici esenţă de rom nu este de ajuns. 13. Când o să-ţi deschidă, cere-i doar puţină apă şi, dacă vrea, şi puţin de
mâncare; sînt sigur că îţi va da. 14. Dacă veneam primul, trebuia să aştept mai mult de trei sferturi de oră în
parcare, iar dacă eram ultimul, îi făceam pe ceilalţi să aştepte. 15. Cel puţin mă puteai anunţa, dacă ştiai că nu
mai mergi la petrecere! 16. În cel mai rău caz, s-ar putea ca medicamentul acela să aibă oarecare efecte
secundare. 17. Într-un timp nu prea lung, a reuşit să realizeze cel mai mare proiect al său. 18. Dacă reuşeai să
menţii acelaşi ritm, puteai avansa mereu mai mult şi ai fi câştigat concursul.

Irregular & Special Noun Plurals.

1. irregular plurals in – ves.

The following nouns ending in – f(e) have plurals in

– ves.
Singular Plural Noun (in the
singular)
calf [k○‫ף‬f] calves [k○‫ף‬vz] viţel.
elf [elf] elves [elvz] spiriduş.
half [h○‫ף‬f] halves [h○‫ף‬vz] jumătate.
knife [naif] knives [naivz] 1.cuţit,
briceag.2.bisturiu.
leaf [li ‫ף‬f] leaves [li ‫ף‬vz] 1.frunză. 2.foaie.
life [laif] lives [laivz] 1.viaţă. 2.existenţă.
3.energie. 4.durată.
loaf [lEUf] Loaves [l ‫דּ‬vz] 1.pâine, franzelă.
2.căpăţână.3.budincă.
4.plimbare.
self [self] selves [selvz] 1.eu,
 ego.2.persoană. 3.fire.4.interese
personale.
sheaf [╖i ‫ף‬f] sheaves [╖i ‫ף‬vz] 1.snop. 2.teanc.
3.mănunchi.
Singular Plural Noun (in the
singular)
shelf [╖elf] shelves [╖elvz] poliţă, raft.
thief [θi ‫ף‬f] thieves [θi ‫ף‬vz] hoţ.
wife [waif] wives [waivz] soţie, nevastă.
wolf [w ‫דּ‬lf] wolves [w ‫דּ‬lvz] lup.

*Dwarf, handkerchiefs, hoof, scarf and wharf can have plurals in either – fs or ves.
Other words ending in – f(e) are regular.
2. vowel change.

a. some nouns change the vowel sound in plural:

Singular Plural Noun (in the
singular)
foot [f ‫דּ‬t] feet [fi ‫ף‬t] 1.picior,laba
piciorului. 2.(măsura de) 30
cm. 3.capăt. 4.mil. infanterie.
goose [g ‫דּף‬s] geese [gi ‫ף‬s] gâscă.
louse [la ‫דּ‬s] lice [lais] păduche.
mouse [ma ‫דּ‬s] mice [mais] şoarece.
tooth [tu ‫ף‬θ] teeth [ti ‫ף‬θ] dinte.

b. some nouns ending in – man change the vowel in plural.

Singular Plural Noun (in the
singular)
airman [‘eEmEn] airmen [- men] aeronaut.
businessman businessmen [-men] om de afaceri
[‘biznismEn]
cabman [kæbmEn] cabmen [- men] taximetrist.
chairman chairmen [-men] 1.preşedinte. 2.şef.
[‘t∫eEmEn]
chairwoman chairwomen [-w 1.preşedintă. 2.şefă.
[‘t∫eEw ‫דּ‬mEn] ‫דּ‬min]
clergyman [‘klз ‫ף‬d clergymen [-men] cleric, preot
‫יּ‬imEn] (anglican).
countryman[‘k╙ntr countrymen [-men] 1.ţăran.
imEn] 2.compatriot.
dutchman dutchmen [-men] Olandez.
[‘d╙t∫mEn]
dutchwoman dutchwomen [-w Olandeză.
[‘d╙t∫w ‫דּ‬m₪n] ‫דּ‬min]
Englisman Englishmen [-men] englez, britanic.
[‘iŋgli╖m₪n]
Englishwoman Englishwomen [-w englezoaică.
[‘iŋgli∫,w ‫דּ‬m₪n] ‫דּ‬min]
fireman [‘faiEmEn] firemen [-men] 1.pompier. 2.fochist.
fisherman fishermen [-men] Pescar.
[‘fi∫EmEn]
foreman [‘f foremen [-men] 1.(contra)maistru.2.
‫ﭗף‬mEn] şef de echipă. 3.prim jurat.
Frenchman Frenchmen [-men] Francez, franţuz.
[‘frent∫mEn]
Frenchwoman Frenchwomen [-w Franţuzoaică.
[‘frent∫‫דּ‬mEn] ‫דּ‬min]
gentleman [‘d gentlemen [-men] 1.gentilom, boier.
‫יּ‬entlmEn] 2.om politicos, binecrescut.
3.rentier. 4.domn.
Irishman Irishmen [-men] irlandez.
[‘aiEri∫mEn]
Irishwoman Irishwomen [-w irlandeză.
[‘aiEri∫,w ‫דּ‬mEn] ‫דּ‬min]
journeyman[‘d ‫ יּ‬з journeymen [-men] muncitor calificat.
‫ף‬nimEn]
layman [‘leimEn] laymen [-men] 1.laic, mirean.
2.nespecialist.
madman madmen [-men] nebun.
[‘mædmEn]
ploughman [‘pla ploughmen [-men] plugar.
‫דּ‬mEn]
pointsman [‘p pointsmen [-men] acar.
‫ﭗ‬intsmEn]

policeman [pE’li policemen [-men] poliţist.

‫ף‬smEn]
postman [‘pE postmen [-mn] poştaş.
‫דּ‬stmEn]
salesman salesmen [-men] 1.vânzător.
[‘seilzmEn] 2.comisionar.
spaceman spacemen [-men] astronaut.
[‘speismæn]
 spokesman spokesmen [-men] urtător de cuvânt.
[‘spE ‫דּ‬ksmEn]
sportsman [‘sp sportsmen [-men] sportiv.
‫ﭗף‬tsmEn]
sportswoman sportswomen [-w sportivă.
[‘sp ‫ﭗף‬tsw ‫דּ‬mEn] ‫דּ‬min]
superman [‘su supermen [-men] supraom.
‫ף‬pEmæn]
tradesman tradesmen [-men] 1.comerciant,
[‘treidsmæn] negustor. 2.meşter.

watchman watchmen [-men] arh. paznic.

[‘w◘t∫m₪n]
woman [‘w ‫דּ‬mEn] women [‘w ‫ דּ‬min] femeie.
workman [‘wз workmen [-men] muncitor, lucrător.
‫ף‬kmEn]
yeoman [‘jE ‫דּ‬mEn] yeomen [-mn] 1.moşier. 2.ofiţer în
marina americană.

3. irregular plural in –en suffix.

The following nouns have Old English plurals in –en .

Noun (in the
Singular Plural singular)
brethren 1.confrate, tovarăş.
brother [‘br╙■E]
[‘bre■rEn] 2.(rel.)frate.

child [t∫aild] children [t∫ildr₪n] copil.

ox [◘ks] oxen [◘ksn] bou.

4. plural same as singular.

a. some words ending in –s do not change in the plural. Common

examples:
Singular Plural Noun

barracks [‘bær₪ks] barracks cazarmă.

crossroads [‘kr◘sr₪ crossroads răscruce
‫דּ‬dz]
dice [dais] dice joc de zaruri.
headquarters headquarters 1.mil cartier
 [‘hed,kw ‫ﭗ‬t₪z] general. 2.sediu.
means [mi ‫ף‬nz] means mijloace.
series [‘si₪ri ‫ף‬z] series 1.serie, şir. 2.gamă
(de culori). 3.asortiment.
species [‘spi ‫∫ף‬i ‫ף‬z] species specie
works [wз ‫ף‬ks] works 1.lucrare. 2.uzină.
Swiss [swis] Swiss elveţian.

*Dice (used in board games) is originaly the plural of die ,which is not now often used in this
sense; in modern English dice is generally used as both singular and plural.
b. some nouns are names of animals.

Singular Plural Translation

carp [k◘‫ף‬p] carp crap
deer [di₪] deer cerb, căprioară.
grouse [gra ‫דּ‬s] grouse ieruncă, gotcan.
sheep [∫ip] sheep oaie.
pike [paik] pike ştiucă
plaice [pleis] plaice cambulă.
perch [pз ‫ף‬t∫] perch biban.
salmon salmon somon
[‘sæm₪n]
trout [tra ‫דּ‬t] trout păstrăv

*We have to notice that the nouns carp, deer, pike, trout are regular, too. They can
have regular plural by adding –s ,but they are rarely used.
* We also have to notice that some of the words are names of fish. Many (but not
all) fish have irregular plural forms. Halibut and tuna are further examples, but one shark
becomes two sharks, in the plural.
Other nouns which do not change in the plural are craft (meaning ‘vehicle’),
aircraft, hovercraft, spacecraft, Chinese, Japanese, Portuguese, Vietnamese (and other
nationality nouns ending in –ese), and the names of some other living creatures (especialy
those that are hunted or used for food).

5. foreing plurals.
Some words which come from foreign languages have special plurals. The
languages that these words are borrowed from are Greek and Latin.
a. Some of these nouns have adapted a regular English plural form.

Ending Singular Plural Translation

 Singular-
plural
-us; -i; bacillus bacilli bacil
[b₪’silai]
fungus fungi ciupercă
[‘f╙ŋg₪s] [‘f╙ŋgai]
stimulus[‘s stimuli
timj ‫שׁ‬lEs] [‘stimj ‫שׁ‬lai]

Ending Singular Plural Translation

Singula
r-plural
-um; addendum addenda atendă,
-a. [E’dendEm] [E’dendE] adaos.
Bacterium bacteria bacterie
[bæk’tiEriE] [bæk’ti
Eria]
datum data dată
[‘deitEm] [‘deitE]
erratum [e’ra errata [e’ra erată
‫ף‬t Em] ‫ף‬tEm]
quantum quanta cuantum;
[‘kw◘ntm] [‘kw◘ntE] cuantă.
stratum [‘str○ strata strat
‫ף‬tEm] [‘str○‫ף‬tE]

Ending Singular Plural Translation

Singula
r-plural
-is; -es. analysis analyses analiză
axis axes axă
basis bases bază,
temelie
crisis crises criză

Ending Singular Plural Translation

Singula
r-plural
-is; -es. diagnosis diagnoses diagnostic,
diagnoză.
 ellipsis ellipses (lingv.)elips
ă
hypothesis hypotheses ipoteză
paralysis paralyses paralizie
synthesis syntheses sinteză
thesis theses teză;
dizertaţie.

*The difference between the singular and the plural form doesn’ t show only in
spelling but also in pronunciation: axis [‘æksis] – axes [‘æksi ‫ף‬z]; basis [beisis] – bases [‘beisi
‫ף‬z]; crisis [‘kraisis] – crises [‘kraisi ‫ף‬z], etc.

b. Other borrowed nouns have the plural in –s and in the foreign plural form (they have two
kinds of plural):

Endin
g Translatio
Singular Plural
Singu n
lar-plural
-us;- cactus cactuses/ cactus
uses/-i cacti
genius geniuses/ *
genii
syllabus syllabuses/ conspect,
syllabi plan.
terminus terminuses/ capăt de
termini linie.

*Notice that the noun genius has the meaning of om de geniu with the plural
geniuses and the meaning of spirit, duh when it has the plural genii.

Endin Singular Plural Translatio

g n
Singu
lar-plural
-a; antenna antennas/ant antenă
-as/-ae ennae
formula formulas/for formulă
mulae
vertebra vertebras/ve vertebră
 rtebrae
nebula nebulas/nebu nebuloasă
lae
-um; aquarium aquariums/a acvariu
-ums/-a quaria
curriculum curriculums/ plan de
curricula studii, de învăţământ
medium mediums/me mediu;
dia cale de mijloc.
sanatorium sanatoriums/ sanatoriu
sanatoria ; infirmerie.
symposium symposiums/ banchet;
symposia simpozion
-ix/- appendix appendixes/a *
ex; ixes/-ices ppendices
index indexes/indic *
es
-on; automaton automatons/
-ons/-a automata
criterion criterions/cri criteriu
teria
-eau; bureau bureaus/bure Birou;
-eaus/ aux oficiu.
-eaux
plateau plateaus/plat platou
eaux
-o; libretto librettos/libr libret
-os/-i. etti
virtuoso virtuosos/vir virtuos
tuosi

*Notice that the noun appendix has the meaning of apendice with the plural
appendixes and adaos, adenda (la o carte) with the plural appendices and the word index –
pl.indexes =cuprins and index –pl.indices= (mat.)indici.

6. plural with irregular pronunciation.

Singular Plural Translation
bath [b○‫ף‬θ] baths [b○‫■ף‬z] or baie
[b○‫ף‬θs]
house [ha ‫דּ‬θ] houses [ha ‫דּ‬ziz] casă
mouth [ma ‫דּ‬θ] mouths [ma ‫■דּ‬z] or gură
 [ma ‫דּ‬θs]
path [pa ‫ף‬θ] paths [pa ‫■ף‬z] or alee
[pa ‫ף‬θs]
roof [ru ‫ף‬f] roofs [ru ‫ף‬fs] or [ru acoperis
‫ף‬vz]
truth [tru ‫ף‬θ] truths [tru ‫■ף‬z] or adevăr
[tru ‫ף‬θs]
wreath [ri ‫ף‬θ] wreaths [ri ‫■ף‬z] or ghirlanda
[ri ‫ף‬θs]
youth [ju ‫ף‬θ] youths [ju ‫■ף‬z] or tânăr
[ju ‫ף‬θs]
*NOTE: Third person singular forms (e.g. catches, wants, runs) and possessive forms (e.g.
George’s, Mark’s, Joe’s ) follow the same pronunciation rules as regular plurals.
B. Uncountable nouns.
1.The difference between countable and uncountable nouns.
Countable nouns are the names of separate objects, people, ideas etc which can be
counted. We can use numbers and the article a/an with counteble nouns; they have plurals.
a cat a newspaper
three cats two newspapers
Uncountable (or ‘mass’) nouns are the names of materials, liquids, abstract, qualities, collections
and other things which we see as masses without clear boundaries, and not as separate objects. We cannot
use numbers with uncountable nouns, and most are singular with no plural. We do not normally use a/an
with uncountable nouns, though there are some exceptions; with certain uncountable nouns – especially
nouns referring to human emotions and mental activity – we have to use a/an when we are limiting their
meaning in some way.
We need a secretary with a first-class knowledge of German.
(NOT ... with first class knowledge of German.)
She has always had a deep distrust of strangers.
My parents wanted me to have a good education.
(NOT ... to have good education.)
*note that these nouns cannot normally be used in the plural, and that most uncountable
nouns cannot be used with a/an at all.
My father enjoys very good health. (NOT ...a very good health.)
We’re having terrible weather. (NOT ...a terrible weather.)
He speaks excellent English. (NOT ...an excellent English.)
It’s interesting work. (NOT ...an interesting work.)
2. problem cases.
 Usually, it is easy to see whether a noun is countable or uncountable. Obviously house is
normally a countable noun, and sand is not. But sometimes things are not so clear. For instance, travel
and journey have very similar meanings, but travel is normally uncountable (it means ‘travelling in
general’,and we do not talk about ‘a travel’), while journey is countable (a journey is one movement
from one place to another). And many things can be seen bot as a collection of separate elements and as a
mass; some names for things of this kind are countable, while others are uncountable. Compare:
Countable: bean(s), pea(s), grape(s), lentil(s), fact(s)
Uncountable: rice, spaghetti, macaroni (and other pasta foods), sugar, salt, wheat, news.
3. English and other languages.
Not all languages treat things in the same way. For example, hair can be uncountable in
English, but countable in many languages; grape is a plural countable word in English, but uncountable
in some other languages. Here is a list of some common words which are usually uncountable in
English, but which have countable equivalents in some other languages.

A.Abstract: advice, age, beauty, capitalism, cleanliness, communism, death, democracy, energy, fun,
happiness, help, homework, honesty, information, justice, kindness, knowledge, laughter, liberty, life,
nonsense, permission, play, progress, recreation, strength, trouble, truth, virtue, wisdom, work, youth.

B. Matter, material: air, beer, blood, bread, butter, cake, chalk, cheese, coal, coffee, electricity,
fog, fish, gold, grass, hair, ice, ink, iron, juice, lumber, meat, milk, oil, oxygen, paper, rain, rice, smoke,
snow, soap, soup, sugar, tea, water, wine, wood.

C. Generic terms: business, change, equipment, fruit, furniture, jewellery, luggage, machinery, mail,
money, news, propaganda, publicity, research, rubbish, scenery, slang, stationery, thunder, traffic, vegetation,
weather.

D. Subject matters: acoustics, aesthetics, architecture, art, chemistry, cibernetics, civics,

economics, electronics, engineering, English, geology, grammar, history, linguistics, literature,
mathematics, music, philosophy, phisics, phonetics, poetry, science, technology, vocabulary.

E. Sports and recreation activities: baseball, basketball, bridge, camping, dancing, drinking,
football, golf, hiking, hockey, hunting, opera, sailing, singing, softball, swimming, television, traveling,
volleyball.
*Note that when uncountable English words are borrowed by other languages, they may
change into countable words with different meanings (for example French parking means ‘car park’,
 not ‘parking’).
4. illnesses.
The names of illnesses are usually uncountable in English, including those ending in –s.
If you’ve already had measles, you can’t get it again. Dacă ai avut pojar, deja, poţi să mai
faci încă o dată.
There is a lot of flu around at the moment. Este o epidemie de gripă în această periodă.
The words for some minor ailments are countable, though: e.g. a cold, a sore throat, a
headache. However, toothache, earache, stomachache and backache are more often uncountable in
British English. In American English, these words are generally countable if they refer to particular
attacks of pain. Compare:
Love isn’t as bad as toothache. (GB)
Love isn’t as bad as a toothache. (US)
5.mixed uses.
Many nouns have both countable and uncountable uses, with some differences of meaning.
Words for materials are countable, but we can often use the same word as a countable noun to refer to
something made of the material. Compare:
- I’d like some typing paper.
I’m going out to buy a paper. (=a newspaper)
- The window’s made of unbreakable glass.
Would you like a glass of water?
And normally uncountable nouns can often be used as countable if we are talking about different
kinds of material, liquid etc.
Not all washing powders are kind to your hands.
The 1961 wines were among the best this century.
Many abstract nouns can have both uncountable and countable uses, corresponding to more ‘general’
and more ‘particular’ meanings. Compare:
- Don’t hurry – there’s plenty of time.
Have a good time.
- She hasn’t got enough experience.
I had a realy strange experience.
Singular countable nouns are sometimes used as uncountable (e.g.with much, enough, plenty of or a
lot of ), in order to express the idea of amount.
We’ve got too much nose and not enough chin.
We’ve got enough paint for about 20 square feet of wall.
Some countable abstract nouns can be used uncountably after little, much, and other determiners.
 Common examples are difference, point, reason, idea, change, difficulty, change and question.
E.g. There isn’t much difference between ‘begin’ and ‘start’.
We have little reason to expect prices to fall.
I haven’t got much idea of her plans.
They experiences little difficulty in stealing the painting.
*Note the expression have difficulty (in)...ing.
I have difficulty (in) remembering faces. (NOT: I have difficulties...).
6. plural uncountables.
Some uncountable nouns are plural. They have only a plural form and so take a plural verb.
a. Some nouns name things that come in pairs. These nouns are called summation plurals.
- tools: binoculars, compasses, glasses, pincers, pliers, scales, scissors, spectacles, tongs, tweezers.
E E.g. Where are the scissors ? Unde este foarfeca ?
- clothes: braces, clothes flannels, jeans, overalls, pants, pyjamas, shorts, trousers, undies.
E.g. These trousers are too long for you. Aceşti pantaloni sunt prea lungi pentru tine.
b. Nouns that are used only in plural. They are called pluralia tantum and they end in
–s.
Examples of pluralia tantum in English are many. Here are some common nouns:
Pluralia tantum in - s
Noun Translation Noun Translation
Annals anale buttocks fese, fund.
the antipodes antipozi casuals haine obişnuite.
Arms arme chattels acareturi
Auspices auspicii chopsticks beţişoare ptr. orez
Bellows foale colours steag, drapel
Noun Translation Noun Translation
belongings lucruri; avere the Commons Camera Comunelor
Bowels intestine confines graniţă
credentials scrisori de acredi- manners purtare, maniere
tare
Cymbals muz. talger. particulars date particulare
damages despăgubiri proceedings (of lucrările (conferin-
the conference) ţei)
doings fapte regards salutări
dregs drojdie remains resturi
earnings câştig savings economii
effects efecte; scraps resturi de mâncare,
îmbrăcăminte. deşeuri de metal
embers jeratic
fireworks foc de artificii stairs scări
 funds fonduri (băneşti) surroundings împrejurimi
grounds zaţ, drojdie; parc; thanks mulţumiri
teren (al unei clă-
diri)
letters litere, literatură. troops trupe
the Lords Camera Lorzilor valuables obiecte de valoare.

There are some nouns which are pluralia tantum but only in English; in Romanian they
are countable or uncountable:
Noun Translation Noun Translation
archieves arhivă contents conţinut
Noun Translation Noun Translation
ashes cenuşă customs vamă
brain(s) intelect (coffee) dregs zaţ (de cafea)
goods marfă pains osteneală
grounds Parc în jurul unei premises local, imobil
clădiri (stil oficial)
holidays vacanţă (BrE.) sands plajă
minutes proces-verbal spirits dispoziţie (bună
sau rea)
oats ovăz wages salariu
outskirts periferie

*Note that there are some pluralia tantum nouns which don’t end in –s when they are used as
adjectives or in compounds :ash-tray, a holiday camp, staircase, a wage-earner, a wage-packet.
c. Other nouns are pluralia tantum and summation plurals.
colour = culoare, colorit; pl. colours ground = motiv, cauză; pl. grounds
colours (pl. tantum) = steag, drapel. Grounds (pl. tantum) = zaţ, teren,
Compass = busolă; pl. compasses. parc în jurul unei clădiri.
Compasses (pl. tantum) = compas. Letter = scrisoare; pl. letters
Custom = obicei; pl. customs letters (pl. tantum) = literatură, litere.
Customs (pl. tantum) = vamă manner = mod; pl. manners
Damages = avarie; pl. damages manners (pl. tantum) = maniere, purtare
Damages (pl. tantum) = despăgubiri minute = minute; pl. minutes.
Effect = efect; pl. effects minutes (pl. tantum) = proces-verbal.
Effects (pl. tantum) = efecte, haine. pain = durere; pl. pains.
Glass = pahar; pl. glasses pains (pl. tantum) = osteneală
Glasses (pl. tantum) = ochelari premise = premisă; pl. premises

Quarter = sfert, cartier; pl. quarters
Quarters (pl. tantum) = locuinţă, cantonament.
Receipt = chitanţă; pl. receipts
Receipts (pl. tantum) = încasări
Scale = gamă muzicală, solz; pl. scales.
Scales (pl. tantum) = balanţă.
tantum) = resturi de mâncare,
deşeuri de metal.
Premises (pl. tantum) = incintă
Scrap = bucăţică, fragment; pl. scraps
Spectacle = spectacol; pl. spectacles
Spectacles (pl. tantum) = ochelari
Term = perioadă, termen, trimestru;
pl. terms
Terms (pl. tantum) = termeni, relaţii, Scraps (pl.
raporturi, condiţii.

DIFFICULTIES OF THE ENGLISH ADJECTIVE

1.Irregular adjectives.

One-syllable adjectives normally have comparatives and superlatives ending in –er, - est.
Some two-syllable adjectives are similar; others have more and most. Longer adjectives
have more and most. But there are some irregular adjectives that change their form
completely, in comparative and superlative. Here is a list with irregular adjectives:

Positive Comparative Superlative Translation of the

adjective (positive)
bad worse (the) worst rău
far farther /further (the)farthest / (the) departe
furthest
good better (the) best bun
ill worse (the) worst bolnav
late later/latter (the)last/ (the)latest târziu
little less (the) least mic
many more (the) most mult
much more (the) most mult
near nearer (the) nearest/ (the) aproape
next
old older/elder (the) oldest/ bătrân
(the)eldest

2. Some difficulties of word formation

Adjectives that end in –ic and –ical.

Many adjectives end in –ic or –ical. There is no general rule to tell you which form is correct in a
particular case.
Some of these adjectives can be a difficulty because of some differences of meaning.
In some cases, both forms exist but with a difference of meaning.
A) classic and classical.
a)classic and classical
Classic usually refers to a famous or supreme ecample of its type.
Chateau Bertil is classic French wine.
Classical refers to the culture of ancient Greece and Rome, or to European works of art the
so-called ‘classical’ period in the 18th century.(Classical music often refers simply to any
serious music, especially older music.)
She’s studyng classical languages.
It’s hard to learn classical guitar.
b) comic and comical
Comic is the normal adjective for artistic comedy.
comic verse Shakespeare’s comic technique
comic opera
Comical is a rather old-fashioned word meaning ‘funny’
a comical expression
c) economic and economical
economic refers to the science of economics, or to the economy of a country,state etc.
economic theory economic problems
Economical means ‘not wasting money’.
an economical little car an economical housekeeper
d) eletcric and electrical
Electric is used with the names of particular machines that work by electricity.
an electric motor electric blankets
Note also:an electric shock;an electric atmosphere(full of excitement).
Electrical is used before more general words.
electrical appliances electrical equipment
electrical components electrical engineering
e) historic and historical
Historic is used in the sense of ‘marking history’.
1January 1973-the historic date when Britain joined the European
Coomon Market
Histotical means ‘connected with history’ or ‘really existing in history’
Historical research a historical novel
Was King Arthur a historical figure?
f) magic and magical
Magic is the more common word,end is used in a number of fixed expression.
a magic wand(=a magician’s stick)
the magic world a magic carpet
Magical is sometimes used instead of magic,especially in metaphorical senses like
‘mysterious’, ‘wonderful’ or ‘exciting’.
It was a magical experience.
g) politic and political
Politic is a rather unusual word for ‘wise’,prudent’.
I don’t think it would be politic to ask for a loan just now.
Political mean’s connected whit politics’.
political history a political career