# the / a bitch



## VicNicSor

The newly elected (female) mayor changes the hiring practice of the city's police force. From now on, everyone, regardless of weight, height, color, sex, etc., can join the force. The chief of police in the academy is indignant at that.
CHIEF: Have you seen these applications? Have you seen what our new lady mayor has brought us? Do you know she is attempting to dismantle one of this country's great institutions of law and order? What do you say to that, Lassard?
COMMANDANT LASSARD: [agreeing] *The bitch*.
Police Academy, movie

Why is he using the definite article instead of the indefinite one? Thank you.


----------



## london calling

Because we're talking about a specific bitch, not just any bitch.


----------



## VicNicSor

london calling said:


> Because we're talking about a specific bitch, not just any bitch.



I thought that was the "she's *a *bitch", or "what *a *bitch she is" kind of statement. Is that wrong?


----------



## london calling

VicNicSor said:


> I just thought that was the "she's *a *bitch", or "what *a *bitch she is" kind of statement. Is that wrong?


No, not at all.


----------



## heypresto

He could have said 'She's a bitch'.  Or just 'Bitch!'. But he chose to go with 'The bitch!'.

Cross-posted.


----------



## VicNicSor

heypresto said:


> But he chose to go with 'The bitch!'


Of course he chose that if he said that. But why? Or, what would the extended phrase be?


----------



## VicNicSor

london calling said:


> No, not at all.


To the first sentence, or the second?..


----------



## JulianStuart

heypresto said:


> He could have said 'She's a bitch'.  Or just 'Bitch!'. But he chose to go with 'The bitch!'.
> 
> Cross-posted.


(I suspect 99.999% of the thought process was about the word bitch and 0.001% was about the choice of article - extended phrase 0.0000000%)


----------



## heypresto

VicNicSor said:


> what would the extended phrase be?



I suppose it would be 'The bitch! She's attempting to dismantle one of this country's great institutions of law and order', or 'She's attempting to dismantle one of this country's great institutions of law and order. The bitch!'.


----------



## VicNicSor

Compare, please:
In the movie "Overboard", the carpenter Dean did a job for a lady, but she treated him unfairly and just pushed him overboard with his tools, without pay. Later he sees her on TV, and tells his friend: 
-- Look at this. That's her.
-- Who?
-- *The *bitch!

Now it is immediately clear why it is "*the *bitch", because he of course told his best friend about the incident. 

But in the OP, I still don't understand


----------



## JulianStuart

VicNicSor said:


> Compare, please:
> In the movie "Overboard", the carpenter Dean did a job for a lady, but she treated him unfairly and just pushed him overboard with his tools, without pay. Later he sees her on TV, and tells his friend:
> -- Look at this. That's her.
> -- Who?
> -- *The *bitch!
> 
> Now it is immediately clear why it is "*the *bitch", because he of course told his best friend about the incident.
> 
> But in the OP, I still don't understand


Would your mind explode if we told you there is  nothing to "understand"  - it's just the way people say things - the _speaker's choice_ of article makes ABSOLUTELY no difference (see #5)


----------



## VicNicSor

I just need to understand why kind of THE it is.

Could it be replaced by "*This/That* bitch."?


----------



## Hermione Golightly

Because we're talking about a specific person, that's why. Basic English usage standard, conversational exchange pattern.

"My bloody husband has taken me off his credit card!"
"The bastard!" This equals 'he is a bastard'


> Could it be replaced by "*This/That* bitch."?


 Not unless there was some reason for changing to the demonstrative that we know nothing about.

Why do you think somebody might choose to replace the definite article in this instance?


----------



## VicNicSor

Hermione Golightly said:


> Because we're talking about a specific person, that's why. Basic English usage.


It would probably be obvious for me if it was a normal sentence, but with just a single-word remark, it is unclear.

Could these two work in the OP with a similar meaning?:
"*That *bitch."
"*This *bitch."


----------



## JulianStuart

VicNicSor said:


> I just need to understand why kind of THE it is.
> 
> Could it be replaced by "*This/That* bitch."?


OK- I think my head just exploded   It's an irrelevant insignificant "the" which is part of a set expression/expletive/non-sentence in such circumstances.
(These discussions about articles often end up  like: I could have worn a red shirt or a blue today, and I wore a red one.  You ask me why.  I tell you "because I felt like it".  And then you ask "Why did you feel like it?"  "Because I did." "But why?"  )
People don't always speak in sentences and sometime it is totally useless to try and analyse them as if they did.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

> Could these two work in the OP with a similar meaning?:
> "*That *bitch."
> "*This *bitch."


It's possible but unlikely. I have edited my reply and I apologise if the edits make a difference.
 This particular use of the definite article is a classic form of common conversational exchange.


----------



## VicNicSor

Thank you, everyone, for the replies.

One question:


Hermione Golightly said:


> "My bloody husband has taken me off his credit card!"
> "The bastard!" This equals 'he is a bastard'


Do I correctly understand the whole thing:
"*The *bastard!": "He's *a *bastard!" or "Bastard!"
"*The *bastard!": "He's *the *bastard!" or "*A *bastard!"


----------



## Hermione Golightly

Right. You have understood my comments.
Please read Julian's #15 very carefully and don't ever forget it.
I would add to his very apposite remarks, that you need to ask yourself if you are 'highjacking' an OP's thread.


----------



## london calling

Hermione Golightly said:


> Because we're talking about a specific person, that's why. Basic English usage standard, conversational exchange pattern.


Which is exactly what I said in post 2. Vic, you certainly take some convincing.


----------



## SevenDays

VicNicSor said:


> I thought that was the "she's *a *bitch", or "what *a *bitch she is" kind of statement. Is that wrong?



In "she's a bitch" and "what a bitch she is," specificity/reference is provided by the pronoun "she" so you use don't use "the" for the same purpose. The indefinite articles does other things: indicates membership in the class of bitch (_she's a bitch_) or presents "bitch" in its highest degree (_what a bitch she is_). In your Police Academy dialogue, the phrase in question doesn't have a pronoun as _referent_, so the definite article is _referential _(we know what "the" specifically points to) and at the same time presents "bitch" in its highest degree: _The bitch._


----------



## VicNicSor

Thank you, all!


Hermione Golightly said:


> you need to ask yourself if you are 'highjacking' an OP's thread


I don't understand


london calling said:


> Vic, you certainly take some convincing.


Just some going into detail


JulianStuart said:


> (These discussions about articles often end up like: I could have worn a red shirt or a blue today, and I wore a red one. You ask me why. I tell you "because I felt like it". And then you ask "Why did you feel like it?" "Because I did." "But why?"  )


With this, I totally disagree "which article to use and why" and "which shirt to wear and why" are just incomparable.


----------



## karlalou

I wonder if it's because the question was "What do you say to that, Lassard?"
"A bitch" would be an answer to "What is she?"?


----------



## JulianStuart

VicNicSor said:


> With this, I totally disagree "which article to use and why" and "which shirt to wear and why" are just incomparable.


The point being made is that, Yes sometimes it is incomparable and the choice affects the meaning, but sometimes No it's not - in those cases *it is* a speaker's choice.


----------



## VicNicSor

JulianStuart said:


> The point being made is that, Yes sometimes it is incomparable and the choice affects the meaning, but sometimes No it's not - in those cases *it is* a speaker's choice.



1. But the speaker must know when it is possible to use either article and when it is not.
2. Even when the choice doesn't affect the basic meaning of the sentence, it doesn't mean the two articles mean the same thing.
3. In this particular instance, in the OP, it is not "a speaker's choice". Should the speaker choose "a" -- as I suggested first -- and they would be wrong.
4. I just see no point in belittling or making fun of the issue. This particular usage is indeed not very usual and obvious for me as it is for you. There's nothing wrong in trying to understand it wholly so why to reduce it to a choice between a red and blue shirt.


----------



## JulianStuart

VicNicSor said:


> 1. But the speaker must know when it is possible to use either article and when it is not.
> 2. Even when the choice doesn't affect the basic meaning of the sentence, it doesn't mean the two articles mean the same thing.
> 3. In this particular instance, in the OP, it is not "a speaker's choice". Should the speaker choose "a" -- as I suggested first -- and they would be wrong.
> 4. I just see no point in belittling or making fun of the issue. This particular usage is indeed not very usual and obvious for me as it is for you. There's nothing wrong in trying to understand it wholly so why to reduce it to a choice between a red and blue shirt.


Of course, in some cases, detailed figuring out of why one article was chosen does make sense and the explanations can be complicated.  But when several people tell you it doesn't make much difference and there isn't really much logic or sense to a situation, just a set expression, and yet you persist in pushing for "why?"  - that is what generates irritation on the part of those who are trying to help you.  In some cases,  both a and the are acceptable, in some cases (like this one) the and zero are acceptable, in some cases any of the above will work.  It's fine to ask for explanations but it's when you won't accept them, that frustration sets in.


----------



## Oddmania

Hi Vic,

"_The _+ noun" is often used to express surprise, or annoyance. For example, when someone is being rude to you or acting inappropriately, you might want to shout out "_THE NERVE!_" (= The nerve you've got! I can't believe it!). Or, more positively: you walk into your hotel room, step out onto the balcony and say "_Wow... The view!_".


----------



## JulianStuart

Oddmania said:


> Hi Vic,
> 
> "_The _+ noun" is often used to express surprise, or annoyance. For example, when someone is being rude to you or acting inappropriately, you might want to shout out "_THE NERVE!_" (= The nerve you've got! I can't believe it!). Or, more positively: you walk into your hotel room, step out onto the balcony and say "_Wow... The view!_".


 (Set expression - that's the way it is)


----------



## emre aydın

JulianStuart said:


> Of course, in some cases, detailed figuring out of why one article was chosen does make sense and the explanations can be complicated.  But when several people tell you it doesn't make much difference and there isn't really much logic or sense to a situation, just a set expression, and yet you persist in pushing for "why?"  - that is what generates irritation on the part of those who are trying to help you.  In some cases,  both a and the are acceptable, in some cases (like this one) the and zero are acceptable, in some cases any of the above will work.  It's fine to ask for explanations but it's when you won't accept them, that frustration sets in.



I find these discussions very helpful for myself. Thank you all native speakers who are trying to help.


----------



## VicNicSor

Oddmania said:


> Hi Vic,
> 
> "_The _+ noun" is often used to express surprise, or annoyance. For example, when someone is being rude to you or acting inappropriately, you might want to shout out "_THE NERVE!_" (= The nerve you've got! I can't believe it!). Or, more positively: you walk into your hotel room, step out onto the balcony and say "_Wow... The view!_".


Thanks!


JulianStuart said:


> Of course, in some cases, detailed figuring out of why one article was chosen does make sense and the explanations can be complicated.  But when several people tell you it doesn't make much difference and there isn't really much logic or sense to a situation, just a set expression, and yet you persist in pushing for "why?"  - that is what generates irritation on the part of those who are trying to help you.  In some cases,  both a and the are acceptable, in some cases (like this one) the and zero are acceptable, in some cases any of the above will work.  It's fine to ask for explanations but it's when you won't accept them, that frustration sets in.


But "pushing for why" helped me understand the issue in the end. If I hadn't "pushed", I would still be guessing why it is THE in the OP. I didn't start looking into articles yesterday, I have already some understanding of the issue, and I now start article-related threads not so often as before. So if I have a problem, it is one for me.
Are you irritated by the fact that the answers like "the bitch is a set expression", or "because it's a specific bitch" were not not enough for me to understand? After all, there are threads around here that are much much longer than this one


----------



## JulianStuart

I am sure you understand them, it is that you appear not to be able to _accept_ them as answers.   I understand that for someone who likes to fit their langugae learning process into an orderly understanding of rules, it must be hard to _accept_ "idioms" 


> idiom
> Linguistics an expression or phrase that does not follow regular rules of grammar, or one whose meaning cannot be predicted from the meaning of its individual parts:


----------



## karlalou

JulianStuart (or any natives), could I get your confirmation (or maybe correction) on my guess? 

The answer for "What do you say to that, Lassard?" could be "She is a bitch", but more likely "The bitch". "A bitch" could be an answer to "What is she?", but this sounds too casual for that context. Am I taking it correctly?


----------



## Glasguensis

You have understood correctly, @karlalou


----------



## karlalou

Thank you, Glasguensis!


----------



## VicNicSor

Hello.


Hermione Golightly said:


> Could it be replaced by "*This/That* bitch."?
> 
> 
> 
> Not unless there was some reason for changing to the demonstrative that we know nothing about.
> 
> Why do you think somebody might choose to replace the definite article in this instance?
Click to expand...

In "South Park", four kids are playing an online computer game. Since it's an interactive real-time game, there are different characters around there, directed by other people. Now a character appears before those kids's characters, and kills them all. The kids are sitting each at his home at their computers talking to each other over the internet:
-- *That son of a bitch!*
-- Who is that guy ?
-- Whoever he is, he is one tough bad ass.

Does this context differ in any way from the OP?...


----------



## Glasguensis

One difference is that the OP line follows a remark which introduces the person concerned. Here it is apparently the first reference, which makes a demonstrative more appropriate.


----------



## VicNicSor

Glasguensis said:


> which makes a demonstrative more appropriate.


... and which makes the definite article _what_? Incorrect, or still possible anyway?..


----------



## Glasguensis

The definite article would also work.


----------



## kentix

I'm going to make Vic happy by saying that in the original example I don't see any meaningful difference between "that" and "the". I would be happy with either one. They both serve the function of expressing annoyance that oddmania described. I've heard it expressed both ways multiple times.


----------



## Hermione Golightly

Yes, it does; _perhaps_. One thing that _might_ make a difference is that the kids are in separate places, not having a face-to- face conversation.

But the crucial factor is that the *script writer chose *to have them use 'that', a strong demonstrative, with the basic idea of 'not this here', but 'that over there', _wherever 'there' is, which might only be a contrast with 'this'. '_This' might be the shoe in my left hand, and 'that' might be the shoe in my right hand.
Here, two  people are not being compared, (unless you think of some unstated contrast).
Native speakers can't always explain exactly why they chose one form over another on any particular occasion, not even when they are relatively well-informed about usage and grammar, not even when they are seeking to explain their own choices. At least *I *can't and I am very rarely if ever, in a long life," the only one".
I really have _no idea at all _why might I choose to say 'This woman is an idiot' rather than 'That woman is an idiot' unless it is directly related to an immediate prompt.
By 'immediate' prompt, I mean for example while reading an e-mail or watching somebody talking on TV. My 'immediate' reaction would be to say 'This woman's an idiot'. I might say "That woman ... if it was _already_ my opinion that she was an idiot. And when I'm telling somebody later about my reaction ('reported') I suppose I would change it to "that woman's an idiot".
Please don't quote anything I've said ever again, because I'm not entering into further discussions of this sort. Obviously you haven't properly read and thoroughly absorbed the previous posts in this thread.


----------



## kentix

VicNicSor said:


> Do you know she is attempting to dismantle one of this country's great institutions of law and order? What do you say to that, Lassard?
> COMMANDANT LASSARD: [agreeing] *The bitch*.


Here's where I do see a possible slight difference.

If the line "What do you say to that, Lassard?" was not there, i.e. the next line by the other speaker was not prompted by a question and was uttered on his own initiative, I think I would be more likely to say, "That bitch!"


----------



## VicNicSor

Hermione Golightly said:


> Please don't quote anything I've said ever again, because I'm not entering into further discussions of this sort. Obviously you haven't properly read and thoroughly absorbed the previous posts in this thread.


I'm confused (sorry for quoting you again).
-----

Thank you, everyone


----------

