# He's reading THE newspaper.  [The?]



## pndpnd11

There is this example
"What is Paul doing" "He's reading THE newspaper"
on 28th page of Essential grammar in use by Murphy.

I am just wondering wouldn't indefinite article be more suitable here?


----------



## Sparky Malarky

If we didn't know what newspaper Paul is reading, we would certainly say "He's reading a newspaper."

But who is speaking?  Maybe it's Paul's wife.  Maybe she knows they only subscribe to one newspaper.  Maybe she knows that Paul only ever reads one newspaper.  In this case, "He's reading the newspaper."

I realize you don't have context, but without context we can't know which would be correct.  Either sentence might be correct, depending on circumstances.


----------



## Beryl from Northallerton

Hello pndpnd11, and Welcome to the Forum! 

I don't think you need to know which newspaper to justify the definite article - 'reading the newspaper' is a stock phrase, I'd say.


----------



## Sparky Malarky

Beryl from Northallerton said:


> I don't think you need to know which newspaper to justify the definite article - 'reading the newspaper' is a stock phrase, I'd say.



On second thought, you're right.


----------



## pndpnd11

Well if you are reading a book and someone just asks you "what you are doing?" is it better to answer "I am reading the book"? I think I would say "a book".


----------



## Beryl from Northallerton

It's different for books, pndpnd11 - sorry 

I thought you were asking specifically about newspapers.


----------



## pndpnd11

Yes I was asking about newspapers I didn't think there was a difference. Is there any logical explanation why is it different for books or it's just the way it is?)


----------



## sdgraham

Beryl from Northallerton said:


> Hello pndpnd11, and Welcome to the Forum!
> 
> I don't think you need to know which newspaper to justify the definite article - 'reading the newspaper' is a stock phrase, I'd say.



stock phrases are not necessarily grammatically perfect.

You might just as well argue that "I'm in the shower"  Is wrong in a home with two more such ablution devices.


----------



## George French

pndpnd11 said:


> Yes I was asking about newspapers I didn't think there was a difference. Is there any logical explanation why is it different for books or it's just the way it is?)



The simple answer is "that's the way it is".

GF..


----------



## Beryl from Northallerton

>> Is there any logical explanation why is it different for books or it's just the way it is?

I'd speculate that it's this way because it's assumed that a person will take the same newspaper everyday, and until they drop.

With books, we might allow for a little more variety in our interpretations.


----------



## pndpnd11

OK, thanks a lot. I've seen such explanations



> "I'm reading a newspaper." and "I'm reading the newspaper." both sound good to me.
> I'd say it's just one of those times when we use the definite article (the) without any obvious good reason.
> I'm  in the library. (even though some towns have more than one and the  person you're speaking to might not know which one you mean)
> Did you watch the news last night? (it could be any one of dozens of news programs but we still use the definite article)





> You  can use either article (the/a) as they are both correct.  "reading the  newspaper" is more common because people usually subscribe to or buy a  particular paper so "the" subsitutes the name of their preferred  newspaper.  However, "a" is equally correct.




Does this sound right?


----------



## pndpnd11

*Beryl from Northallerton*  	 I had not seen your post before I sent mine. OK now it's clear. Thank you very much.


----------



## se16teddy

Beryl from Northallerton said:


> I don't think you need to know which newspaper to justify the definite article - 'reading the newspaper' is a stock phrase, I'd say.


 Maybe for some people. But if I read the Daily Telegraph every day, but at the moment I am reading the Times, I don't think I am "reading the paper".


----------



## pndpnd11

On the previos page of this textbook (Essential grammar in use) there is exercise in which one has to use the sentence
I am not reading A newspaper. It's kind of bewildering isn't it? Assumig that this textbook is for beginners.


----------



## Beryl from Northallerton

se16teddy said:


> Maybe for some people. But if I read the Daily Telegraph every day, but at the moment I am reading the Times, I don't think I am "reading the paper".



Fair enough; but what would you be doing?


----------



## Beryl from Northallerton

pndpnd11 said:


> OK, thanks a lot. I've seen such explanations ..... Does this sound right?



Where do these explanations come from, pndp?


----------



## pndpnd11

A forum like this. I assume it's also just speculations of those who posted it.


----------



## natkretep

Beryl from Northallerton said:


> 'reading the newspaper' is a stock phrase, I'd say.


And in support of this, you'd also always have _the_ if you had the plural _papers_​. 'I'm reading the papers'.


----------



## PaulQ

*The *and *a/an* are confusing for those whose language has no articles. This website is very helpful for understanding the use of the definite and indefinite articles: http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/articles/ (My experience is that the page loads slowly, so be patient.)


----------



## nodnol

> "What is Paul doing" "He's reading THE newspaper"
> I am just wondering wouldn't indefinite article be more suitable here?



DEPENDS ON CONTEXT: To my mind, this is not exceptional, but it is a relatively specific  case, and probably unsuitable for a text book intended for study  without a teacher. As well as what was said in post #2 (a household traditionally subscribed  to one national publication), typically, a new edition of this  publication entered the home each day/ each weekday, and it is a truth  universally acknowledged that it would be _this particular newspaper, not any othe_r,  that one would most likely read. Indeed, to the extent that after one  day a newspaper became chip paper or an implement to be used in the lost  art of window cleaning, it may be said that _there was only over one newspaper_  at a given time. (So 'reading a newspaper' would be rather uncommon as  it would suggest a vagueness which may, depending on context (e.g. who  is speaking and how familiar they are with the habits of the household),  require a specific justification).*

As for ''What is Paul doing" "He's reading THE book'': as you see, in  the situation I discussed above, there is only one newspaper; or else  one newspaper (i.e. today's) has a unique privileged status. Now,  similar situations do occur in which there is only one book, or in which  one book has a unique, privileged status, but to my mind, these are  much rarer. For example, in a pious household, ''What is Paul doing"  "He's reading THE book'' may occur, meaning a given holy book; or in a  particularly harsh prison, it may mean the only book that the prisoners  have managed to smuggle in. In such situations, 'reading a book' would  not be correct, or would be understood as an example of irony.




> If we didn't know what newspaper Paul is reading, we would  certainly say "He's reading a newspaper." ...Either sentence might be  correct, depending on circumstances.



In a library with shelves of newspapers and back issues going back seven  days, unless you knew which newspaper Paul was reading, you would say  'He is reading a paper' or, if there are more than one, 'he is reading  newspapers.' 

So, there does not appear to me to be anything unusual or  unexpected  going on grammatically, and no stock phrase. -- For me, a stranger  on a  bus, they are 'reading A newspaper'. 





> But if I read the Daily Telegraph every day, but  at the moment I am  reading the Times, I don't think I am "reading the  paper".



We all adjust at our own pace. But arguably you would be 'reading the  paper,' or, if you prefer, 'reading the Times.' Indeed, in these  modern times, people buy fewer papers, and I expect they also switch  publication more often. As a non-subscriber, rather than say 'I am  reading the newspaper' I would be more likely to say the name of the  publication, e.g. 'I am reading the Financial Times, the Sunday Sport'  etc.



> On the previous page of this textbook (Essential grammar in use) there is exercise in which one has to use the sentence
> I am not reading A newspaper. It's kind of bewildering isn't it? Assuming that this textbook is for beginners.



Yes, if I wrote a textbook I would try to avoid things like that. In  what I have written, every time you see 'He is reading THE paper/book'  it would be equally grammatical to put 'He is not reading THE  newspaper/book,' and likewise, each time you see 'He is reading A  newspaper/book', you could substitute 'He is not reading A  newspaper/book'

So using the flow chart from the link provided, you can see why in the contexts I refer to in my first two paragraphs, the book/newspaper we are talking about is 'This One Exactly.' 

*Note: 'The newspapers' usually means 'all the main national papers that were published today.'

And the source for all of the above were the thoughts that my brain  generates and which I carefully examined before presenting for  public consumption.


----------



## sdgraham

Nodnol in the tome above is not only out of step with the preponderance of our opinion  regarding the stock phrase, but talks of " national newspapers," which do not exist on this side of the pond.


----------



## dadane

natkretep said:


> And in support of this, you'd also always have _the_ if you had the plural _papers_​. 'I'm reading the papers'.



I would only say this if I wanted to specifically point out that I was in the process of reading through several papers. If you happen to have several papers to hand and are reading one you can still be simply 'reading the paper', irrespective of whether you have looked at or intend to look at another one.

Edit:



nodnol said:


> We all adjust at our own pace. But arguably you would be 'reading the paper,' or, if you prefer, 'reading the Times.' Indeed, in these modern times, people buy fewer papers, and I expect they also switch publication more often. As a non-subscriber, rather than say 'I am reading the newspaper' I would be more likely to say the name of the publication, e.g. 'I am reading the Financial Times, the Sunday Sport' etc.


 "Have you started on the painting yet"? "No, I am reading the Sunday Sport". Not in my world.


----------



## pndpnd11

*nodnol* thank you for such a detailed answer.
*PaulQ* thanks for the link.

I just love this forum


----------



## nodnol

sdgraham said:


> Nodnol in the tome above is not only out of step with the preponderance of our opinion  regarding the stock phrase, but talks of " national newspapers," which do not exist on this side of the pond.



Two vaild points. (I don't take either as suggesting a fault).

But relating to the first one, I was clear that my source was only my personal view, and sorry if it appeared otherwise to anyone, but I do not wish to shut down discussion. For example, would you say 'As the guy put gas in my juggernaut, I saw a dude sitting on the hood of his automobile reading THE paper'? If so, I can just about believe it has becoming a bit like a stock phrase by contamination. If half a handful of people on these forums confirm that they would typically say 'I was sitting on the train next to a man reading THE paper,' not '...A paper', then that would be useful and reliable information, more so than just my opinion.

I know what book I would consult for definitive judgements on French grammar, but I don't know for English.


----------



## wandle

'Reading the newspaper' is an expression of the same kind as 'walking the dog', 'washing the car', 'cutting the grass', etc etc.: everyday activities for which the definite article is used to indicate that the expression refers to the generic activity with which we are all familiar, not some specific item previously mentioned.


----------



## nodnol

wandle said:


> 'Reading the newspaper' is an expression of the same kind as 'walking the dog', 'washing the car', 'cutting the grass', etc etc.: everyday activities for which the definite article is used to indicate that the expression refers to the generic activity with which we are all familiar, not some specific item previously mentioned.



Are you saying, for you 'I saw a man in the park today walking the dog' is a perfectly normal way of saying '...walking his dog'?
PS
And


> I just love this forum


 so do I, it's like a family,  but one made up of different personalities. Everyone contributes something, everyone can learn something.


----------



## Giorgio Spizzi

1. As was said earlier, the use of articles is never easy to grasp for speakers of languages which do not have this grammatical category. Helping them is no easy task, either.
2. Most probably, both THE and A(N) have each _one_ core-meaning — the THE-ness and the A(N)-ness respectively — that is _always there_ whatever the sentence in which either of the two appears.  
2. If I were to compare, say, "Chuck's reading the paper" and "Chuck's reading a paper", I'd be inclined to say that the use of THE in the first one _could_ be a marker of a "ritual activity", whereas the second sentence doesn't seem to me to evoke the notion of anything "ritual". 
Something very similar happens with requests/offers of the kind "Shall we have Ø tea?" and "Shall we have a cup of tea?". Maybe a "zero article" would be felt to be more appropriate in case the speaker were proposing to have tea at that particular time of day when he and his listener _are accustomed to_ having it. Again, a ritual. 
The second sentence, on the other hand, seems to be _good for all seasons_.

I may be wrong, of course.

GS


----------



## wandle

nodnol said:


> Are you saying, for you 'I saw a man in the park today walking the dog' is a perfectly normal way of saying '...walking his dog'?


That is not the question which was asked.


pndpnd11 said:


> There is this example
> "What is Paul doing" "He's reading THE newspaper"
> on 28th page of Essential grammar in use by Murphy.
> 
> I am just wondering wouldn't indefinite article be more suitable here?


Any of the generic expressions I have mentioned would fit equally well in the example offered by *pndpnd11*.


----------



## nodnol

> 2. If I were to compare, say, "Chuck's reading the paper" and "Chuck's reading a paper", I'd be inclined to say that the use of THE in the first one _could_ be a marker of a "ritual activity", whereas the second sentence doesn't seem to me to evoke the notion of anything "ritual".
> Something very similar happens with requests/offers of the kind "Shall  we have Ø tea?" and "Shall we have a cup of tea?". Maybe a "zero  article" would be felt to be more appropriate in case the speaker were  proposing to have tea at that particular time of day when he and his  listener _are accustomed to_ having it. Again, a ritual.



I  think these are good comments worth reading carefully. I don't have  anything more to say about newspapers (except that I myself don't read the  Sunday Sport either) but I'll add to the above comments, and answer my  previous question. 


But I'll also comment on



> 'Reading the newspaper' is an expression of the same kind as 'walking  the dog', 'washing the car', 'cutting the grass', etc etc.: everyday  activities for which the definite article is used to indicate that the  expression refers to the generic activity with which we are all  familiar, not some specific item previously mentioned.



I think I know what you mean, and I think you  understand the issue perfectly, but I find your explanation  incomplete and thus potentially misleading. I think it is sometimes  better to be explicit and systematic, both to explain things better to  others, and make sure that one has fully understood the matter oneself.

I would explain things with these further examples:
If the lady of the house says to her husband:

While you were still in bed, I walked the dog.
While you were still in bed, I washed the car. 

'The dog, the car' mean 'our dog, our car.' (I.e. 'This one, not any other.') 

And if she says

While you were in bed, the man walked the dog.
While you were in bed, the man washed the car.

'The  man' would refer to someone familiar to them, they would both know  exactly who 'the man' is; it would be 'this man, not any other' (e.g.  'That strange man who just moved into our neighbourhood' or  'Christopher, our servant'). And as before, _*Clarification: in the second case, (Christopher, our servant)*_, 'the dog/the car' means 'our  dog/car' *, and see 'B' b*_*elow for what 'the dog' would mean in with the example 'That strange man who just moved into our neighbourhood.'*_

While you were in bed, a man walked the dog.
While you were in bed, a man washed the car.

It could mean 
A) There is an unknown man who is acting in an unusual  fashion, washing the couple's car without their permission, or there is a  dognapper who had a sudden change of heart and who decided to return  the couple's dog, which he had stolen. The car, the dog, 'this  particular dog/ car' meaning in the context of a conversation between a  husband and wife, 'our dog, our car.' 

Or B) There is a particular car or dog which has attracted the attention of the couple. It may be a huge American Hummer, which the couple find somewhat distasteful and that ruins the look of their genteel British neighbourhood, or it may be a dog that is known to them becuase it is particularly noisy. So 'the dog, the car' would refer to one particular, previously identified car or dog.


----------



## Chasint

Returning to newspapers. I've read the thread and I just don't accept the "stock phrase" answer. In my version of British English there is a distinction.

Examples
_A surveillance team is observing a suspect. They are communicating by mobile phone. The suspect is sitting on a park bench._
John: What's the suspect doing now?
Jane: At the moment he's reading a newspaper. 
Jane: At the moment he's reading the newspaper. 

_A couple are at home and a visitor arrives._
Visitor: Hello Mary! Where's James?
Mary: He's in the garden reading the newspaper. 
Mary: He's in the garden reading a newspaper.* ?*

In the first case there is no expectation that the suspect has any reason to read a newspaper or a book or anything else. The fact that he is reading *a* newspaper is useful information that could be passed to another agent in order to identify him.

In the second case the people concerned know John and expect him to read newspapers. Therefore they understand 'the'. Even so the second version with 'a' would not be wrong.


----------



## wandle

Certainly, in _'He is reading the newspaper'_, the definite article may be a reference to a particular paper previously mentioned.
It may also be an  expression of the generic activity of newspaper reading.

The same applies to other phrases such as 'washing the car'.

Neither of these interpretations makes the other invalid. 
The context will determine which one is applicable in the particular case.


----------



## nodnol

> It may also be an  expression of the generic activity of newspaper reading.



Could anyone illustrate this with examples?  Any got any counter-examples to:



> _A surveillance team is observing a suspect. They are communicating by mobile phone. The suspect is sitting on a park bench._
> John: What's the suspect doing now?
> Jane: At the moment he's reading a newspaper.
> Jane: At the moment he's reading the newspaper.



Because it would make your assertion more convincing if you could demonstrate it.


----------



## wandle

nodnol said:


> Could anyone illustrate this with examples?


_'Now that you are retired, how do you spend your time?'
'Oh, you know, the usual, reading the newspaper, walking the dog, catching up on the DIY, chewing the fat with the neighbours etc. etc.'_

Please note, though, these are simply examples of generic usage: not counter-examples to anything.


----------



## MikeLynn

wandle said:


> _'Now that you are retired, how do you spend your time?'
> 'Oh, you know, the usual, reading the newspaper, walking the dog, doing the DIY I never got round to etc. etc.'_


I agree with wandle's example. To me it means: my (_usual_) newspaper, _my_ dog, doing (_my usua_l) DIY activities etc. For us, speakers of article-less languages, it's difficult, but this seems to be something that's "linguistically logical". Of course, you natives feel it differently, but, very often, when you are asked for an explanation you're baffled and you do not know why it should be that way. The usual answer is: It just doesn't sound right. Well, for us it is not sufficient  because we do need some "rules"l most of which simply do not exist and are based on the person's feel and experience with the language.
M&L


----------



## chipulukusu

Surely a mother of the old times would say to her little boy: "Don't make noise, Dad is reading *the* newspaper".

"Dad is reading _a_ newspaper" would be casual and dismissive.

This regardless of the actual newspaper Dad is reading

EDIT: as I was sleeping on my netbook a lot of new posts came in. I hope this post is not odd now...


----------



## Chasint

MikeLynn said:


> I agree with wandle's example. To me it means: my (_usual_) newspaper, _my_ dog, doing (_my usua_l) DIY activities etc. For us, speakers of article-less languages, it's difficult, but this seems to be something that's "linguistically logical". Of course, you natives feel it differently, but, very often, when you are asked for an explanation you're baffled and you do not know why it should be that way. The usual answer is: It just doesn't sound right. Well, for us it is not sufficient  because we do need some "rules"l most of which simply do not exist and are based on the person's feel and experience with the language.
> M&L


I'm not sure how many of us are professional EFL teachers on the forum. I suspect that there are not many. Why would they come on here and continue to do their day job unpaid? 

The main thing about English is that it is highly context dependent. Sometimes learners don't understand that and they give very small fragments of text and expect us to give a simple answer. Often it would require an essay to answer fully.

In a sense, knowing which part of speech to use is rather like a jazz musician knowing what note to play. He or she knows but it's impossible to explain in terms of theory.

EDIT
My suggestion would be to read English texts and absorb the grammar by osmosis. That's how the human brain is programmed to learn languages.


----------



## MikeLynn

Thank you, Biffo, for your post. I really like the jazz-musician metaphor because that's very appropriate. It takes a lot of jam sessions of all kinds to get the right feel and play in the pocket so to speak  M&L


----------



## chipulukusu

nodnol said:


> If so, I can just about believe it has becoming a bit like a stock phrase by contamination. If half a handful of people on these forums confirm that they would typically say 'I was sitting on the train next to a man reading THE paper,' not '...A paper', then that would be useful and reliable information, more so than just my opinion.



Hi nodnol I really much appreciated the scientific approach of your post, which I can agree with using my logic, but, for what is worth and legitimate in this forum, also in my language (italian) r_eading the newspaper_ has become a bit of a stock phrase. Even a perfect stranger whom I meet on a train and never imagine to see again is reading _the_ newspaper for me. I think it has to do with the nature of media of a newspaper and with the daily routine it involves.
If I am watching one of the four tv sets in my house, I'm still watching _the_ tv, I am not watching _a_ tv. This in Italian at least. I am not sure, but I think the process is analogous.


----------



## EdisonBhola

<<Edison's post as been appended to the prior discussion>>

I have a lot of trouble understanding the difference between:

A) He never reads the newspaper.
B) He never reads a newspaper.

Is there a real difference in meaning between them? From my knowledge and what I have learnt from this forum, "the newspaper" can be both specific (e.g. specifically Globe and Mail) and non-specific (e.g. newspapers in general). "A newspaper" is definitely non-specific. 

Am I right?


----------



## dadane

'He never reads a newspaper' means exactly what it says, he doesn't read newspapers at all, it has no other connotations.

'He never reads the newspaper' refers to a specific newspaper. Here are a couple of scenarios:

1. They have a newspaper delivered every day but he doesn't read it. - 'The newspaper' is the daily paper, what newspaper that may be on any particular day is irrelevant.
2. He doesn't read newspapers but does do the crosswords. - 'The newspaper' is the newspaper with the crossword in it.
3. He doesn't read newspapers at all. - 'The newspaper' would be his newspaper of choice if he did read newspapers.

In all these cases 'the newspaper' is used to indicate a newspaper with which the speaker, listener, or the third person is in some way familiar. I am unable to think of a case in which the definite article is not appropriate, this includes Biffo's surveillance scenario in post #30.


----------



## Chasint

dadane said:


> ...
> In all these cases 'the newspaper' is used to indicate a newspaper with which the speaker, listener, or the third person is in some way familiar. I am unable to think of a case in which the definite article is not appropriate, this includes Biffo's surveillance scenario in post #30.


I'm astonished. Why stop at newspapers? Why not do away with the indefinite article altogether if it means so little? 

Seriously, what is so special about newspapers? Can you list any other everyday objects that follow the same 'rule'?


----------



## dadane

Biffo said:


> I'm astonished. Why stop at newspapers? Why not do away with the indefinite article altogether if it means so little?


  Well, it is horribly difficult to define, this would make lexicography easier.


Biffo said:


> Seriously, what is so special about newspapers? Can you list any other everyday objects that follow the same 'rule'?


 Most everyday nouns aren't part of a set phrase. The argument justifies use of the definite article within the set phrase, logically it could be extrapolated to cover all objects, in reality it isn't. I pose you one question: when the need arises do you 'go to a toilet' or 'go to the toilet'?


----------



## sdgraham

Would we not say:

 "He likes to listen to *the* radio?
"We're going to *the* movies?" (AE)


----------



## Dexta

-You took a while to answer the phone, did I disturb you?
-Not at all, I was just in the yard hanging out the washing.
-Ah getting through the weekly chores..
-Yes, it's the pits. 
-Did you see the news tonight?
-Not really. I was doing the dishes. I just watched the weather. I wasn't interested in the rest. It's always the same.


----------



## Beryl from Northallerton

sdgraham said:


> Would we not say:
> 
> "He likes to listen to *the* radio?
> "We're going to *the* movies?" (AE)



We say both in BrE. (Yes, we say 'going to the movies'; we also say going to 'the cinema', 'the flicks', 'the pictures', 'the filums')


----------



## Chasint

Dexta said:


> -You took a while to answer the phone, did I disturb you?
> -Not at all, I was just in the yard hanging out the washing.
> -Ah getting through the weekly chores..
> -Yes, it's the pits.
> -Did you see the news tonight?
> -Not really. I was doing the dishes. I just watched the weather. I wasn't interested in the rest. It's always the same.


COMMENTS
Interesting. I wonder if this is related to the likelihood of an object/phenomenon being present in a particular environment.  'The' weather is always present. By contrast, suppose we are watching the 400m hurdles at the Olympics, We would be unlikely to say "He is putting 'the' kettle on." Perhaps this is an eccentric athlete and he has decided to put a kettle on his head in order to run faster. Then we might say "He is putting a kettle on [his head]."

If I am sailing across the Pacific Ocean in a small yacht and come across a pig on a desert island and the pig appears to be reading a newspaper then I, personally, would not even be tempted to say to the rest of the crew "There's a pig on the island and he's reading the newspaper." I might say "...he's reading 'a' newspaper..."


sdgraham said:


> Would we not say:
> "He likes to listen to *the* radio?
> "We're going to *the* movies?" (AE)


Likewise it would be strange to say "Let's go to the movies tonight" as few small yachts have movie theatres. We would say "Let's watch a movie." However it would be very likely that a yacht would have a radio.

HYPOTHESIS
I suggest that there is no sharp dividing line but that familiarity and context determine the choice of article. I don't buy newspapers, I keep up with events on TV or online. Therefore I don't read 'the' newspaper although I might occasionally read part of 'a' newspaper.

EVIDENCE OF USAGE
Many threads limp along with mere to-and-fro arguments and no evidence. Well, here is some evidence courtesy of Google Ngram. I have plotted "reading a newspaper" against "reading the newspaper".

BE: http://books.google.com/ngrams/grap...00&year_end=2008&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=

AE: http://books.google.com/ngrams/grap...00&year_end=2008&corpus=17&smoothing=3&share=

I find the results interesting. There is a distinction between AE and BE. AE is more likely to use 'reading the newspaper' from around 1990. BE is more likely to use 'reading a newspaper'

CONCLUSION
Evidence shows that "reading the newspaper" and "reading a newspaper" appear in roughly equal proportions. I think this demonstrates a reasonable split between definite and indefinite article such as we might expect from pretty much any noun.


----------



## nodnol

*Newspapers*: If I were personally asked to sum things up, taking into account others' comments (particularly the part of Biffo's comment in #40, quoted in #41), I would say that in cases where there is no other grammatical reason for choosing 'the' not 'a', 'the' suggests _familiarity_ and _habit_. There is probably a lot of choice, and not much logic, as to which is used. For example, I feel that I would be more likely to say that an unknown person on the train is reading 'the' newspaper if that person looked as if they were an older person with fixed habits, who looked as if they last bought modern-looking clothes about 30 years ago, perhaps even ''(One) dull man... with one thought less each year'', to quote Ezra Pound. So that is one possible takle on things - my take on things.

I suspect that there are grammatical rules at work in *the other cases mentioned*, and that they are not exceptions. I have never studied English grammar, but citing from a book on French grammar, I think that these concepts may help explain things: ''Determiners may indicate *specificity*, *deixis or spatio-temporal reference*, (or possession).''  (And I would add that a single form, in this case ''the'', can fulfill *more than one role*.) Another useful term may be ''*exophoric reference*.'' Thus there are explanations that I could offer for the use of the definitive article in  both of the below phrases, (phrases that I find completely natural, and where I don't consider that there is an alternative to using 'the')
"He likes to listen to *the* radio?''
"We're going to *the* movies?''
But I'm modest enough to keep them to myself, as I am no expert in the matter, and don't want to mislead anyone. -- And all my explanations would be dependent on context, see 'exophoric'


----------



## Chasint

nodnol said:


> *...*
> "He likes to listen to *the* radio?''
> "We're going to *the* movies?''
> But I'm modest enough to keep them to myself, as I am no expert in the matter, and don't want to mislead anyone. -- And all my explanations would be dependent on context, see 'exophoric'



I tend to agree with you about these two, however...

The radio
...if someone is listening to *the radio* we aren't talking about the box of electronics, we're talking about the broadcasts that are all around us waiting to be detected by *a radio*. If you doubt this then ask yourself if you would say "There is a man over there he is listening to *the beatbox*." or even to *the iPhone*.  I think most people would say *a beatbox* or *his iPhone*. Like the weather the radio is just there whether we access it or not. Let's test the difference:

Goggle nGram - plotting _*listen to the radio,listen to a radio*_
http://books.google.com/ngrams/grap...00&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=
As expected "the radio" comes out on top. I suggest that this reflects the two distinct meanings of the word.

The movies
The problem with talking about 'movies' is that you are using the plural. You are unlikely to say any of the following in standard English:
"We're going to movies" 
"We're going to a movies" 
"We're going to some movies" [Possible but not what we usually mean]

When we go to "the movies", this refers more to the genre than to a specific screening. Consider what happens if 'movie' is singular.

"We're going to a movie."  [Normal when this activity hasn't been mentioned before]
"We're going to the movie." [Only acceptable if we have already spoken about some movie]

I suppose the question becomes, do we consider 'the newspaper' to act like 'the radio', i.e. something that is just 'out there' waiting to be accessed. Are we saying it in the following sense? _"One common medium for keeping up to date with current affairs is the newspaper."_

I don't see it that way but some others may.


----------



## nodnol

Well I can afford to be more explicit:I was suggesting that, if you would say "There is a man over there he is listening to *the beatbox*.", 'the' would be substituting for 'that', and I would speculate that arguably, 'that' would be more logical or 'correct'.

And second: If I was clever, I would wite some computer program that would automatically post the following comment if and when someone questions why I said 'an unknown person on the train', not the equally possible 'a train':
the train means 'this (type of) train, _you know the type I mean_', _as if_ I had already described it, or as if you could also see the type of scene that I was imagining and picturing in my mind, just like if were were sitting in the same room, I could say 'the chair' and you would know which chair I was refering to (eg because I was looking at it, or we had already been talking about it.)


----------



## Giorgio Spizzi

Hullo, everyone.

Pndpnd's OP was:
_
"What is Paul doing" "He's reading THE newspaper"_ _on 28th page of Essential grammar in use by Murphy.
__I am just wondering wouldn't indefinite article be more suitable here?
_
The question reminds me of other similar cases discussed in this same Forum some time ago, e.g. Ø vs. A :

1. Shall we have Ø coffee? vs. 2. Shall we have a coffee?

In my opinion, the presence of Ø in 1. is the trace of the fact that both the speaker and the hearer consider "having Ø coffee" a (long-) established ritual in their lives. Most probably the sentence is uttered at _that_ time of day when the two characters usually enjoy the friendly cuppa.

Not so with "a coffee" in 2., which could — at least in coffee-consuming countries like mine — be pronounced practically at _any_ time. 

That said, I'm inclined to think that the difference in the treatment of THE and A in the newspaper sentence can be seen through very similar "semantico-cultural" spectacles, with THE for the "ritual" and A for the "non-ritual" reading.

GS ​





Reply 


Reply With Quote 

​


----------



## sdgraham

I see no connection between "the newspaper and coffee." 

"Reading the newspaper" is a common, established, well-worn phrase in English, just like "listening to the radio."

There is an abstraction here that's hard to explain. The best way I know to explain it is "that's the way we say it." 

It doesn't mean that "a newspaper" is not correct, but the nuance is a bit different.



> That said, I'm inclined to think that the difference in the treatment of THE and A in the newspaper sentence can be seen through very similar "semantico-cultural" spectacles, with THE for the "ritual" and A for the "non-ritual" reading.



I think that in straightforward, non-jargonized English that means "That's the way we say it.?" No?


----------



## Dexta

_In my opinion,  the presence of Ø in 1. is the trace of the fact that both the speaker  and the hearer consider "having Ø coffee" a (long-) established ritual  in their lives._

I would almost agree. The only qualification I would make is that it may be an established ritual in other people's lives, not necessarily 'theirs'. For instance, I may have just met a new colleague and to be friendly, suggest that we 'have coffee' sometime, which we have never done before or the colleague might not do in his/her life.

 _I'm inclined  to think that the difference in the treatment of THE and A in the  newspaper sentence can be seen through very similar "semantico-cultural"  spectacles, with THE for the "ritual" and A for the "non-ritual"  reading._

I think that's brilliant and sums it up nicely.


----------



## Chasint

Dexta said:


> _In my opinion,  the presence of Ø in 1. is the trace of the fact that both the speaker  and the hearer consider "having Ø coffee" a (long-) established ritual  in their lives._
> 
> I would almost agree. The only qualification I would make is that it may be an established ritual in other people's lives, not necessarily 'theirs'. For instance, I may have just met a new colleague and to be friendly, suggest that we 'have coffee' sometime, which we have never done before or the colleague might not do in his/her life.
> 
> _I'm inclined  to think that the difference in the treatment of THE and A in the  newspaper sentence can be seen through very similar "semantico-cultural"  spectacles, with THE for the "ritual" and A for the "non-ritual"  reading._
> 
> I think that's brilliant and sums it up nicely.


Yes, I am inclined to agree also.



Dexta said:


> _..._ The only qualification I would make is that it may be an established ritual in other people's lives, not necessarily 'theirs'. For instance, I may have just met a new colleague ...


Well, I am that colleague. I used to be a regular coffee drinker before I discovered it was giving me migraine type headaches. I haven't drunk coffee for many years. Nevertheless I still might suggest to a friend "Let's go for coffee".  Similarly if I was doing some manual work with someone I might say "Let's have a tea break" even if neither of us have access to hot tea but are carrying cold drinks in cans.


----------



## Chasint

Additional thought

If I was reading a newspaper and someone phoned me up and asked "What were you doing when I called?" I would probably say "I was reading the Independent" or "I was reading the news". The former refers to a specific, well-known BE newspaper. The latter refers to the universal phenomenon of 'News'. I can't imagine I would say "I was reading the newspaper" because *that ritual is not part of my life.
*

Another example, "I'm reading the local newspaper". Here I'm being specific because there is only one local newspaper.


----------



## dadane

Biffo said:


> Another example, "I'm reading the local newspaper". Here I'm being specific because there is only one local newspaper.


 Where? I've never had to deal with this linguistic dichotomy because I've never lived anywhere where there is only one local paper. The population of this town is only about 50000, we still have three local papers. "I'm reading the local paper" is used when referring to any unspecified member of the set of local papers.

"I'm reading the local paper"
"Which one"?
"The Report"

I cannot image hearing, let alone saying, "I'm reading a local paper".


----------



## Chasint

dadane said:


> Where? I've never had to deal with this linguistic dichotomy because I've never lived anywhere where there is only one local paper. The population of this town is only about 50000, we still have three local papers. "I'm reading the local paper" is used when referring to any unspecified member of the set of local papers.
> 
> "I'm reading the local paper"
> "Which one"?
> "The Report"
> 
> I cannot image hearing, let alone saying, "I'm reading a local paper".


Just because you live somewhere that has a population of 50000 doesn't mean everyone does. In any case you have missed my point entirely.

I agree with the rest of your post. 

My point was that we say "the local paper" (or "one of the local papers") because of the word "local". This makes it clear that we are referring to a specific journal (or journals). Hence this use of 'the' is standard.

EDITED


----------



## Chasint

I'd like to sum up my own point of view.

I don't object to anyone saying "I'm reading the newspaper", however I do believe that this is a description of a ritual rather than an occasional activity.

One of the problems with a discussion like this is the tendency to resort to extreme examples or textbook type contextless examples . Sometimes it is necessary to think about what people would say in a real situation and in idiomatic English.

Example
A girl phones her boyfriend. She asks "What were you doing when I called?"

Depending on the circumstances he might say:

"I was reading the paper" [Context: his girlfriend knows that he regularly reads newspapers and probably a specific one]
"I was reading a newspaper." [Context: he doesn't often read newspapers and his girlfriend knows that]
"I was reading the local newspaper" [Context: He expects his girlfriend to know or understand that there is one local newspaper]
"I was reading one of the local newspapers"  [Context: He expects his girlfriend to know or understand that there are several local newspapers]

If the boyfriend acts like me he would probably choose the non-specific "I was reading a newspaper."  This implies that it is not really important which newspaper or even which type of paper.


----------

