# Scenery / landscape



## A-friend

Hi; please tell me, when I am enjoying a beautiful scene, can I say: "Wow! what a beautiful (*scenery */ *landscape*)"
Are these two words refer to the same concept and can be used interchangeably?
Otherwise, what is the conceptual difference between these two words?


----------



## Chasint

What a beautiful landscape! 

What a beautiful scenery! 

What beautiful scenery! 

What a beautiful scene! 

The noun scenery is uncountable. You cannot talk about a scenery.


----------



## Myridon

A landscape can also be a painting.
Scenery can also be background items in a play or movie. A fake tree on a stage is a piece of scenery.


----------



## A-friend

So just let me know for pointing to a beautiful view, which word is used the most or usually which one is in common use more?


----------



## Chasint

A-friend said:


> So just let me know for pointing to a beautiful view, which word is used the most or usually which one is in common use more?


Just that - a view.
_
Wow - what a beautiful view!_

That's my personal answer. Let's see if others agree.


----------



## A-friend

Biffo said:


> Just that - a view.
> _
> Wow - what a beautiful view!_
> 
> That's my personal answer. Let's see if others agree.



Thanks dear Biffo
But what about a place where has very beautiful views? Can we name it a scenic place? Or what? What is your suggestion?


----------



## Florentia52

It is grammatically correct to refer to "a scenic place," but it would be more common in writing than in speaking.

If by "beautiful views," you simply mean beautiful scenery or landscape, I would simply call it "a beautiful place."

If you are using "beautiful views" more literally to mean views from hilltops or other elevations that overlook an area, you could say (in written English) that the place offers many spectacular or stunning views, or (in spoken English) that it has some great views.


----------



## A-friend

Florentia52 said:


> It is grammatically correct to refer to "a scenic place," but it would be more common in writing than in speaking.
> 
> If by "beautiful views," you simply mean beautiful scenery or landscape, I would simply call it "a beautiful place."
> 
> If you are using "beautiful views" more literally to mean views from hilltops or other elevations that overlook an area, you could say (in written English) that the place offers many spectacular or stunning views, or (in spoken English) that it has some great views.



Thanks Florentia52
If I got you ponit, you meant that:
View and Scenery and Landscape can be used interchangeably for referring to a place which has a beautiful nature and view but having this difference that "View" often is used in common and everyday English but other two words are used in written English. Did I get your point correctly?


----------



## Florentia52

"Scenery" and "landscape" can be used interchangeably. "Views" emphasizes the ability to look out over the scenery/landscape, usually from an elevation (hill, cliff, top of a castle, etc.), although you could also say "We got wonderful views of the rural landscape from the window of the train." Again, it's a bit formal.

If I were hiking in the Alps, I might tell a friend, "We had great views every time we came around a bend in the trail." I might also say "The scenery was spectacular." If I were hiking in the jungle in Costa Rica, I would probably say "The jungle was beautiful." It would be too close at hand to refer to as either scenery or landscape.


----------



## EdisonBhola

Can a context be created where "a scenery" would be correct? 

e.g.
This park has (such) a scenery that is beyond compare.

From my understanding, the "a" is needed here despite "scenery" being uncountable because of the restrictive clause "that is beyond compare".


----------



## Glenfarclas

No, you can't say "a scenery."  You could say something like "The scenery in the park is beyond compare," though.


----------



## EdisonBhola

How about this one? (I know it's "beauty" not "scenery" but the principle applies here.  )

She possesses (a) beauty that is beyond compare.

"Beauty" is uncountable in this context but I was taught that the "a" is absolutely needed here. I'm confused...


----------



## Glenfarclas

Yes, that's fine.  I guess I'll revise my previous statement to say that "a scenery that..." may be grammatically correct, but sounds unnatural and unidiomatic.


----------



## WyomingSue

Also, landscape refers to land--if I were at the beach, looking out to sea, I might comment on the view, or maybe the scenery (if there were several small islands), but not "landscape."


----------



## zaffy

Would it be natural  to use both 'scenery' and 'landscape' in one sentence? 

"One should visit the small village of Gabon to admire a truly rural landscape as well as a breathtaking scenery"


----------



## Steven David

A-friend said:


> So just let me know for pointing to a beautiful view, which word is used the most or usually which one is in common use more?




Both are equally good. It depends on what you want to say. A landscape is not exactly the same thing as scenery, but they're related. And I wouldn't say that one is more common than the other. One could be more common than the other, but that is not relevant to what someone really wants to communicate. Again, it just comes down to what you want to say or what you have in mind.

So the idea is to develop an understanding of what the two concepts mean or what the two concepts are.

Scenery is more general, and a landscape is something more specific.

Scenery could be anything: mountains, old houses, buildings. A landscape is just that: the land. An example of a landscape is a farm field with, perhaps, animals grazing in the field. We could also say that a field for sports games or athletic competitions is a landscape. A landscape could also be a view of a shoreline. We could also say that this is scenery.

Think of the idea of landscape artists.

Also consider the idea of landscapers doing work such as mowing lawns, trimming shrubs, planting flowers, and whatever else goes into taking care of the grounds or the land. People that do this type of work are called landscapers, and they work for landscaping companies.

Also, look up "landscape" in Google Images. You could find photographers' landscapes and painters' landscapes.

A landscape is a type of scenery, but scenery is not a type of landscape.

So the wider idea is scenery.


----------



## Steven David

zaffy said:


> Would it be natural  to use both 'scenery' and 'landscape' in one sentence?
> 
> "One should visit the small village of Gabon to admire a truly rural landscape as well as a breathtaking scenery"



It's possible. However, that would depend on whether you can certainly distinguish a landscape from the scenery. You would have to be specific about this and what you are talking about, somehow.

My previous post should help clarify this more.

I had not noticed that this was a reopened thread.


----------



## zaffy

And how about the articles in my sentence?  Landscape is countable and scenery is uncountable only?

"One should visit the small village of Gabon to admire *a *truly rural landscape as well as (*a*) breathtaking scenery"

I looked through numerous examples and I've noticed 'the' or 'some' before 'scenery'. So should I put 'the' in the above sentence?


----------



## A-friend

Steven David said:


> Both are equally good. It depends on what you want to say. A landscape is not exactly the same thing as scenery, but they're related. And I wouldn't say that one is more common than the other. One could be more common than the other, but that is not relevant to what someone really wants to communicate. Again, it just comes down to what you want to say or what you have in mind.
> 
> So the idea is to develop an understanding of what the two concepts mean or what the two concepts are.
> 
> Scenery is more general, and a landscape is something more specific.
> 
> Scenery could be anything: mountains, old houses, buildings. A landscape is just that: the land. An example of a landscape is a farm field with, perhaps, animals grazing in the field. We could also say that a field for sports games or athletic competitions is a landscape. A landscape could also be a view of a shoreline. We could also say that this is scenery.
> 
> Think of the idea of landscape artists.
> 
> Also consider the idea of landscapers doing work such as mowing lawns, trimming shrubs, planting flowers, and whatever else goes into taking care of the grounds or the land. People that do this type of work are called landscapers, and they work for landscaping companies.
> 
> Also, look up "landscape" in Google Images. You could find photographers' landscapes and painters' landscapes.
> 
> A landscape is a type of scenery, but scenery is not a type of landscape.
> 
> So the wider idea is scenery.


Amazing explanation. Thank you very much Steve. The previous time (about 6 years ago) I couldn't distinguish between the two and I used to think that they were identical. Thanks to your clarification everything is clear-cut now.


----------



## PaulQ

To me, the landscape is there whether you look at it or not (objective), but the scenery is there only if you look at it (subjective.)


----------



## Keith Bradford

As for frequency of use, _*scenery *_is the most common, as shown in Google Ngram Viewer.  The other two are equal, and each is used about half as often as _scenery_.


----------



## PaulQ

Whereas:
rocky scenery,rocky landscape,a rocky view​and​fertile scenery,fertile landscape,a fertile view​give the opposite effect.


----------



## zaffy

PaulQ said:


> Whereas:
> rocky scenery,rocky landscape,a rocky view​and​fertile scenery,fertile landscape,a fertile view​give the opposite effect.



So would that mean that scenery covers all kinds of features (mountains, trees, hills, houses) and a landscape covers a single feature like rocks only?


----------



## PaulQ

No. Google Ngrams do not say anything about the words (or combinations of words) other than how frequently they are used. In this sense, Google Ngrams uses all its books, in which we can assume that the words are used correctly and appropriately to convey the intended message to the reader.

As I said in #20, "scenery" is a subjective word, it is usually informal and describes a combination of features that comprise any *scene -> that which is seen*. The scene may be looking down a microscope, or staring at the night sky, it may be the sight of a riot or a scene of the countryside.

*Landscape* is more formal and objective. It refers only to overall picture of the geology (in its broadest sense) combined with any features (soil, rocks, sand, hills, rivers, etc or their absence,) and plant life (grass, trees or their absence) and also clues taken from the ambient temperature and climate in the area.


----------



## Steven David

zaffy said:


> And how about the articles in my sentence?  Landscape is countable and scenery is uncountable only?
> 
> "One should visit the small village of Gabon to admire *a *truly rural landscape as well as (*a*) breathtaking scenery"
> 
> I looked through numerous examples and I've noticed 'the' or 'some' before 'scenery'. So should I put 'the' in the above sentence?




The three of these are possible. Yes, it's possible to put "the" or "some" before "breathtaking scenery".

1) "One should visit the small village of Gabon to admire *a *truly rural landscape as well as breathtaking scenery."

2) "One should visit the small village of Gabon to admire *the *truly rural landscape as well as breathtaking scenery."

3) "One should visit the small village of Gabon to admire truly rural landscapes as well as breathtaking scenery."



A-friend said:


> Amazing explanation. Thank you very much Steve. The previous time (about 6 years ago) I couldn't distinguish between the two and I used to think that they were identical. Thanks to your clarification everything is clear-cut now.




You're welcome, A-friend.

Thank you for saying so, A-friend.

I'm glad you find it useful and helpful.


----------



## Keith Bradford

Bear in mind that _*landscape *_has parallels in_ seascape, cityscape, townscape, moonscape_ and (rarer) _skyscape _and _roofscape _(other scapes are available).

These are all different types of scenery, views of different parts of the world (and beyond).


----------



## velisarius

PaulQ said:


> To me, the landscape is there whether you look at it or not (objective), but the scenery is there only if you look at it (subjective.)


I'm inclined to agree with that.

_He surveyed the landscape with a critical eye. Utter desolation. A whole new city could be built there, or they might just allow Nature to reclaim it. _

We might talk about, or paint, a desert landscape, but there isn't much in the way of scenery in the desert. A landscape may be ugly or bare. Someone who talks about "landscapes" is looking at the land with an artist's eye. As Paul says, it sounds "objective".

If there's nothing beautiful, uplifting, or at all interesting there, we don't normally call it "scenery"; we nearly always use "scenery" in a positive way - or at least not in an entirely negative way:

_There's some *spectacular scenery* in Canada.
The scenery around where I live is really ugly. _(People rarely talk about ugly, bare scenery.)
_I went to an island I'd never been to before.* The scenery was nothing to write home about*, but the food was good. _(Scenery can be unimpressive, or not to one's taste.)


(Edit: been to)


----------



## zaffy

The rover which is now exploring Mars takes pictures and sends them to the Earth to give us some idea of the 'landscape' or 'scenery' up there?


----------



## Uncle Jack

zaffy said:


> The rover which is now exploring Mars takes pictures and sends them to the Earth to give us some idea of the 'landscape' or 'scenery' up there?


I'd use "landscape". "Scenery" seems too subjective a word, and tends only to be used for attractive places. "Terrain" might be better (although perhaps someone will object to to that on the basis that Mars isn't "terra" (Earth) at all).


----------



## JulianStuart

A neutral word I've seen in a few articles is "surface" when not specifying rocks or geological features (do we need a Mars word for this too - geo- means of the earth?)  Edit: areology will do nicely...


----------



## kentix

Yes, landscape. As said above, landscape exists whether humans look at it or not. The rover is giving us information about that geological marrain terrain that forms that landscape. It has objective characteristics - shapes and sizes and compositions of things.

Scenery is what a person sees. It can't be measured and scientifically analyzed - just appreciated. We might appreciate the scenery on Mars but that's not the reason scientific expeditions are sent there. But that might be a reason you drive through picturesque countryside.


----------



## zaffy

kentix said:


> Scenery is what a person sees. (...)   We might appreciate the scenery on Mars



And what if I landed on Mars, took a walk and said:

"Gosh, I hate this scenery. It looks like hell."

From what I understood, "scenery" works in a positive context, which we don't have in that example. Then, "scenery" seems to be nice greenery, nice views over hills, rivers, etc. Again we don't have it in that example. In other words, does that example work?

And what if I did like the scenery on Mars?
"Wow, I love it here. Look at this beautiful desert-like scenery."  Would it work?


----------



## Uncle Jack

zaffy said:


> And what if I landed on Mars, took a walk and said:
> 
> "Gosh, I hate this scenery. It looks like hell."


No, it would not be "scenery" unless it was artificial, as on a stage or film set. The natural landscape is only scenery if it is pretty - something that makes a nice scene.


zaffy said:


> And what if I did like the scenery on Mars?
> "Wow, I love it here. Look at this beautiful desert-like scenery." Would it work?


Even this does not work. It makes the scenery appear to be something external. This is fine with landscape, but as I mentioned earlier, "scenery" is subjective. It is what you see, not really something that you can direct someone else to look at (I am sure there are all sorts of exceptions, but it sounds wrong here). You can say "I love this beautiful desert-like scenery", describing how you see the landscape, but another person might see it as a barren wilderness, and not scenery at all.


----------



## zaffy

Uncle Jack said:


> You can say "I love this beautiful desert-like scenery", describing how you see the landscape, but another person might see it as a barren wilderness, and not scenery at all.



So do these two work and mean the same? 
"I love this beautiful desert-like scenery."
"I love this beautiful desert-like landscape."


----------



## Uncle Jack

zaffy said:


> So do these two work and mean the same?
> "I love this beautiful desert-like scenery."
> "I love this beautiful desert-like landscape."


Yes, I think so.


----------



## zaffy

Uncle Jack said:


> It is what you see, not really something that you can direct someone else to look at (I am sure there are all sorts of exceptions, but it sounds wrong here). You can say "I love this beautiful desert-like scenery", describing how you see the landscape, but another person might see it as a barren wilderness, and not scenery at all.



If someone and I are in beautiful mountains with amazing scenery all around, couldn't I say this to my companion? 

"Tom, look at this picturesque scenery all around us."


----------



## Uncle Jack

Possibly, but "scenery" tends not to be used much like this. If you are telling someone to look, it implies they are not currently looking at whatever it is. "The scenery all around us" hardly tells the other person where to look or what you want them to look at.


----------



## Steven David

zaffy said:


> And what if I landed on Mars, took a walk and said:
> 
> "Gosh, I hate this scenery. It looks like hell."
> 
> From what I understood, "scenery" works in a positive context, which we don't have in that example. Then, "scenery" seems to be nice greenery, nice views over hills, rivers, etc. Again we don't have it in that example. In other words, does that example work?
> 
> And what if I did like the scenery on Mars?
> "Wow, I love it here. Look at this beautiful desert-like scenery."  Would it work?



It could be that scenery is a word associated with positive, favorable, or desirable viewpoints or ideas. However, this is not a rule. Therefore, your sentence about not liking scenery works very well. It's not a problem at all, and it's correct.

When a word is often associated with something that is generally speaking positive, we can say that the word has positive semantic prosody. And when a word is often associated with something that is generally speaking negative, we can say that the word has negative semantic prosody.

I would say that scenery has positive semantic prosody, but, unlike structure or grammar, negative prosody and positive prosody are not rule-based. These ideas are, I would say, both objective and subjective. Native speakers can often determine from a lifetime of using the language whether a word is normally associated with something positive or negative. And then many words are neutral.

Then again, with respect to native speakers and these ideas, most probably wouldn't give it much thought and therefore might be ill prepared to comment in such a way.

Here's another example.

When we speak of what we see on the moon, we usually consider this to be a landscape, and so we get the phrase lunar landscape. This is not to say that the moon doesn't have scenery. We can view what's on the moon as scenery. We probably say lunar landscape because, often, landscape implies, but does not necessarily mean, flatter lands, and the moon, as far as I know, is mostly flatlands, no mountain ranges, for example.

The phrase lunar scenery sounds rather unusual. But it is not incorrect.

🤔😎


----------



## zaffy

When we look at say an industrial part of a town and don't like the chimneys around, do we talk of 'scenery' rather than 'landscape'?

A: Look at those chimneys. I hate it here.
B: Yeah, the scenery/landscape around here is ugly.

or. 

A: Look at that ugly scenery/landscape around here!
B: Yeah, I hate those chimneys.


----------



## Uncle Jack

zaffy said:


> When we look at say an industrial part of a town and don't like the chimneys around, do we talk of 'scenery' rather than 'landscape'?
> 
> A: Look at those chimneys. I hate it here.
> B: Yeah, the scenery/landscape around here is ugly.


Neither. Both scenery and landscape refer to the terrain. They might be more man-made than natural (a landscape garden, perhaps), but neither word is used for buildings or other structures.


----------



## zaffy

Uncle Jack said:


> Neither. Both scenery and landscape refer to the terrain. Neither word is used for buildings or other structures.



I found this example made up by a native speaker here in the forums. Doesn't it refer to buildings? Or does it work beacuse it is a positive context?

_I love Vermont's scenery with its church spires and covered bridges._


----------



## Myridon

Partly because it's positive, but also because this makes you think of a rural vista that happens to include a bridge and a church steeple in the distance.  The scenic covered bridges aren't in the middle of a big city.
This is some scenic scenery:


----------



## Steven David

zaffy said:


> When we look at say an industrial part of a town and don't like the chimneys around, do we talk of 'scenery' rather than 'landscape'?
> 
> A: Look at those chimneys. I hate it here.
> B: Yeah, the scenery/landscape around here is ugly.
> 
> or.
> 
> A: Look at that ugly scenery/landscape around here!
> B: Yeah, I hate those chimneys.



I'd use scenery here.

Scenery is a more general term.

Landscape has more to do with the land just as the word itself says.

Landscapes, for example, are fields or mountain ranges.
__________

For your other question, this is a case in which using the works and not using the works.

Or, in other words, this can be viewed as specific or general.


----------



## Roxxxannne

_I love Vermont's scenery with its church spires and covered bridges._
This is a reasonable use of scenery: presumably it means the tree-covered Green Mountains and their foothills, and farms, fields, meadows, and streams (not the car dealerships and mattress stores in South Burlington).  The church spires here and there plus the occasional covered bridge are accents, not the main images in one's field of vision as one drives through the state.


----------



## zaffy

Uncle Jack said:


> Neither. Both scenery and landscape refer to the terrain. They might be more man-made than natural (a landscape garden, perhaps), but neither word is used for buildings or other structures.


I found another example made up by a native speaker. Does it sound right to you? I'm confused again. It doesn't refer to natural features like 'landscape' should. It refers to man-made features. 

"The factory chimneys dominated the landscape for miles around".


----------



## Myridon

If you're seeing them from miles away, again, your vantage point is not inside the city.


----------



## zaffy

Myridon said:


> If you're seeing them from miles away, again, your vantage point is not inside the city.


And what if we used "scenery" in that example (#45)? I guess it wouldn't work because the context is not positive, right?

However, it would work with say 'pine trees' rather than 'chimneys', wouldn't it? "Pine trees dominated the scenery for miles around".


----------



## Uncle Jack

zaffy said:


> I found another example made up by a native speaker. Does it sound right to you? I'm confused again. It doesn't refer to natural features like 'landscape' should. It refers to man-made features.
> 
> "The factory chimneys dominated the landscape for miles around".


Buildings are in the landscape, but they don't make the landscape. If something dominates the landscape for miles around, it means that it towers over the landscape (hills, trees, and so on) so that people's eyes are drawn to it.


zaffy said:


> However, it would work with say 'pine trees' rather than 'chimneys', wouldn't it? "Pine trees dominated the scenery for miles around".


The chimneys dominated everything for miles around the chimneys. Pine trees cannot dominate everything for miles around themselves - they simply aren't large enough. However pine trees might dominate the landscape, if they are the largest/most noticeable thing in it.

We don't usually talk about things dominating scenery.


----------



## zaffy

And would these two make sense?

Pine trees dominated the scenery of the valley.
Pine trees dominated the landscape of the valley.


----------



## Uncle Jack

zaffy said:


> And would these two make sense?
> 
> Pine trees dominated the scenery of the valley.
> Pine trees dominated the landscape of the valley.


The second one is fine. The first doesn't work in my opinion, but it isn't as bad as some of your other "scenery" examples.


----------



## zaffy

And do these all work?

1. This postcard shows the beautiful landscape/scenery of Hawaii.
2. They enjoyed the spectacular view of the mountain landscape/scenery.
3. The landscape/scenery in the Alps was spectacular.
4. There's some spectacular landscape/scenery in Canada.


----------



## twenty6

Use "scenery" for all four.

You can use "landscape" for (1) and (2), but "scenery" would still be better; if you wanted to use "landscape" for any others:
3. The landscape of the Alps was spectacular
4. There are some spectacular landscapes in Canada.

Using "landscape" for 3 or 4 also sounds pretty odd to me, stick to "scenery".


----------



## Roxxxannne

I might use "Pine trees dominated the landscape of the valley" if I meant it in an ecological sense: the genus _Pinus _is the dominant tree in the valley: there are many more pines than spruces, maples, or oaks.

"Dominate the scenery" sounds strange.


----------



## abluter

To my mind "scenery" is a ridiculous word to use seriously of landscape. It cheapens it, and is the sort of word that a philistine would use. It's fine in the theatre, where it presumably originated, but I would never recommend its use in any other context.


----------



## Roxxxannne

abluter said:


> To my mind "scenery" is a ridiculous word to use seriously of landscape. It cheapens it, and is the sort of word that a philistine would use. It's fine in the theatre, where it presumably originated, but I would never recommend its use in any other context.


Yes, 'scenery' turns a landscape into something 'delightful' and 'charming' and ignores the fact that people actually live there.


----------



## zaffy

abluter said:


> To my mind "scenery" is a ridiculous word to use seriously of landscape. It cheapens it, and is the sort of word that a philistine would use. It's fine in the theatre, where it presumably originated, but I would never recommend its use in any other context.



Thanks for that. I know where the problem comes from. You can imagine now how confusing it is for non-natives. Yes, in Polish we have one word for 'landsacape', and a different one (sceneria) for 'scenery' in the theatre. So looks like the Polish works better here as the distinction has been kept.





abluter said:


> To my mind "scenery" is a ridiculous word to use seriously of landscape. It's fine in the theatre,


In other words, even though "scenery" works in all of these, the logic tells us there should be "landscape" used in these, shouldn't there?
1. This postcard shows the beautiful landscape/scenery of Hawaii.
2. They enjoyed the spectacular view of the mountain landscape/scenery.
3. The landscape/scenery in the Alps was spectacular.
4. There's some spectacular landscape/scenery in Canada.


----------



## abluter

Zaffy, it's not a question, for me, of correctness, logic or popular usage - more of personal taste.  I know "scenery" is used widely and indiscriminately, but to my ear it inexorably suggests superficiality and cheapness.


----------



## zaffy

twenty6 said:


> You can use "landscape" for (1) and (2), but "scenery" would still be better; i





zaffy said:


> 1. This postcard shows the beautiful landscape/scenery of Hawaii.



And wouldn't context matter? If some tourists were buying a postcard in Hawaii, I guess they would use 'scenery'. However, say there is a geography class. The teacher is talking about the landscape of Hawaii and shows a postcard to the students, saying "This postcard shows the beautiful landscape of Hawaii."


----------



## Uncle Jack

We tend to use "scenery" when referring to the landscape in abstract terms, and it is often used to talk about somewhere else: "You should go to Scotland; it has beautiful scenery". We might, on a postcard or in a letter, write "the scenery is delightful" about the place we are staying, but scenery tends not to be something you point out to someone, or use to describe a scene that is in front of you.

You can manage perfectly well in English without using "scenery" at all, and just use "landscape", as long as you remember that "landscape" is countable, so it is used a little differently.


----------



## zaffy

Uncle Jack said:


> We tend to use "scenery" when referring to the landscape in abstract terms, and it is often used to talk about somewhere else: "You should go to Scotland; it has beautiful scenery".



And if I told you "You should go to Scotland; it has a beautiful landscape ", would you know I'm not a native speaker straight away? Does it sound off?


----------



## abluter

Not "it has *a *beautiful landscape", just "it has beautiful landscape". You would pass for a perfect Englishman.


----------



## zaffy

abluter said:


> Not "it has *a *beautiful landscape", just "it has beautiful landscape". You would pass for a perfect Englishman.


I thought 'landscape' was countable.

What beautiful scenery! = What *a* beautiful landscape!


----------



## abluter

Yes, it can be countable, or uncountable.


----------



## Uncle Jack

abluter said:


> Not "it has *a *beautiful landscape", just "it has beautiful landscape". You would pass for a perfect Englishman.


"It has beautiful landscape" sounds wrong to me, and I would use the plural "landscapes".

I rather suspect that doubts about how to use the word "landscape" may account for "scenery" being used instead.


----------



## velisarius

_You should go to Scotland; it has beautiful landscape._

I couldn't say that sentence. It looks non-native to me.
An artist might say that it has some beautiful landscapes he'd like to paint.

(cross-posted)


----------



## abluter

Yes, on reflection I agree with Uncle Jack and Velisarius -" landscapes " sounds better in this context.


----------



## zaffy

Say I am in this small town in the mountains. Should I refer to it as 'beautiful scenery' or 'a beautiful landscape'? Or does it depend on how I word the sentence? I guess these two work with 'houses' in the first example and no man-made features mentioned in the second.

_I love this scenery. Those houses with woods and hills in the background. 
I love this landscape. The hills and woods are amazing. _


----------



## Uncle Jack

The picture does not obviously show either scenery or landscape.


----------



## abluter

From an artist's/photographer's point of view, it's a landscape. You might or might not find it a very interesting landscape, but there's no other convenient way to describe it, apart from "a view of road, houses and trees".


----------



## zaffy

Uncle Jack said:


> The picture does not obviously show either scenery or landscape.


How about this one? How do you like these examples?

_I love this scenery. This cottage with the mountains in the background looks amazing.
I love this landscape. These green hills and the mountains covered with snow are amazing._


----------



## abluter

Yes, it's a landscape, or you could be more specific and call it a "mountainscape". A view of the sea must be called a "seascape".


----------



## Uncle Jack

abluter said:


> Yes, it's a landscape, or you could be more specific and call it a "mountainscape". A view of the sea must be called a "seascape".


As a picture, I agree with you. However, it would also be fine to describe the picture of being of beautiful scenery, for example.



zaffy said:


> How about this one? How do you like these examples?
> 
> _I love this scenery. This cottage with the mountains in the background looks amazing.
> I love this landscape. These green hills and the mountains covered with snow are amazing._


The second sentence is fine. The first looks to me to be too specific. "Scenery" is used more as an abstract thing than a specific view, and when you describe scenery, it is a combination of what you can see from several different viewpoints or when you look in different directions. You might love the scenery with mountains all around, or the scenery of green valleys with mountains in the background. You might even include small cottages in your description of the scenery ("I love the scenery of green valleys, snow-covered mountains, and pretty little cottages dotted around"), but it would have to be cottages (plural), not just one specific cottage. In this view, it so happens that you can only see one cottage. In a different view you might see no cottages at all. In a third view you might see a different cottage, or several cottages. If there is only one cottage, I cannot think how you could include it in a description of the scenery.


----------



## zaffy

Uncle Jack said:


> The first looks to me to be too specific. "Scenery" is used more as an abstract thing than a specific view, and when you describe scenery, it is a combination of what you can see from several different viewpoints or when you look in different directions.



So what would you imagine to be depicted in this postcard? It's a dictionary example. Could there be any man-made structures? Could there be paople on the beach?

"This postcard shows the beautiful scenery of Hawaii."


----------



## Myridon

abluter said:


> To my mind "scenery" is a ridiculous word to use seriously of landscape. It cheapens it, and is the sort of word that a philistine would use.


Are you calling calling most of the English-speaking world Philistines?  I use "scenery" of scenery and "landscape" of landscapes.  Is that okay? Is it okay if I use "scenic"? There seems to be no "landscapic."


----------



## Uncle Jack

zaffy said:


> So what would you imagine to be depicted in this postcard? It's a dictionary example. Could there be any man-made structures? Could there be paople on the beach?
> 
> "This postcard shows the beautiful scenery of Hawaii."


There might be buildings, but they are unlikely to be prominent. Most likely there will be no buildings at all. It could look something like these:


----------



## Roxxxannne

To return to #60, Zaffy, imagine you are  talking to a random native American English speaker (like me   ) about a trip you'd just taken to Vermont (#s 41-44) and you said "I loved the scenery in Vermont.  The farmland along Lake Champlain reminded me of Poland, but smaller."  I would completely understand that you are talking as a tourist about something that you enjoyed, and, since I haven't been to Poland, I'd ask  what the differences were.

But in these sentences,  I would expect 'landscape' instead, since you're talking about the natural environment and its use by humans rather than its aesthetics:
"The scenery landscape in Vermont is mostly given over to farming along Lake Champlain, although one can see that car dealerships and malls have taken over much of the scenery landscape south of Burlington in the last 30 years."
or
"The scenery landscape in Vermont in the foothills of the Green Mountains is dominated by species of _Quercus_ and _Acer _except where small towns were established and land was cleared for farming in the 18th and early 19th centuries.  In some areas, cleared farmland returned to forest when the population declined as wheat production moved further west in the United States."

(Note: These sentences should not be taken as historically accurate regarding changes in the VT landscape.)


----------



## AmericanAbroad

A-friend said:


> Hi; please tell me, when I am enjoying a beautiful scene, can I say: "Wow! what a beautiful (*scenery */ *landscape*)"
> Are these two words refer to the same concept and can be used interchangeably?
> Otherwise, what is the conceptual difference between these two words?


The common usage would be "what beautiful scenery" and "what a beautiful landscape".  The word scenery carries a bit more of a suggestion of artificiality, as a common secondary meaning of the word scenery refers to the decor used in a stage or film production.  And, while "landscaping" also suggests a degree of artificiality, the scenery in a stage or film may be completely artificial, whereas "landscaping" ordinarily refers to reshaping the contours of actual natural land.  While the word "landscape" may refer to a kind of painting, that kind of painting is so called not in and of itself but because the painting depicts a natural landscape.  These nuances about artificiality are just that, mere nuances.  When it comes to the use of an article, the definite article "the" can be used with the word scenery, as in "wow, the scenery was beautiful".  But the indefinite article, "a" would not be used before the word scenery.  With respect to landscape, the definite and/or the indefinite article can be used, depending on the circumstances.


----------



## zaffy

The man recording this view said this. "Beautiful mountains in the background. Beautiful scenery." 

Would you describe this view as scenery as well?


----------



## Steven David

zaffy said:


> The man recording this view said this. "Beautiful mountains in the background. Beautiful scenery."
> 
> Would you describe this view as scenery as well?
> 
> View attachment 58451



Yes, that view is scenery.

If a painter were to paint the mountains, and only the mountains appeared in the painting, I would call that a landscape. 

Still, such a sight, not considering a painting for a moment, can also be called scenery.


----------



## zaffy

Steven David said:


> Yes, that view is scenery.


Hmm, pretty similar to that in #67, which I was told wasn't "scenery".


----------



## JulianStuart

zaffy said:


> Hmm, pretty similar to that in #67, which I was told wasn't "scenery".


In both cases, any image with so much tarmac/road./sidewalk is not going to cause many to think of either landscape or scenery!  The background in such an image could be either.


----------



## Steven David

zaffy said:


> Hmm, pretty similar to that in #67, which I was told wasn't "scenery".



I think it's fair to say that the words landscape and scenery overlap in some ways.

And, given that, I would say that what anyone would want to call scenery or a landscape could also be open to some interpretation.

We can find consensus with respect to these words. However, there are going to be some differences in viewpoints.

Still, I think everyone is mostly on the same page here.

________________

Julian, I would think that the term scenery is a lot more flexible. But that's just me.

🤔😎🙂


----------



## Uncle Jack

What a person sees and what appears in a picture aren't necessarily the same thing. The mountains in the background may well be beautiful scenery, but the road in the foreground is not. The person filming the scene and providing the commentary may well be thinking of the mountains. However, presented as a still image on here, what we mainly see is the road.


----------



## zaffy

A few seconds later into the video, he changed the shot and used "scenery" again. I guess he meant both the mountains and the man made structures. He said "Incredible scenery. It's amazing. Almost looks fake."


----------



## JulianStuart

Steven David said:


> Julian, I would think that the term scenery is a lot more flexible. But that's just me.
> 
> 🤔😎🙂


  
Both words can be used in a variety of situations.  Both could also be used to refer to something that is not attractive.


----------



## Steven David

About the term scenery being more flexible, the first definition here is, I suppose, what I'm thinking about. And this definition would make scenery a more flexible word. Still, I understand what you mean. Very often, scenery is the natural appearance of something, which is to say nature as in trees, forests, fields, mountains, lakes, ponds, valleys, canyons, etcetera.

Definition of scenery | Dictionary.com


----------



## merquiades

zaffy said:


> The man recording this view said this. "Beautiful mountains in the background. Beautiful scenery."
> 
> Would you describe this view as scenery as well?
> 
> View attachment 58451


Absolutely scenery.
Scenery is the mountains not the houses or the sidewalk.


----------



## AmericanAbroad

zaffy said:


> The man recording this view said this. "Beautiful mountains in the background. Beautiful scenery."
> 
> Would you describe this view as scenery as well?
> 
> View attachment 58451


I don't know if I would say it that way, but you could.  It is not an inappropriate use of the word scenery.  Look at it this way.  The word scenery can be used to describe what you see in the background or surroundings.  This can apply to the scenery in a stage play, or the scenery outside.  It can apply to natural phenomena and artificial phenomena.  Landscape, by way of contrast, does not apply to in door phenomena.  It only applies to what you see outside.  Usually to the natural phenomena, mountains rivers lakes and such.  However, you can also talk about an urban landscape, which is artificial.  And you can refer to artificially rearranging natural phenomena as "landscaping".  So scenery and landscape can both be used to describe what you see outside, but normally only scenery can be used to describe indoor phenomena like the scenery used in a stage play.


----------



## zaffy

The same American again. He commented on this view first calling it "beautiful scenery" and a few seconds later "beautiful landscape."  Is it possible that he uses them interchangeably?


----------



## Steven David

zaffy said:


> The same American again. He commented on this view first calling it "beautiful scenery" and a few seconds later "beautiful landscape."  Is it possible that he uses them interchangeably?
> 
> View attachment 58489
> 
> View attachment 58490



Yes, it's possible to use them interchangeably.

Just as there can be different interpretations and overlap in our perception of what a landscape is and what scenery is among different native speakers of English, this same sort of overlap can exist with just one person.

Here's another way to look at it, which could be of some help.

Landscape <

This is an English word, or, we can say, a word having its origins in northern Europe, which is to say originating from the Germanic side of English.

Scenery <

This is an English word with its origins in Latin, or, we can say, an English word having its origins in southern Europe or Latin-based languages.

I think the challenge here is that these words can be very different, and these words can be very close. So, again, there's a lot of overlap with these words.

The difference could be, sometimes, in some people's minds, no more than a nuance, a subtlety, or a detail.

We are consciously trying to break this down, the difference that is. And, at this point, I suppose it's proving to be a challenging task.

I understand what you are trying to understand better. However, let's also consider that most native speakers of English probably don't consciously try to break down the difference between these two words.

I would suggest this:

Continue reading and listening, and notice how native speakers of English use scenery and landscape. Expect that there's going to be some ambiguity in how these words are applied.

Oftentimes, English has two, or even three or four, words that apply to the same idea or concept. Some people can call these synonyms, but they are not entirely 100% synonyms. In fact, I would say that there's no such thing as a true synonym in English.

So what we have here, with scenery and landscape, are two words that can be applied to the same concept or idea.

And with this, I would say that if you keep thinking about it, you could end up driving yourself crazy. You don't want to do that, of course.

🙂😉😎

So, again, I would observe, notice, and take notes on how the words are used.


----------



## merquiades

Scenery is more beautiful, natural, pristine, untouched by man.  Think of mountains, prairies, natural reserves, beaches.
Landscape lacks a bit of this and can be used for anything.
Scenery draws my attention to the mountains.  Landscape to the whole picture... grass, gardens, flowers etc. and the mountains.
By the way, it doesn't look so beautiful to me,  neither the mountains nor the modern buildings and paved parking lots, cars, the avenue...  They have tried to cover up massacring the scenery with some kind of industrial park by landcaping the entire area with plants and greenery.


----------



## Steven David

Something else comes to mind about these two words.

Sometimes, words that are very close but different have specific applications.

For example, scenery is applied to theater and movies.

Landscape, for example, is applied to what artists paint on a canvas.

We would never talk about the landscape on a movie set or going onsite to have a landscape. This is always scenery in the context of actors playing parts.

Artist, artists who paint that is, do not paint scenery necessarily. We can say they paint scenery, but what we usually think of when an artist paints nature are landscapes.

So, in this way, I would say these are specific applications of these words in English.

Are there more specific applications? I don't know. None come to mind at the moment.

I would say that photographers photograph both scenery and landscapes.


----------



## FERNANDO ARTURO GUZMAN

Differents point of views... modern human language is complex


----------



## AmericanAbroad

zaffy said:


> Say I am in this small town in the mountains. Should I refer to it as 'beautiful scenery' or 'a beautiful landscape'? Or does it depend on how I word the sentence? I guess these two work with 'houses' in the first example and no man-made features mentioned in the second.
> 
> _I love this scenery. Those houses with woods and hills in the background.
> I love this landscape. The hills and woods are amazing. _
> 
> View attachment 57360


Both phrasings are possible.  Ordinarily, landscape focuses on the natural aspects of what you see, but it may include some buildings, bridges, roads.  A country landscape could include barns, farms, fences, etc.  Scenery tends to imply artificial constructs, but need not do so.  The differences are nuances.


----------



## brit66

A-friend said:


> Hi; please tell me, when I am enjoying a beautiful scene, can I say: "Wow! what a beautiful (*scenery */ *landscape*)"
> Are these two words refer to the same concept and can be used interchangeably?
> Otherwise, what is the conceptual difference between these two words?


You can say "what a beautiful landscape" and "what beautiful scenery". "The landscapes are breathtaking here."  "The scenery is breathtaking." Landscape is a countable noun and scenery is a uncountable noun like happiness.


----------

