# beaten to <a?> pulp



## Ranjith P V

Oxford learners online dictionary meaning for the word "Pulp"

[singular, uncountable]a soft wet substance that is made especially by crushing something. 
Example sentences:
Cook the fruit gently until it forms a pulp.
Mash the beans to a pulp.His face had been *beaten to a pulp* (= very badly beaten).
Reduce the berries to a pulp.

Can somebody explain why there is an indefinite article before the word pulp in the example sentences

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Muttaki

_Halve the melon and scoop out the pulp._

This is an example sentence from Longman.


----------



## Ranjith P V

Muttaki said:


> _Halve the melon and scoop out the pulp._
> 
> This is an example sentence from Longman.



Thanks for your reply, I can understand why there is an definite article but in the sentences I've mentioned contains an indefinite article, so in the 
singular uncountable nouns can we use indefinite articles before them.


----------



## cyberpedant

"Beat [something] to a pulp" is more or less a fixed phrase. Most often uncountable nouns do not take the indefinite article.


----------



## Ranjith P V

cyberpedant said:


> "Beat something to a pulp" is more or less a fixed phrase. Most often uncountable nouns do not take the indefinite article.


Thanks for your reply. But in the sentence "Cook the fruit gently until it forms a pulp" : why they are using 'a' before pulp ?

I can also give some more examples of singular uncountable nouns 'waste','interest' 
example sentence
It seems such a waste to throw good food away.


----------



## cyberpedant

Perhaps because originally the "fruit" was several pieces and after cooking it is only one "piece."


----------



## Ranjith P V

cyberpedant said:


> Perhaps because originally the "fruit" was several pieces and after cooking it is only one "piece."


So it means a piece of pulp, is this correct.. ?

Thanks.


----------



## cyberpedant

No. You can't have a "piece" of pulp, just as you can't have a "piece" of soup.


----------



## Ranjith P V

cyberpedant said:


> No. You can't have a "piece" of pulp, just as you can't have a "piece" of soup.


So is it a [singular or uncountable noun] or [singular and uncountable noun]

Thanks


----------



## JulianStuart

I think the original definition is too restrictive - it can be used as uncountable, but also as singular "mass" (?) noun 
Compare pulp with mess


> mess _/mɛs/_  n.
> 
> a dirty or disorderly state: [countable; singular]Things are in a mess here.[uncountable]How much mess did they make?


Cambridge has
Mash the bananas to a pulp and then mix in the yogurt.


----------



## Myridon

You could also read it as "a pulp" = "a type of pulp", "a form of pulp", "any of several possible pulps"


----------



## VicNicSor

Ranjith P V said:


> So is it a [singular or uncountable noun] or [singular and uncountable noun]


"[singular, uncountable]" seems to mean that it's either uncountable or countable (but only singular). That is, you can't think of "faces beaten up to *pulps*".


----------



## JamesM

VicNicSor said:


> "[singular, uncountable]" seems to mean that it's either uncountable or countable (but only singular). That is, you can't think of "faces beaten up to *pulps*".



Good point!


----------



## Ranjith P V

JulianStuart said:


> I think the original definition is too restrictive - it can be used as uncountable, but also as singular "mass" (?) noun
> Compare pulp with mess
> 
> Cambridge has
> Mash the bananas to a pulp and then mix in the yogurt.





Myridon said:


> You could also read it as "a pulp" = "a type of pulp", "a form of pulp", "any of several possible pulps"


Thanks for the replies 

[ S or U ] a soft, wet mass:

Mash the bananas to a pulp and then mix in the yogurt.

S stands for singular noun : A noun only used in singular form and which has no plural form.


----------



## Ranjith P V

VicNicSor said:


> "[singular, uncountable]" seems to mean that it's either uncountable or countable (but only singular). That is, you can't think of "faces beaten up to *pulps*".


So this means can we say one pulp, two pulp, three pulp.

Thanks


NOT two pulps, three pulps


----------



## cyberpedant

Ranjith P V said:


> So can we say ..., two pulp, three pulp.


Never!



> two pulps, three pulps


Yes.


----------



## Ranjith P V

cyberpedant said:


> Never!
> 
> 
> Yes.


I can't understand ?

Thanks


----------



## PaulQ

One pulp
Two pulp*s*


----------



## cyberpedant

I had quoted your posts before each reply. Perhaps your browser didn't print them.
I'll re-post them here:
So can we say ..., two pulp, three pulp.
Never!

two pulps, three pulps
Yes.
And add something I should have said before: talking about pulp in the plural would require an extremely unusual and artificial context.
If you want to talk about plural pulps the word needs to be qualified: "plural pulps," "fruit pulps."


----------



## Ranjith P V

PaulQ said:


> One pulp
> Two pulp*s*





cyberpedant said:


> I had quoted your posts before each reply. Perhaps your browser didn't print them.
> I'll re-post them here:
> So can we say ..., two pulp, three pulp.
> Never!
> 
> two pulps, three pulps
> Yes.
> And add something I should have said before: talking about pulp in the plural would require an extremely unusual and artificial context.
> If you want to talk about plural pulps the word needs to be qualified: "plural pulps," "fruit pulps."



So the indefinite article means a type of or a form of... is this correct ?

Thanks, for the reply


----------



## cyberpedant

> So the indefinite article means a type of or a form of... is this correct ?


I suppose it's ok to think of it that way, but articles are grammatical words and carry no "meaning." Some languages don't even _have _articles, others stick the article at the end of the noun--so it's really not a "word."


----------



## Ranjith P V

cyberpedant said:


> I suppose it's ok to think of it that way, but articles are grammatical words and carry no "meaning." Some languages don't even _have _articles, others stick the article at the end of the noun--so it's really not a "word."


Thank you very much,

But these grammatical words makes me go crazy because, the indefinite article most of the time points to a singular countable noun.
By the way, in our language we don't the concept of article.

Can a pulp means whole of the substance.


----------



## Ranjith P V

Ranjith P V said:


> Thank you very much,
> 
> But these grammatical words makes me go crazy because, the indefinite article most of the time points to a singular countable noun.
> By the way, in our language we don't the concept of article.



a coffee = a cup of coffee.
a beer = a can of beer.

Are these contractions


----------



## panzerfaust0

I have never heard of "two pulps, three pulps".  I have heard of "a pulp".

I think that if someone wants to say that he beat two people's faces very badly, you can say, "he beat their faces to pulps" but even this sounds strange to me.


----------



## Ranjith P V

panzerfaust0 said:


> I have never heard of "two pulps, three pulps".  I have heard of "a pulp".


a waste, an interest, a pulp, etc.,
In the Oxford & Cambridge dictionaries they have marked it like this [singular, uncountable] [S or U].


----------



## Ranjith P V

Ranjith P V said:


> a waste, an interest, a pulp, etc.,
> In the Oxford & Cambridge dictionaries they have marked it like this [singular, uncountable] [S or U].


Are these means a kind of, a sort of.


----------



## Ranjith P V

JulianStuart said:


> I think the original definition is too restrictive - it can be used as uncountable, but also as singular "mass" (?) noun
> Compare pulp with mess
> 
> Cambridge has
> Mash the bananas to a pulp and then mix in the yogurt.


Can we say one mess, two mess, three mess, etc., for [Singular;Countable] nouns

Kindly, do reply


----------



## Ranjith P V

I think we can't say one mess, two mess, etc., and also two pulps, three pulps.
Because, I think if a noun has only singular form and yet countable we need a determiner before it (example the word 'Mess').
If a noun has singular form and yet uncountable such as the word 'Pulp' then I don't know why they are using an indefinite article.

Kindly clarify.


----------



## Ranjith P V

<Merged with an earlier thread. Nat>

Dear WRF & EO,

In Oxford Learner's Dictionaries & Cambridge Dictionaries the below entries are given:

_[singular, uncountable] <-- This means either a word is singular or uncountable.
[S or U] <-- This means either a word is singular or uncountable._​Am I correct?
Kindly clarify.

Thank you for always supporting.


----------



## Barque

The first means that the word is both singular and uncountable.

I'm not sure about the second - please give us an example of a word that's described that way.


----------



## Ranjith P V

Barque said:


> The first means that the word is both singular and uncountable.
> 
> I'm not sure about the second - please give us an example of a word that's described that way.


Below is the entry for the word '*pulp*' from the Oxford Learner's Dictionary:

_[singular, uncountable]a soft wet substance that is made especially by crushing something
Cook the fruit gently until it forms a pulp.Mash the beans to a pulp._

This one is from Cambridge Dictionary for the word _*'pulp' *_:
_
[ S or U ] a soft, wet mass:

Mash the bananas to a pulp and then mix in the yogurt.
_
Kindly clarify
Thanks.


----------



## dojibear

"Pulp" is a very unusual word. Usually it is uncountable - some quantity of squashed substance. 

But we also use it in singular form, as in your examples. "A pulp" is a pile of pulp, the result of shmooshing an item (a fruit, usually).

You are right in your understanding of "S or U", but it's pretty rare to find a word that would be marked that way.


----------



## Ranjith P V

dojibear said:


> "Pulp" is a very unusual word. Usually it is uncountable - some quantity of squashed substance.
> 
> But we also use it in singular form, as in your examples. "A pulp" is a pile of pulp, the result of shmooshing an item (a fruit, usually).
> 
> You are right in your understanding of "S or U", but it's pretty rare to find a word that would be marked that way.


Thank you for clarifying.


----------



## JulianStuart

Ranjith P V said:


> Below is *the* entry for the word '*pulp*' from the Oxford Learner's Dictionary:
> 
> _1 [singular, uncountable]a soft wet substance that is made especially by crushing something
> Cook the fruit gently until it forms a pulp.Mash the beans to a pulp._



You omitted the *other* definitions that distinguish between the one that may be singular (1) and those that are uncountable (1-4)

2 [uncountable]a soft substance that is made by crushing wood, cloth or other material and then used to make paperpaper/wood pulp
3 [uncountable] the soft part inside some fruit and vegetablessynonym flesh   Scoop out the pulp and serve it with sugar.
4 writing that is of poor quality but popular and often sensational (2)


Word Origin


----------



## Ranjith P V

JulianStuart said:


> You omitted the *other* definitions that distinguish between the one that may be singular (1) and those that are uncountable (1-4)
> 
> 2 [uncountable]a soft substance that is made by crushing wood, cloth or other material and then used to make paperpaper/wood pulp
> 3 [uncountable] the soft part inside some fruit and vegetables synonym flesh   Scoop out the pulp and serve it with sugar.
> 4 writing that is of poor quality but popular and often sensational (2)
> 
> 
> Word Origin


Yes, I wanted to understand when both the singular and uncountable symbols are used together.
Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## natkretep

Ranjith P V said:


> So the indefinite article means a type of or a form of... is this correct ?


It can, but it needn't. As noted in your dictionary entry, _pulp_ can be treated as countable.


----------



## Ranjith P V

natkretep said:


> It can, but it needn't. As noted in your dictionary entry, _pulp_ can be treated as countable.


thanks, for clarifying.
But we can't have plural 'pulps', Am I right ?


----------



## velisarius

Myridon said:


> You could also read it as "a pulp" = "a type of pulp", "a form of pulp", "*any of several possible pulps*"





cyberpedant said:


> I had quoted your posts before each reply. Perhaps your browser didn't print them.
> I'll re-post them here:
> So can we say ..., two pulp, three pulp.
> Never!
> 
> two pulps, three pulps
> *Yes.*
> And add something I should have said before:* talking about pulp in the plural would require an extremely unusual and artificial context.*
> If you want to talk about plural pulps the word needs to be qualified: "plural pulps," "fruit pulps."



We can have plural "pulps", but we don't often need the plural. 

_I have here a bowl of mango pulp, a bowl of banana pulp, and a bowl of watermelon pulp. Now... I'll just blend all these different pulps together in a blender..."_


----------



## Ranjith P V

velisarius said:


> We can have plural "pulps", but we don't often need the plural.
> 
> _I have here a bowl of mango pulp, a bowl of banana pulp, and a bowl of watermelon pulp. Now... I'll just blend all these different pulps together in a blender..."_


Thank you for clarifying.


----------



## Ranjith P V

natkretep said:


> It can, but it needn't. As noted in your dictionary entry, _pulp_ can be treated as countable.


If a dictionary word is marked as _ [singular, uncountable] _for example pulp, waste, interest, etc., then, we can use the indefinite article a/an before them, i.e., if the situation permits?

Kindly clarify.
Thank you for always supporting.


----------



## natkretep

This is an idiom, Ranjith. You just need to take it as it is. My understanding is that it means 'into a pulp state'.


----------



## Ranjith P V

natkretep said:


> This is an idiom, Ranjith. You just need to take it as it is. My understanding is that it means 'into a pulp state'.


Thanks.


----------

