No article

[hooshdar3]

Hi.

I earlier cited an example from CALD® as follows:

"He's just been appointed (as) director of the publishing division."

Why isn't there an article?

[5jj]

Because it's not necessary when you appoint + somebody(+as) + job title. We would need one here: They have just appointed a new director of the publishing division,

[hooshdar3]

Because it's not necessary when you appoint + somebody(+as) + job title. We would need one here: They have just appointed a new director of the publishing division,

but "a" is an article too

[5jj]

but "a" is an article too

I don't understand the point you are trying to make. I said that an article was not necessary in your example, but that it was in mine,

[hooshdar3]

I don't understand the point you are trying to make. I said that an article was not necessary in your example, but that it was in mine,

So in my sentence, appointed is used as an adj.?Why isn't thhere a need in my sentence?Our sentences both use 'appoint'

[emsr2d2]

One difference between the two examples:

They have appointed = active
He has been appointed = passive

[hooshdar3]

One difference between the two examples:

They have appointed = active
He has been appointed = passive

What are you getting at?

[5jj]

What are you getting at?

emsr2d2 is not 'getting at' anything. She is merely pointing out that 'appointed' is part of an active or passive verb construction. It is not an adjective.

[hooshdar3]

emsr2d2 is not 'getting at' anything. She is merely pointing out that 'appointed' is part of an active or passive verb construction. It is not an adjective.

It's gotten combersome!So why would appoint in the first sentence make the unnecessary?

It's like answering 'why?' with 'because the sky is high!', as do some teachers here in Iran.