The rain is falling....

[subhajit123]

Hi there should I use rain or the rain in the following sentence?

Here's the sentence:

• The rain/rain is falling heavily.

I know people will say "it is raining heavily" sounds better. But my question is in that sentence, should I use the?

 

[GoesStation]

Both options are possible. You'd use the definite article if you had previously mentioned the rain you're writing about.

 

[emsr2d2]

Both options are possible. You'd use the definite article if you had previously mentioned the rain you're writing about.

Or if you're currently looking at the rain falling.

 

[jutfrank]

I know people will say "it is raining heavily" sounds better. But my question is in that sentence, should I use the?

You're not going to like my answer but the sentence is wrong whether you use the or not. I'm not saying that one could not imagine a context in which it is meaningful, I'm saying that if you want to learn about the uses of definite articles, you should use correct, natural sentences.

We use the when we want to specify in some way.

 

[emsr2d2]

What do you find unnatural about it, jutfrank? I can imagine a sports reporter or a weather reporter using it to describe the current weather conditions somewhere.

 

[jutfrank]

What do you find unnatural about it, jutfrank? I can imagine a sports reporter or a weather reporter using it to describe the current weather conditions somewhere.

Yes. I suppose I was trying to be pre-emptive here. My thinking was really that if we are about to go into the subtle usage of definite articles, then we should focus on an authentic (or at least more natural) example for which both the use and the lack of use of a definite article could be effectively contrasted. It's not so easy to think of contexts for a zero-article use of this sentence.

If subhajit123 did not make up this sentence himself, I think he should say where he found it. And if he did, then he could tell us himself more about the situation in which he'd like to use it.

 

[subhajit123]

Yes. I suppose I was trying to be pre-emptive here. My thinking was really that if we are about to go into the subtle usage of definite articles, then we should focus on an authentic (or at least more natural) example for which both the use and the lack of use of a definite article could be effectively contrasted. It's not so easy to think of contexts for a zero-article use of this sentence.

If subhajit123 did not make up this sentence himself, I think he should say where he found it. And if he did, then he could tell us himself more about the situation in which he'd like to use it.

Hi this is my own sentence. When I was uttering the sentence, it was raining outside my house. So which one should I say? I think I should use the because I am talking about a particular instance of rain. But in cricket I hear commentator say "rain stopped play" though they are talking about a particular instance of rain. So I want to know if I need to use the in the above sentence.

 

[jutfrank]

When I was uttering the sentence, it was raining outside my house. So which one should I say?

Who were you talking to? What did you mean to communicate exactly? Did they know it was raining? If so, what made you say it? Only if you tell us about the real life situation can we say with confidence what you should have said, because it is conceivable that either is correct.

 

[Phaedrus]

I think I should use the because I am talking about a particular instance of rain.

You're talking about a particular instance of rainfall, sometimes called a shower or a storm, depending on quantity, duration, and intensity. If I had just become aware of the fact that it was raining, or of the fact that it was raining hard (I had known that it was raining, but not that it was raining hard), and chose not to speak naturally by saying "It's raining (hard)," but instead to begin the sentence with "rain" as the head of the subject noun phrase, I would naturally use "the" in the case where I already knew it was raining and wanted to express that "The rain is falling hard" or in a case where I felt a certain kinship with rain and perceived it as a being in its own right: "The rain is falling."

If I did not feel that kinship with rain, I would say "Rain is falling." It wouldn't make sense to say "Rain is falling heavily/hard" out of the blue. It needs to be established, at least in the speaker's awareness, that it is raining before he or she will be inclined to use an adverb like "hard" or "heavily," though a nonrestrictive construction is certainly possible: "Rain is falling -- heavily." Or, in the case of kinship with Mother Nature: "The rain is falling -- heavily." I wonder if more people feel that kinship, at least linguistically, with wind. I think it would be weird to hear someone say "Wind is blowing" in any context. It's grammatical without "the," but it sounds as though the speaker is on drugs.

Well, I didn't mean to wax so philosophical. But this time you didn't duplicate your question where I usually respond to you, where I am not Phaedrus.

 

[emsr2d2]

None of our responses change the fact that naturally, we would say "It's raining", "It's raining hard" and "It's raining really hard". I don't think I've ever even said "It's raining heavily" in casual everyday English. I might peer out the window at the rain and say "It's getting heavier" or something similar.

For very heavy rain, in BrE you have the option of using "It's chucking it down", "It's p*ssing [it] down", "It's raining cats and dogs", "It's coming down in stair rods out there!"

 

[GoesStation]

In American English (in my region at least) it may rain buckets when the sky opens. It also rains cats and dogs, but we don't use any of the other terms you quoted.

 

[emsr2d2]

Ah yes, you've reminded me of one I missed - "It's bucketing down".

 

[jutfrank]

None of our responses change the fact that naturally, we would say "It's raining", "It's raining hard" and "It's raining really hard".

This is what I was driving at in post #4. I don't think there's much sense in trying to analyse utterances that are unnatural. Like I said, it's not that what Subhjajit said couldn't be natural in other contexts, it's just that it wasn't natural. (Admittedly, until he responds, I am making an assumption here, but I hope you see my point.) We ought to discourage learners from the habit of asking us to analyse artificial or unnatural language.

 

[Phaedrus]

A first-time visitor to our planet from outer space, who was endowed with English-speaking skills and an inclination to speak it, might say:

Look! Water is falling from the sky.