well-being of (the) American people

[lagoo]

1. In reality, our country's billionaires and corporations have stepped up to provide solutions that ensure the protection and well-being of American people.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/coronavirus-outbreak-america-helen-raleigh
2. The coronavirus pandemic has created a threat to the health and well-being of the American people, as well as to our country’s economic stability.
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/...economic-stimulus-ubi-amid-coronavirus-crisis

It seems like even natives sometimes get confused about the use of the definite article ‘the’. Could you tell me which one is correct in the cases above?

 

[GoesStation]

They're both grammatically correct, but I think an editor (or the author) lost an article in number one. Without it, the sentence means that some Americans benefit from those solutions while others don't. If you insert the missing article, all Americans become lucky recipients of corporate largesse. The latter situation comports better with the general outlook of the site that published the sentence.

 

[GoesStation]

It seems like even natives sometimes get confused about the use of the definite article ‘the’.

I can't think of a case where a native speaker could be uncertain whether an article is required or which article to use. (Some speakers don't always use an before a vowel sound, but that's a matter of dialect and pronunciation, not article selection.)

There are plenty of sentences that work with either article or with none, but not without affecting the meaning. It's easily possible for words, including articles, to be lost due to carelessness or editing errors.

 

[jutfrank]

I can't think of a case where a native speaker could be uncertain whether an article is required or which article to use.

Right. Native speakers just don't get confused about the use of articles.

 

[Alexey86]

Right. Native speakers just don't get confused about the use of articles.

If my memory serves me correctly, you disagreed with GoesStation about whether "screaming" can be countable and, as a consequence, be preceded by "a" or not (https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/threads/277973-A-Screaming-Comes-Across-the-Sky/page2). But each of you individually didn't get confused in that case.

 

[GoesStation]

If my memory serves me correctly, you disagreed with GoesStation about whether "screaming" can be countable and, as a consequence, be preceded by "a" or not (https://www.usingenglish.com/forum/threads/277973-A-Screaming-Comes-Across-the-Sky/page2). But each of you individually didn't get confused in that case.

Right. Countability isn't a fixed attribute. Many nouns are used both countably and uncountably, and formerly uncountable nouns can find new, countable uses.

 

[Tdol]

If you insert the missing article, all Americans become lucky recipients of corporate largesse.

Are you suggesting that Fox News does not wish corporate largesse for all American citizens? :shocked!:

 

[GoesStation]

Are you suggesting that Fox News does not wish corporate largesse for all American citizens? :shocked!:

It's shocking, I know.

 

[lagoo]

They're both grammatically correct, but I think an editor (or the author) lost an article in number one. Without it, the sentence means that some Americans benefit from those solutions while others don't. If you insert the missing article, all Americans become lucky recipients of corporate largesse. The latter situation comports better with the general outlook of the site that published the sentence.

Today, I came across a similar one on https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-51938035
China has effectively expelled journalists from three US newspapers in retaliation for restrictions on its news outlets in the US.

Does it mean we don't know how many journalists have been expelled?
But if I add the article 'the' before 'journalists', I guess it would possibly mean two scenarios, depending on further context:
1) ‘all the journalists’
2) ‘the afore-mentioned journalists’
Your confirmation would be appreciated.

 

[emsr2d2]

As it stands, it could mean "all the journalists from three US newspapers" or "some of the journalists from three US newspapers". I suspect it's the former given the substance of the story but it's ambiguous.

If you add "the" before "journalists", it would be likely to mean "all the journalists from three US newspapers". However, if, as you suggest, those journalists have previously been mentioned, then it could just as easily mean that.