[Grammar] As soon as they saw the intruder, they called the police immediately.

[kadioguy]

(On a Chinese-English translation exercise)

As soon as they saw the intruder, they called the police immediately.

--------

a. As soon as they saw the intruder, they called the police immediately.

b. As soon as they saw an intruder, they called the police immediately.

As far as English itself is concerned, could you tell me what different effects (a) and (b) have? (I mean, in what contexts should I say (a), and in what contexts should I say (b)?)

PS - I created (b) for comparison.

PPS - Is it OK to say the red part?

---------
(Source)

https://youtu.be/2H_DZ1w3QI4?t=818

 

[tedmc]

There can only be one intruder in the situation, so the definite article is appropriate.

 

[kadioguy]

There can only be one intruder in the situation, so the definite article is appropriate.

How about the indefinite article?

 

[tedmc]

How about the indefinite article?

With the indefinite article, it sounds like the people are waiting for an intruder to appear.

 

[kadioguy]

With the indefinite article, it sounds like the people are waiting for an intruder to appear.

c. As soon as they saw the intruders, they called the police immediately.

d. As soon as they saw intruders, they called the police immediately.

What do you think about the different effects between (c) and (d)?

 

[kadioguy]

a. As soon as they saw the intruder, they called the police immediately.

b. As soon as they saw an intruder, they called the police immediately.

For me, I would think that (a) means the intruder has been mentioned before, while (b) means that the intruder is mentioned for the first time and isn't referred to a particular person.

The same reason for using (c) and (d).

What do you think?

c. As soon as they saw the intruders, they called the police immediately.

d. As soon as they saw intruders, they called the police immediately.

 

[jutfrank]

There can only be one intruder in the situation, so the definite article is appropriate.

That's not right.

With the indefinite article, it sounds like the people are waiting for an intruder to appear.

Yes, that's right.

kadioguy—this question is really about the very basic rules of article use. We use a definite article when we want to make specific reference to the referent (the thing referred to by the referring expression, which in this case is the intruder). You could think of this as if the writer/speaker is pointing to which particular intruder he's talking about. That doesn't necessarily mean that the speaker has mentioned or identified the intruder before in the text—it just means he's identifying the intruder in this sentence.

(By the way, the example sentence really needs to lose the word immediately.)

 

[GoesStation]

Sentences A and C follow text that describes the situation and says something about intruders/an intruder. Sentences B and D are about habitual or repeated acts. It's hard to think of a context where they would work.

Immediately doesn't work well in any of them. Its idea is already expressed by as soon as.

[Cross-posted with jutfrank's much more thorough explanation.]

 

[kadioguy]

Thank you all.

(On a Chinese-English translation exercise)

PPS - Is it OK to say the red part?

I now think it should be In a Chinese-English translation exercise.

What do you think? :-?

 

[kadioguy]

kadioguy—this question is really about the very basic rules of article use.

Sentences B and D are about habitual or repeated acts. It's hard to think of a context where they would work.

How about these two? Are they more possible?

e. As soon as they see an intruder, they will call the police.

f. As soon as they see intruders, they will call the police.

 

[GoesStation]

How about these two? Are they more possible?

e. As soon as they see an intruder, they will call the police.

f. As soon as they see intruders, they will call the police.

They're not impossible, but it's hard to think of a context that would call for the future aspect (if that's the right word).

 

[kadioguy]

e. As soon as they see an intruder, they will call the police.

f. As soon as they see intruders, they will call the police.

They're not impossible, but it's hard to think of a context that would call for the future aspect (if that's the right word).

Why? The context in my mind is that "they" could refer to two people who are working as security guards. :shock:

--------
(Update)

OK, now I think (b), (d), (e), and (f) are equally possible. The key is not the tenses but the context.

When in the past tenses, "they" in my mind could refer to two people who were working as security guards.

b. As soon as they saw an intruder, they called/would call the police.
d. As soon as they saw intruders, they called/would call the police.

 

[kadioguy]

e. As soon as they see an intruder, they will call the police.

f. As soon as they see intruders, they will call the police.


The context in my mind is that "they" could refer to two people who are working as security guards.

When in the past tenses, "they" in my mind could refer to two people who were working as security guards.

b. As soon as they saw an intruder, they called/would call the police.

d. As soon as they saw intruders, they called/would call the police.

What do you think about my thoughts? Are they reasonable?

 

[tedmc]

What do you think about my thoughts? Are they reasonable?

The sentences still suggest that the security guards are/were on the lookout/waiting for the intruder(s) to appear. It is a general statement, not about a specific incident.

 

[Tarheel]

I suppose it's good to be prepared.