(the) Europeans

[Verona_82]

Hello!

I'm a bit confused about the use of 'the' with nationalities ending with 'ans', as grammars seem to have different opinions on this point.

Should I say/write:
the Europeans or Europeans?
the Americans or Americans?
the Russians or Russians?
(Sting sang 'the Russians', but Murphy says 'the' should be omitted).

I'd appreciate it if anyone could help.

 

[Richard1]

Hello,

It all depends on the context.

For instance if talking about say a United Nations committee comprising many nationalities you might say, 'The Europeans (on the committee - understood) were not in favour of xyz'.

If however you were referring just to Europeans, or just Americans etc., you might say 'Europeans on the whole don't understand baseball'.

Regards

 

[Verona_82]

Thank you for the reply. I know that 'the' refers to a definite person/thing/group, but I'm just wondering if this is the case when talking about nationalities in general. I'm trying to find out what native speakers really say when compared to what is written in books

We say 'the Swiss', 'the French', but '-an'-ending nationality names seem to be deprived of the article.

So, [STRIKE]The [/STRIKE]Russians [on the whole] don't play baseball

?

 

[5jj]

It seems that nationality words ending in -an can function as full nouns; others retain enough of their adjective properties to require the definite article at all times, as do other adjectives used in this way - the rich, the young,etc.

For the same reason, we can say 'a German', 'an American', but we can't say 'an English', 'a French'. You'll find in some books that we can use the indefinite article before some of these words - 'a Swiss', 'a Chinese', but these sound strange to me. I would always say 'a Chinese man/woman/person'.

 

[balakrishnanijk]

When referring to nationalities, we can either use or omit the definite article.

 

[5jj]

When referring to nationalities, we can either use or omit the definite article.

As I pointed out in my last post, we can't omit it with some nationality words:

*Chinese have a greater respect for education than English.

 

[birdeen's call]

Do "the Russian", "the American" sound unnatural to you when used to refer to whole nations?

 

[5jj]

Do "the Russian", "the American" sound unnatural to you when used to refer to whole nations?

Usually, yes.

However, COCA gives us some examples such as:
"Subjugation of the American Indian was initiated and sustained by a series of events...",
"As Fortune magazine presciently observed in 1969: # The American likes his home brilliantly lit, of course...",
"Obviously the Indian wanted to continue to live his life as his ancestors had".

 

[birdeen's call]

Usually, yes.

However, COCA gives us some examples such as:
"Subjugation of the American Indian was initiated and sustained by a series of events...",
"As Fortune magazine presciently observed in 1969: # The American likes his home brilliantly lit, of course...",
"Obviously the Indian wanted to continue to live his life as his ancestors had".

Thank you.

I meant "the American" used like "the French" though--adjectivally.

The French eat frogs.

The American eat burgers. (not eats)

The Russian eat kasha.

Does it sound unnatural to you too?

 

[5jj]

The American (singular, for 'Americans in general') eats hamburgers as though hamburgers were the food of the gods.

I would normally say, and expect to hear,"Americans eat ...", but the sentence above is possible,

The French (plural!) eat frogs.

The American eat burgers. NO. The Americans eat.. or The American eats...

The+adjective normally refers to people in general, plural: the rich, the young, the French, etc.

However, nationality words ending in -an have beome established as nouns in their own right, as well as functioning as adjectives.Thus American (noun) functions like Turk, Dane, Englishman, Frenchman, while American (adjective) functions like Turkish, Danish, English French.

 

[birdeen's call]

The American eat burgers. NO. The Americans eat.. or The American eats...

The+adjective normally refers to people in general, plural: the rich, the young, the French, etc.

However, nationality words ending in -an have beome established as nouns in their own right, as well as functioning as adjectives.Thus American (noun) functions like Turk, Dane, Englishman, Frenchman, while American (adjective) functions like Turkish, Danish, English French.

I see. So even though "American" can be used as an adjective in other contexts, it can't be used in "the American eat..." because it's unnatural. Is that right?

 

[Verona_82]

Somebody told me that -an-ending nationality names were probably formed according to the same way as 'sweets", "slims" and "shorts" came into the world. People added the -s ending to an existing adjective and came up with a noun for a group of things. Do you find this explanation plausible?

 

[5jj]

I see. So even though "American" can be used as an adjective in other contexts, it can't be used in "the American eat..." because it's unnatural. Is that right?

Yes.

If the word is an adjective, it must refer to plural people. If it is a noun, it is singular (there is no -s).

In either case, the American eat is wrong.

As French (nationality) is not a noun, we cannot say The French eats, only the French eat.

 

[birdeen's call]

Somebody told me that -an-ending nationality names were probably formed according to the same way as 'sweets", "slims" and "shorts" came into the world. People added the -s ending to an existing adjective and came up with a noun for a group of things. Do you find this explanation plausible?

I can't imagine any other explanation. However, it seems the nominal use is quite old, as this quotation from George Washington would suggest:

The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation.

I see "American" as a noun in this sentence.

 

[TheParser]

Hello!

I'm a bit confused about the use of 'the' with nationalities ending with 'ans', as grammars seem to have different opinions on this point.

Should I say/write:
the Europeans or Europeans?
the Americans or Americans?
the Russians or Russians?
(Sting sang 'the Russians', but Murphy says 'the' should be omitted).

I'd appreciate it if anyone could help.

***** NOT A TEACHER *****


Verona,


(1) Yes, you are 100% correct: articles are horribly difficult to understand.

(2) This old man's hearing is fading, so maybe I misunderstood, but

I think that I heard our secretary of state (foreign affairs minister)

say during a TV interview that "The Egyptians ...." and

"Egyptians ...." If the secretary of state can be inconsistent,

what hope is there for us ordinary speakers?

(3) I think the only real solution is to keep reading and listening

as much as you can. Little by little, you will start to get an idea

as to which nationalities take the article, which don't, and which

go either way. Keep a notebook with examples.

(4) Personally, I am very confused about:

Hong Kong people/ The Hong Kong people.


Can anyone please help me?


***** NOT A TEACHER *****

 

[birdeen's call]

Yes.

If the word is an adjective, it must refer to plural people. If it is a noun, it is singular (there is no -s).

In either case, the American eat is wrong.

As French (nationality) is not a noun, we cannot say The French eats, only the French eat.

Eh... I'm afraid my questions are becoming tedious, but I'm still not sure I understand...

You seem to be rejecting "the American eat" on syntactic grounds, which I can't understand. Are you saying that "the American eat" is syntactically incorrect too, besides not being used?

I'm sorry once again about my obtuseness.

 

[5jj]

You seem to be rejecting "the American eat" on syntactic grounds, which I can't understand. Are you saying that "the American eat" is syntactically incorrect too, besides not being used?

I'm sorry once again about my obtuseness.

I'm pretty obtuse myself at 02.45, so I apologise in advance if the following does not work.

"the American eat" is unacceptable because (except as noted in #3, below) "the American" is a singular noun.

'The American' can be:

1. A specific American person. Countable noun
Two businessmen, one American, the other Japanese, were talking about food. The American said....

2. The American people personified as an individual. Countable noun.
The Frenchman likes to take his time over carefully prepared meals served at the appropriate time, whilst the American is happier to snack throughout the day.
Note that we can also say: A Frenchman likes/The French like; An American is/(The) Americans are.

3. An adjective with a noun understood.
The Russian proposal was rejected outright; the American (proposal) is still being discussed.
The Russian proposals were rejected outright; the American (proposals) are still being discussed.

 

[Verona_82]

I wonder if native speakers ever have problems or doubts about using articltes too...

 

[birdeen's call]

I'm pretty obtuse myself at 02.45, so I apologise in advance if the following does not work.

"the American eat" is unacceptable because (except as noted in #3, below) "the American" is a singular noun.

'The American' can be:

1. A specific American person. Countable noun
Two businessmen, one American, the other Japanese, were talking about food. The American said....

2. The American people personified as an individual. Countable noun.
The Frenchman likes to take his time over carefully prepared meals served at the appropriate time, whilst the American is happier to snack throughout the day.
Note that we can also say: A Frenchman likes/The French like; An American is/(The) Americans are.

3. An adjective with a noun understood.
The Russian proposal was rejected outright; the American (proposal) is still being discussed.
The Russian proposals were rejected outright; the American (proposals) are still being discussed.

I don't understand the bolded part. "American" is not only a noun. You said yourself it was also an adjective. So when we treat it as an adjective, the sentence we are talking about ("The American eat...") should be syntactically fine. It follows the same pattern as "The French eat..." (Or, "The rich eat...") This is of course only possible when we treat "American" like "French". You say we can't do it. I would understand if you said we can't do it because nobody does it. But you say we can't do it because "American" is only a noun and I don't understand that.

 

[5jj]

I warned you it might not work.

For some reason (and I don't know why) It appears that:

1a. Some adjectives of nationality ending in -sh, or -ch, are never used as as singular nouns for the person from the country: *a Dutch, *a French, *an English,

1b. Some people do not use adjectives ending in -s or -ese in this way eg: ?a Swiss, ? a Chinese.

1c.These words can be used for the people as a whole. They then govern a plural verb: the Dutch, the French, the English, the Welsh, the Swiss, the Chinese.

2a. Adjectives of nationality ending in -an can be used as singular nouns for the person from the country; they govern a singular verb: an/the American, an/the Australian, a/the German, a/the Moroccan,

2b. These words cannot be used for the people as a whole; ie they cannot be considered plural and cannot govern plural verbs. If we wish to use them as plurals, we have to treat them as nouns, and give them a plural -s ending: (the) Americans, (the) Australians, (the) Germans, (the) Moroccans.