The solar system belongs to a group of 100,000 million stars called the Milky Way.

[whatever]

Hello)

I'm trying to understand if it is ok to use the indefinite article in this sentence.

The solar system belongs to a group of 100,000 million stars called the Milky Way.

To me it sounds as if there were many groups of 100,000 stars called the Milky Way, and the solar system just belongs to one of these groups.


Taking into account that there is only one group of stars called the Milky Way, wouldn't it be more logical to say

The solar system belongs to the group of 100,000 million stars (which is) called the Milky Way.

?

 

[probus]

Language is not logic, and English in particular is notorious for failing to be logical. Having said that, I see very little to choose between your two options. They are both equally acceptable to my ear.

 

[GoesStation]

There are many groups of stars. The Milky Way is one of them. Thus the indefinite article is a natural way to refer to the group.

Don't write "100,000 million". Do you mean 100 billion?

 

[emsr2d2]

100,000 million still works in the UK, for those of us that still consider a billion to be a million million.

 

[probus]

for those of us that still consider a billion to be a million million.

Any idea how prevalent that is nowadays? I'm curious.

 

[whatever]

There are many groups of stars. The Milky Way is one of them. Thus the indefinite article is a natural way to refer to the group.

This part is quite clear and straightforward. It's the second part that frustrates me: a group ... called the Milky Way.

I was just trying to apply the same logic as in the following examples:

The man standing outside...
The samples taken from the manifold...
The rule enforced by the latest amendments...
the group ... called the Milky Way...

If I were to convey the idea in question, I'd write something like:

The solar system belongs to the Milky Way, a group of about 100 billion stars.

Sounds a bit clearer to me.

The textbook's version seems to be combining two sentences into one:

The solar system belongs to a group of 100 billion stars. + The group is called the Milky Way.

Which resulted in some ambiguity, in my opinion. As a learner of English (and a teacher for my kids), I'm trying to find as much logic in the language as possible, to make the learning process easier And this evening I found myself in a tight corner trying to explain to my daughter why the indefinite article has been used when the second part sort of asked for the definite article.

Don't write "100,000 million". Do you mean 100 billion?

Just copied it from an English language textbook Yes, I guess they meant 100 billion

 

[jutfrank]

I'm trying to understand if it is ok to use the indefinite article in this sentence.

The solar system belongs to a group of 100,000 million stars called the Milky Way.

First of all, yes, it's okay.

To me it sounds as if there were many groups of 100,000 stars called the Milky Way, and the solar system just belongs to one of these groups.

That isn't how it sounds to native speakers.

Taking into account that there is only one group of stars called the Milky Way, wouldn't it be more logical to say

The solar system belongs to the group of 100,000 million stars (which is) called the Milky Way.

No, 'logical' isn't the right word. What you're asking is whether it would make more sense. The answer is it would make sense but you will have changed the meaning (the 'reference').

I understand very well how article usage can be a very difficult thing to grasp for Russian speakers, so with this in mind, this is how I suggest you begin to think about this sentence:

a group of 100 billion stars [This is an indefinite noun phrase]
called the Milky Way [This is a modifying phrase which in some way 'defines' the noun phrase it modifies]

I believe it's the transition from indefinite to definite that is causing you problems in this case.

If I were to convey the idea in question, I'd write something like:

The solar system belongs to the Milky Way, a group of about 100 billion stars.

Sounds a bit clearer to me.

Yes, that's very clear and well expressed.

The textbook's version seems to be combining two sentences into one:

The solar system belongs to a group of 100 billion stars. + The group is called the Milky Way.

Not really. The textbook version is certainly combining the propositional content (what they're saying) of the two sentences, but it isn't really combining the two sentences grammatically speaking.

Which resulted in some ambiguity, in my opinion.

Like I said, there isn't any ambiguity to a native speaker.

As a learner of English (and a teacher for my kids), I'm trying to find as much logic in the language as possible, to make the learning process easier And this evening I found myself in a tight corner trying to explain to my daughter why the indefinite article has been used when the second part sort of asked for the definite article.

I really admire your efforts but I'm not surprised you had trouble explaining this. Even as a native-speaking user who has spent the majority of his life reading around the subject of sense and reference, I have great trouble explaining things like this too!

Yes, I guess they meant 100 billion

Yes, they did.

 

[Tdol]

Any idea how prevalent that is nowadays? I'm curious.

Rare I'd say in general usage, and very few would know what a milliard (old word for billion) is. I don't know if it has specialist usages.

 

[emsr2d2]

I wouldn't be surprised if most people who went to school at the same time as me, and were taught that a billion is a million million, probably still think that way. I was about 25 when I discovered that Americans called a thousand million a billion. It was at least another ten years before I discovered that the UK had apparently adopted the same system but I'm afraid I didn't update my brain!

 

[PeterCW]

I wouldn't be surprised if most people who went to school at the same time as me, and were taught that a billion is a million million, probably still think that way. I was about 25 when I discovered that Americans called a thousand million a billion. It was at least another ten years before I discovered that the UK had apparently adopted the same system but I'm afraid I didn't update my brain!

I was taught not to use names for numbers above the thousands. My physics teachers insisted on expressing all large numbers as powers of ten to avoid errors if translating between English and American usages.

 

[jutfrank]

I wouldn't be surprised if most people who went to school at the same time as me, and were taught that a billion is a million million

I'm really surprised to hear you were taught that because I'm pretty sure we were at school at the same time. That usage had been long outphased by the time I started school, and I wasn't even aware of the former definition until into my adult life. According to Wikipedia, the UK government officially switched to the short (American) scale in 1974.

 

[probus]

I was taught not to use names for numbers above the thousands. My physics teachers insisted on expressing all large numbers as powers of ten to avoid errors if translating between English and American usages.

The powers of ten notation is pretty well the only usage that is acceptable in scientific works.

 

[GoesStation]

The powers of ten notation is pretty well the only usage that is acceptable in scientific works.

But it should only be used in those contexts. Exponential notation is not meaningful to most people.