[Grammar] (the) son of a ...

[sitifan]

1. George Washington, the son of a wealthy planter, became an important American military leader. (TOEFL Grammar Guide, by Lai Shuixin)
2. George Washington, son of a wealthy planter, became an important American military leader. (my own sentence)
3. Son of a minister, Paul Robeson graduated from Rutgers and then from Columbia University law school. (TOEFL Grammar Guide, by Lai Shuixin)
4. The son of a minister, Paul Robeson graduated from Rutgers and then from Columbia University law school. (my own sentence)
#1 and #3 are supposed to be correct. Are #2 and #4 also acceptable to native speakers?

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

All four look fine to me. And I had no idea Robeson was a lawyer. Thanks!

 

[Alexey86]

What if the minister had several sons? Would "the son" be also correct, or should it be "a son"?

 

[PeterCW]

What if the minister had several sons? Would "the son" be also correct, or should it be "a son"?

There was only one Paul Robeson.

 

[sitifan]

5. Paul is the son of a merchant.
6. Paul is son of a merchant.
7. Paul is a son of a merchant.
Are the above sentences acceptable?

 

[TheParser]

NOT A TEACHER


Sitifan, I could not find the rule, but I did find these examples in the "Books" section of Google. The emphases are mine.

1. "At Tours, Leon Gambetta, son of an immigrant Italian grocer, ..." -- Douglas Porch, The Conquest of the Sahara (2005).

2. "Born into poverty in Glasgow, the son of an immigrant tailor's mechanic,..." -- W. Rubenstein and Michael A. Jolles, The Palgrave Dictionary (2011).

3. "Sam's a good man, a son of an immigrant, who commanded troops ...." -- Alex Stoffel, West of the Bighorns (2001).

 

[Phaedrus]

What if the minister had several sons? Would "the son" be also correct, or should it be "a son"?

I understand your worry, but I don't think phrases like "the son of a minister" necessarily imply that the father of the son being spoken of has only one son.

Such phrases can be read not as pointing to an individual (Minister John Smith, let us say) but, rather, to a type of individual.

Thus, "the son of a minister" can be transposed to "a minister's son." The speaker need not even know which particular minister is the father.

There is a very famous song ("Son of a Preacher Man," by Dusty Springfield, 1968) containing a similar phrase:

"The only one who could ever reach me
Was the son of a preacher man.
The only boy who could ever teach me
Was the son of a preacher man.
Yes, he was, he was, ooh, yes, he was."

 

[Alexey86]

Such phrases can be read not as pointing to an individual (Minister John Smith, let us say) but, rather, to a type of individual.

I see, thank you. What makes it possible to omit "the"? It seems "son" shares the same features as ranks or titles like "Captain" or "President" with respect to article usage.

 

[Phaedrus]

What makes it possible to omit "the"? It seems "son" shares the same features as ranks or titles like "Captain" or "President" with respect to article usage.

Good question, Alexey. (Confession: When I say that a grammar question is good, I generally mean that I find it difficult to answer. )

I think you are right that, absent an article, phrases with "son of ____" resemble phrases designating titles. Once I signed off in a manner like this.

Phaedrus
Son of Zeus

Interestingly, in the Bible, the article-free version occurs in vocative constructions, where the addressee is (the) son or daughter. There is often capitalization:

"And he said unto me, Son of man, stand upon thy feet, and I will speak unto thee." (Ezekiel 2:1, King James Version)

"Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem" (Zechariah 9:9, KJV, sung in Handel's Messiah)

"Son of man,
You cannot say, or guess, for you know only
A heap of broken images . . . ." - T. S. Eliot, The Waste Land

Another instance that has come to mind is from the movie Superman 2, with Christopher Reeve: "Come To Me, Son of Jor-El! Kneel before Zod!"

 

[emsr2d2]

5. Paul is the son of a merchant.
6. Paul is son of a merchant.
7. Paul is a son of a merchant.
Are the above sentences acceptable?

5 - Correct. (It doesn't matter how many children his father has.)
6 - Incorrect.
7 - Correct (although unlikely) only if his father has more than one son.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

What if the minister had several sons? Would "the son" be also correct, or should it be "a son"?

In this particular context, they're both grammatical and natural and mean the same thing.

The focus is on Robeson, so whether or not there are other sons is not relevant to the meaning of the sentence.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

I understand your worry, but I don't think phrases like "the son of a minister" necessarily imply that the father of the son being spoken of has only one son.

Such phrases can be read not as pointing to an individual (Minister John Smith, let us say) but, rather, to a type of individual.

Thus, "the son of a minister" can be transposed to "a minister's son." The speaker need not even know which particular minister is the father.

There is a very famous song ("Son of a Preacher Man," by Dusty Springfield, 1968) containing a similar phrase:

"The only one who could ever reach me
Was the son of a preacher man.
The only boy who could ever teach me
Was the son of a preacher man.
Yes, he was, he was, ooh, yes, he was."

Love that Dusty!