The semantics of the English Article

Оглавление
TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Introduction PAGEREF _Toc411699692 \h 31.Problems in accordance with the English article PAGEREF _Toc411699693 \h 42. The Category of Determination PAGEREF _Toc411699694 \h 83. Countability Characteristics of the Article PAGEREF _Toc411699695 \h 11Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc411699696 \h 15References PAGEREF _Toc411699697 \h 16

IntroductionArticle is a determining unit of specific nature accompanying the English noun in communicative collocation. In theoretical grammar the article attracts interest from the following point of view: whether it is a special grammatical form of the noun or whether it is a separate determiner word.
Scientists offer different approaches to the solution of the problem including the analysis of semantic of the articles (a, the, no article) and the examination of the usage of the importance of the information given in the sentence. On the basis of the second approach the article “the” is considered to help the noun express the theme in the sentence. The article “a” is usually associated with the rheme.
The aim of the research is to describe the semantics of the English Article.
To achieve the result we must:
describe the problems in accordance to the English article;
study the category of determination;
consider countability characteristics.
We’ve used some researches in the field of theoretical grammar. They are works of M.Blokh, J. Eastwood, B.Khaimovich B., M.Swan.

1.Problems in accordance with the English articleThere are three main problems/questions in accordance with the English Article:
1. If the Article is a definite word or not; and what is its relation to the Noun (the problem of garamatical status)?
2. If the Article is a definite word, then if it is a definite part of speech (the problem of morphological status)?
3. What is the number of articles in English (the problem of Grammatical Category)?
M. Blokh minds, that an article is a determining unit of specific nature accompanying the noun in communicative collocation. Its special character is clearly seen against the background of determining words of halfnotional semantics [3].
There are two general approaches to the grammatical morphological status of the article (drawing 1).
ARTICLE

Is
a peculiar morpheme of the Noun
Is a definite
Syntacategorematic word
I. II.

As a word it defines a certain type of the Noun and has its Grammatical Meaning (to define concrete known or any, not particular, noun) The combination ‘an article + a noun’ is considered to be an analytical form of the Noun (its material morphological index)
Drawing 1. The problem of Status of the English Article
1. The approach to the Article as to a definite Syntacategorematic word which defines the Noun.
Article here is compared with the Adjectival Pronoun (his, her, its, etc.).
But such approach leads to treating the combination ‘Article + noun’ as an attributive word-combination and, consequently to treating Article as the Attribute in the Sentence, which is not possible for the Article does not possess the Lexical Meaning.
It has its own grammatical meaning which is to define concrete known or any, not par-ticular, noun. Its grammatical category is based on the opposition of the definite – indefinite attitude to the Noun. Though there is no Lexical Meaning of any type of the article. Consequently it can not be regarded as a member of a sentence because only Categorematic words/parts of speech (which have their own individual lexical meanings) are considered as members of the Sentence.
For example, compare:
*It is my book.
My is an attribute of a direct object book as it, firstly, defines the noun book and, secondly, has its own lexical meaning, it is lexically-morphologically expressed by the possessive pronoun my in the possessive form of a personal pronoun I which means ‘the subject of a verb when the speaker or writer is referring to himself/herself’’[1].
*It is a book. It is the book.
Neither article a nor article the can be considered as the attributes because in spite of having grammatical meanings neither of them has a lexical one (what then the attribute will be expressed by?).
2. The approach to the Article as to a peculiar morpheme of the Noun.
The English linguist Christophersen emphasizes analytical nature of English and considers the Article as a morpheme of the Noun.
Firstly, he distinguishes three Morphological Forms of the Noun in the Category of the Article (table 1):
Table 1
Three Morphological Forms of the Noun in the Category of the Article
Morphological
Form Grammatical Meaning
Its versions in
Singular Plural
Zero form attitude to a thing as to a general phenomenon cake
cakes
Cake is nice food. Cakes are liked by kids.
A-form treating a thing as any representative of a class of things
a cake __
I’d like a cake. The-form considering a thing as a unique or concrete known one
the cake the cakes
The cake we’ve eaten was delicious! The cakes we’ve eaten were delicious!
Secondly, Christophersen stipulated his approach with the following arguments [4]:
1) Article resembles the Auxiliary of the Verb as both of them create a definite analytical form of a part of speech, auxiliary verbs – of the Verb, articles – of the Noun. He stipulates Article as the Auxiliary of the Noun on the ground of the following arguments:
article is a formal morphological index of the Noun;
article does not have Lexical Meaning.
But these arguments are not enough and there is a confusion:
article is not a pure unique index of the Noun.
For example:
(The) water (noun) was wonderful those days. They water (verb) flowers.
article is a definer of the Noun but it does not create Morphological Forms of it whereas auxiliaries create new Morphological forms of the Verb, they change it. Consequently, there is a syntactic connection of the Article and the Noun and there is not of the Auxiliary and the Verb.
For example:
*Article can be substituted by another proper word/pronoun (syntactic connection):
The man is a smart one. = This man is a smart one.
A girl suddenly came in. = Some girl suddenly came in.
*Auxiliary cannot be replaced/substituted by any other word (morphological connection):
He is singing a beautiful song. We have been climbing the rock for three hours.
In the occidental science there has still been some arguments to the problem of article (where to refer it). In the Post-Soviet science the article is treated as a syntacategorematic part of speech.
There are three general functions of the Article: morphological, syntactic and semantic.
1). Morphological function of the Article.
Article is the main formal material morphological index of the Noun.
For example:
*Would you sponge the water from the table? (water is the noun: it is defined by the article which is a formal index of the Noun);
*Would you water the flowers? (water is the verb: it follows after the personal pronoun in the function of the Subject (direct word order in English))
2). Syntactic function of the Article.
It is called the function of the index of a group of the Noun’s left limit: Article forms a left limit to the following after it group of words that define or attribute the Noun which takes the limit right position. Article defines the Noun but not obligatory is put directly before the Noun [4].
For example:
A house; A big house; A big stone house; A comfortable big stone house, etc.
3). Semantic function of the Article.
Semantically the Article can express:
a) a certain identification (a concrete or unique thing);
b) a reference to a class of homogeneous or similar things (any of the class).
To sum up, the article is usually a separate unit which may be divided from its noun by other words, chiefly adjectives. However, in certain languages the article may also be a morpheme attached to the noun as a kind of suffix (in Bulgarian, Rumanian, Swedish).
If we interpret the article as a morpheme, the idea of a zero article would make no difficulty. If we take the article as a word, the idea of a ‘zero word’ would entail (cause) some difficulty (zero form). The notion ‘zero article’ is only possible if the article is not a word.
2. The Category of DeterminationThe question is whether the article is a separate part of speech (i.e. a word) or a word-morpheme. If we treat the article as a word, we shall have to admit that English has only two articles - the and a/an. But if we treat the article as a word morpheme, we shall have three articles - the, a/an, ø.
B.Ilyish (1971) thinks that the choice between the two alternatives remains a matter of opinion. The scholar gives a slight preference to the view that the article is a word, but argues that “we cannot for the time being at least prove that it is the only correct view of the English article”. M.Blokh (op. cit., 85) regards the article as a special type of grammatical auxiliary. Linguists are only agreed on the function of the article: the article is a determiner, or a restricter. The linguistic status of the article reminds us of the status of shall/will in I shall/will go [6].
Both of the structures are still felt to be semantically related to their ‘parent’ structures: the numeral one and the demonstrative that and the modals shall and will, respectively.
The articles, according to some linguists, do not form a grammatical category. The articles, they argue, do not belong to the same lexeme, and they do not have meaning common to them: a/an has the meaning of oneness, not found in the, which has a demonstrative meaning.
If we treat the article as a morpheme, then we shall have to set up a grammatical category in the noun, the category of determination. This category will have to have all the characteristic features of a grammatical category: common meaning + distinctive meaning. So what is common to a room and the room? Both nouns are restricted in meaning, i.e. they refer to an individual member of the class ‘room’. What makes them distinct is that a room has the feature [-Definite], while the room has the feature [+Definite]. In this opposition the definite article is the strong member and the indefinite article is the weak member.
The same analysis can be extended to abstract and concrete countable nouns, e.g. courage: a courage vs. the courage.
Consider: He has a courage equaled by few of his contemporaries.vs. She would never have the courage to defy him.
In contrast to countables, restricted uncountables are used with two indefinite articles: a/an and zero. The role of the indefinite article is to individuate a subamount of the entity which is presented here as an aspect (type, sort) of the entity.
Consider also: Jim has a good knowledge of Greek, where a denotes a subamount of knowledge, Jim’s knowledge of Greek.
A certain difficulty arises when we analyze such sentences as The horse is an animal and I see a horse. Do these nouns also form the opposemes of the category of determination? We think that they do not: the horse is a subclass of the animal class; a horse is also restricted - it denotes an individual member of the horse subclass.
Cf. The horse is an animal. vs. A horse is an animal.
Unlike the nouns in the above examples, the nouns here exhibit determination at the same level: both the horse and a horse express a subclass of the animal class.
M.Blokh points out, that whereas the function of the determiners such as this, any, some is to explicitly interpret the referent of the noun in relation to other objects or phenomena of a like kind, the semantic purpose of the article is to specify the nounal referent, as it were, altogether unostentatiously, to define it in the most general way, without any explicitly expressed contrasts [1].
Another peculiarity of the article, as different from the determiners in question, is that, in the absence of a determiner, the use of the article with the noun is quite obligatory, in so far as the cases of non-use of the article are subject to no less definite rules than the use of it.
Taking into consideration these peculiar features of the article, the linguist is called upon to make a sound statement about its segmental status in the system of morphology. Namely, his task is to decide whether the article is a purely auxiliary element of a special grammatical form of the noun which functions as a component of a definite morphological category, or it is a separate word, i.e. a lexical unit in the determiner word set, if of a more abstract meaning than other determiners.
The problem is a vexed one; it has inspired intensive research activity in the field, as well as animated discussion with various pros and cons affirmed, refuted and re-affirmed.* In the course of these investigations, however, many positive facts about articles have been established, which at present enables an observer, proceeding from the systemic principle in its paradigmatic interpretation, to expose the status of the article with an attempt at demonstrative conviction.
To arrive at a definite decision, we propose to consider the properties of the English articles in four successive stages, beginning with their semantic evaluation as such, then adding to the obtained data a situational estimation of their uses, thereafter analysing their categorial features in the light of the oppositional theory, and finally concluding the investigation by a paradigmatic generalisation.
A mere semantic observation of the articles in English, i.e. the definite article the and the indefinite article a/an, at once discloses not two, but three meaningful characterisations of the nounal referent achieved by their correlative functioning, namely: one rendered by the definite article, one rendered by the indefinite article, and one rendered by the absence (or non-use) of the article. Let us examine them separately.
The definite article expresses the identification or individualization of the referent of the noun: the use of this article shows that the object denoted is taken in its concrete, individual quality. This meaning can be brought to explicit exposition by a substitution test. The test consists in replacing the article used in a construction by a demonstrative word, e.g. a demonstrative determiner, without causing a principal change in the general implication of the construction.
Of course, such an "equivalent" substitution should be understood in fact as nothing else but analogy: the difference in meaning between a determiner and an article admits of no argument, and we pointed it out in the above passages. Still, the replacements of words as a special diagnostic procedure, which is applied with the necessary reservations and according to a planned scheme of research, is quite permissible. In our case it undoubtedly shows a direct relationship in the meanings of the determiner and the article, the relationship in which the determiner is semantically the more explicit element of the two [5].
The indefinite article, as different from the definite article, is commonly interpreted as referring the object denoted by the noun to a certain class of similar objects; in other words, the indefinite article expresses a classifying generalisation of the nounal referent, or takes it in a relatively general sense. To prove its relatively generalising functional meaning, we may use the diagnostic insertions of specifying-classifying phrases into the construction in question; we may also employ the transformation of implicit comparative constructions with the indefinite article into the corresponding explicit comparative constructions.
As for the various uses of nouns without an article, from the semantic point of view they all should be divided into two types. In the first place, there are uses where the articles are deliberately omitted out of stylistic considerations. We see such uses, for instance, in telegraphic speech, in titles and headlines, in various notices.
3. Countability Characteristics of the ArticleAs is widely acknowledged, the meaningful non-uses of the article are not homogeneous; nevertheless, they admit of a very explicit classification founded on the countability characteristics of the noun. Why countability characteristics? For the two reasons. The first reason is inherent in the nature of the noun itself: the abstract generalisation reflected through the meaningful non-use of the article is connected with the suppression of the idea of the number in the noun. The second reason is inherent in the nature of the article: the indefinite article which plays the crucial role in the semantic correlation in question reveals the meaning of oneness within its semantic base, having originated from the indefinite pronoun one, and that is why the abstract use of the noun naturally goes with the absence of the article [2].
The essential points of the said classification are three in number.
First. The meaningful absence of the article before the countable noun in the singular signifies that the noun is taken in an abstract sense, expressing the most general idea of the object denoted. This meaning, which may be called the meaning of "absolute generalisation", can be demonstrated by inserting in the tested construction a chosen generalising modifier (such as in general, in the abstract, in the broadest sense).
For example: Law (in general) begins with the beginning of human society. Steam-engine (in general) introduced for locomotion a couple of centuries ago has now become obsolete.
Second. The absence of the article before the uncountable noun corresponds to the two kinds of generalisation: both relative and absolute. To decide which of the two meanings is realised in any particular case, the described tests should be carried out alternately.
For example: John laughed with great bitterness (that sort of bitterness: relative generalisation). The subject of health (in general: absolute generalisation) was carefully avoided by everybody. Coffee (a kind of beverage served at the table: relative generalisation) or tea, please? Coffee (in general: absolute generalisation) stimulates the function of the heart.
Third. The absence of the article before the countable noun in the plural, likewise, corresponds to both kinds of generalisation, and the exposition of the meaning in each case can be achieved by the same semantic tests.
For example: Stars, planets and comets (these kinds of objects: relative generalisation) are different celestial bodies (not terrestrial bodies: relative generalisation). Wars (in general: absolute generalisation) should be eliminated as means of deciding international disputes.
To distinguish the demonstrated semantic functions of the non-uses of the article by definition, we may say that the absence of the article with uncountable nouns, as well as with countable nouns in the plural, renders the meaning of "uncharacterised generalisation", as different from the meaning of "absolute generalisation", achieved by the absence of the article with countable nouns in the singular. So much for the semantic evaluation of the articles as the first stage of our study [8].Passing to the situational estimation of the article uses, we must point out that the basic principle of their differentiation here is not a direct consideration of their meanings, but disclosing the informational characteristics that the article conveys to its noun in concrete contextual conditions. Examined from this angle, the definite article serves as an indicator of the type of nounal information which is presented as the "facts already known", i.e. as the starting point of the communication. In contrast to this, the indefinite article or the meaningful absence of the article introduces the central communicative nounal part of the sentence, i.e. the part rendering the immediate informative data to be conveyed from thespeaker to the listener. In the situational study of syntax the starting point of the communication is called its "theme", while the central informative part is called its "rheme".
In accord with the said situational functions, the typical syntactic position of the noun modified by the definite article is the "thematic" subject, while the typical syntactic position of the noun modified by the indefinite article or by the meaningful absence of the article is the "rhematic" predicative.
It should be noted that in many other cases of syntactic use, i.e. non-subjective or non-predicative, the articles reflect the same situational functions. This can be probed by reducing the constructions in question on re-arrangement lines to the logically "canonised" link-type constructions. For example:
If you would care to verify the incident (object), pray do so. → If you would care the incident (subject) to be verified, pray have it verified. I am going to make a rather strange request (object) to you. → What I am going to make is a rather strange request (predicative) to you. You are talking nonsense (object), lad. → What you are talking, lad, is nonsense (predicative).
Another essential contextual-situational characteristic of the articles is their immediate connection with the two types of attributes to the noun. The first type is a "limiting" attribute, which requires the definite article before the noun; the second type is a "descriptive" attribute, which requires the indefinite article or the meaningful absence of the article before the noun.
On the basis of the oppositional definition of the article it becomes possible to explicate the semantic function of the article determination of nouns for cases where the inherent value of the article is contrasted against the contrary semantic value of the noun or the nounal collocation.
Having established the functional value of articles in oppositional estimation, we can now, in broader systemic contraposition, probe the correlation of the meanings of articles with the meanings of functional determiners.

ConclusionThe article is usually a separate unit which may be divided from its noun by other words, chiefly adjectives. However, in certain languages the article may also be a morpheme attached to the noun as a kind of suffix (in Bulgarian, Rumanian, Swedish).
If we interpret the article as a morpheme, the idea of a zero article would make no difficulty. If we take the article as a word, the idea of a ‘zero word’ would entail (cause) some difficulty (zero form). The notion ‘zero article’ is only possible if the article is not a word.
So, the semantic purpose of the article is to specify the nounal referent, to define it in the most general way, without any explicitly expressed contrasts.
In the absence of a determiner, the use of the article with the noun is quite obligatory, in so far as the cases of non-use of the article are subject to no less definite rules than the use of it.
If we agree that the group “article + noun” is an analytical form of the verb we shall have to set up a grammatical category in the noun which is expresses by one or the other article or by its absence. That category might be called determination . In this case we could also find a zero article. If we stick to the view that the group is a peculiar type of phrase, no “zero article” is possible.
In the 2nd case we can see that the central point of the sentence is a young man, which is new (-> the person who came in proved to be a young man). While in the 1st sentence the central point is that he came in. The central point corresponds to the semantic predicate, or the RHEME. -> the indefinite article expresses what is new, and the definite article expresses what is known already, or at least what is not presented as new.

ReferencesБлох М. Я. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка: Учебник. Для студентов филол. фак. ун-тов и фак. англ. яз.педвузов. — М.: Высш. школа, 1983. – 383 с.
Худяков А.А. Теоретическая грамматика английского языка: учеб. пособие для студ.филол.фак. и фак.ин.яз. высш.учеб.заведений. – 3-е изд., стер. М.: Издательский центр «Академия», 2010. – 256 с.
Bloch M.Y. A course in Theoretical English Grammar. M.: Pravda, 2000. – 265 p.
Christophersen, Paul and A.O. Sandved. An Advanced English Grammar. –  London: McMillan Press Ltd, 1969.
Eastwood J. Oxford practice grammar with answers/J. Eastwood. – 2 ed. New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 2003. – XIII, 432 p.
Ilyish B.A. Structure of the English word. – Second edition. – L.: Prosveshenie, 1971. –243 p.
Khaimovich B., Rogovskaya I. A course in English Grammar. M.: Pravda, 1967. – 298 p.
Swan M. How Eng. Works: A grammar practice book: With answers/M. Swan, C. Walter. – Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 2004. – 358 p.