Is it the definite article?

So, to reiterate, when it comes to when to use the “the”, the only universal rule is this:

Some rules (such as the two you’ve given) might hold 95%+ of the time, but unfortunately there may be weird and arbitrary exceptions that you’ll just have to learn.

Source: https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/365074/the-use-of-the-definite-article-with-the-names-of-museums-art-galleries-etc/365083#365083

Is it capitalization?

Because a cursory look at the Wikipedia page for capitalization also reveals that it is not without its quirks.

For example:

planets and other celestial bodies: “Jupiter”, “the Crab Nebula”; and “the Earth”, “the Sun”, or “the Moon” should be capitalized according to the International Astronomical Union based on its manual of style, but style guides may suggest differently.[19]

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalization_in_English

Is it the fact the way something is written almost has no bearing on how it’s pronounced?

Please tell me your thoughts.

  • AA5B@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    I always thought the celestial bodies thing was just another case of proper nouns. Jupiter is always capitalized because it’s a proper name.

    But “the Moon” can be either. “the Moon” is the proper name of Earths natural satellite so should be capitalized, but “the moon” is a description of any planetary body’s natural satellite so should NOT be

    Similar for “the Sun”. “the Sun” is the proper name of Earths star, but “the sun” is any solar system’s star. I like that in so much science fiction they’ve figured this out and use a distinct proper name, “Sol”

  • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 days ago

    Probably spelling, but there’s one quirk in English that makes it so you can build the arguably weirdest sentence in any language. Here’s the short version and explanation for people unaware of the 3 meanings of the word (which I’ll use 3 different spellings to make it easier to understand):

    • Buffalo is a city in USA
    • a buffalo is another name for an animal also known as a bison
    • To BUFFALO means to bother, or bully.

    So a Buffalo buffalo is a Bison from the city of Buffalo. If a Bison from Buffalo were to bother another Bison from Buffalo, you get the common example of this phrase which is Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo which means Buffalo bison BOTHERS Buffalo bison. You can add an extra Buffalo at the start to make it a headline of a newspaper telling you where this happened, but that only gives you Buffalo, Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo

    But we can make it better. See, in English you can add specifiers to a noun, the way we’re doing with Buffalo to specify this is a Bison from Buffalo, but the specification can be a full sentence. For example if we wanted to say that specify that the bison is known to bother other bisons you can call him a “bison bully” bison, or even if he’s from Buffalo and only bullies other bisons from Buffalo he’s a Buffalo “Buffalo bison bully” bison, or a Buffalo “Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO” buffalo.

    Cool, so if a Bison from Buffalo known for bullying other bisons from Buffalo is bullying yet another Buffalo bison you can say that a “Buffalo Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo”… But what if the bison it’s bullying is also known to bully other bisons from buffalo? Then Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo buffalo

    But our bison might actually EXCLUSIVELY bully bisons that bully other bisons, so he’s a Buffalo bison BULLY BULLY, and if he’s from the city of Buffalo he’s a Buffalo Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO BUFFALO. So if our heroic bison made a mistake and bullied another Bison who only bullies bullies then: Buffalo Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO BUFFALO buffalo BUFFALO Buffalo Buffalo buffalo BUFFALO BUFFALO

    And you can keep making the sentence infinitely long by specifying that tach bison in the story is a Buffalo bison Bully bison.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 days ago

    The disparity between written English and its pronunciation. Identically written words represented with vastly different sounds, and no real and consistent system whatsoever.

    • RBWells@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      I agree. I like it (the spelling often shows the history of the word, relationships between words) but for an allegedly phonetic system it’s nonsense. Not sure it’s worse than French, but Spanish is so phonetic I can read aloud stuff I don’t even understand!

      I learned to read as I was learning to talk, more like a language than a skill - kids learning in school are taught phonics, and I would despair if that was how I was taught.

      Once. Really? The word Wonss is spelled Once?

  • zlatiah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    Personally I definitely think it’s the pronunciation, which is… self explanatory. Other languages have weird grammar rules too, but even French pronunciation is more consistent 😭

    • Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Which makes it funny when I hear fellow English speakers knock on French spelling. At least I can reasonably assume what a written French word is supposed to sound like. English doesn’t give us that luxury.

  • corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    It’s that it’s being driven by influencers and popularity, and not being improved incrementally according to consistent rules and patterns.

    Other languages have steering committees; we have vapid tiktok influencerati trash steering the evolution of English.

    Fucking hell.