Timeline for Why does "money" take "the" in "all the money in the world"?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 27, 2018 at 17:05 | history | edited | Andrew | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 70 characters in body
|
| Nov 27, 2018 at 14:12 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | You may have a point there (about ELU). But I'm now happy to upvote here mainly on the basis of your final couple of points. You've clarified well enough how to distinguish the article in the (specific quantity of) money (which has actually been) donated to charities from article-less (any) money (real or hypothetical, counted or not, which might have been) donated. And the distinction between addressing what one's choice might be, and whether a choice even exists in any given context is crucial, even though it's probably Too Broad for the question as posed here. | |
| Nov 27, 2018 at 0:25 | history | edited | Andrew | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 10 characters in body
|
| Nov 26, 2018 at 19:28 | comment | added | Andrew | @FumbleFingers edited again. I think we're starting to get well above the scope of this question (and out of my depth), and it might be better posed to ELU to get a truly complete answer. | |
| Nov 26, 2018 at 19:25 | history | edited | Andrew | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 828 characters in body
|
| Nov 26, 2018 at 18:37 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | I've cancelled earlier downvote, but still can't see sufficient reason to upvote. I couldn't bring myself to accept article-less Suppose I gave you a box with all money in the world, but there's nothing wrong with Money donated to charities should be included on your tax forms. And in a context such as I still have [the] money [that] I earned when I last had a job, I can't really see that including the article or not makes any difference at all to the meaning - it certainly doesn't seem to be a matter of whether or not "money" represents a "concept". | |
| Nov 26, 2018 at 18:25 | history | edited | Andrew | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 39 characters in body
|
| Nov 26, 2018 at 18:18 | comment | added | Andrew | @isac please take note of my edits. It is possible to omit the definite article, but this changes the meaning. | |
| Nov 26, 2018 at 18:18 | comment | added | Andrew | @FumbleFingers I've edited to try and explain the distinction. | |
| Nov 26, 2018 at 18:18 | history | edited | Andrew | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 647 characters in body
|
| Nov 26, 2018 at 17:42 | comment | added | FumbleFingers | All [the] water on earth originally came from comets. That may not be a true statement, but it's syntactically fine with or without the article - or with all of the water, come to that. So I don't really see how your talking about a specific set point really "explains" anything here. | |
| Nov 26, 2018 at 17:40 | history | edited | Andrew | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 38 characters in body
|
| Nov 26, 2018 at 16:28 | vote | accept | isac | ||
| Nov 26, 2018 at 15:14 | history | answered | Andrew | CC BY-SA 4.0 |