Timeline for Is it correct to use “polymerase chain reaction” without "the" definite article?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 13, 2019 at 17:46 | comment | added | Lambie | No,I'm not. Just because some noun can also have an uncountable meaning, that does not change what I said. "overreaction" is psychology, not biology. Not all the OP's examples are respectable literature and every one that is follows the rules I laid out. | |
| Sep 13, 2019 at 17:25 | comment | added | TypeIA | @Lambie I think you're contradicting yourself. There are indeed many grammar books, but none of them are authoritative. Given that OP found this usage by a highly respected, peer-reviewed scientific journal, in addition to other sources, I stand by my answer. For a grammatical justification by analogy, compare "overreaction" which is fine with no article: "Overreaction is bad." If scientists use it this way, that's fine by me. | |
| Sep 13, 2019 at 17:10 | comment | added | Lambie | This is not correct regardless of the fact there is no authority. They are many authoritative grammar books and here, they would all agree. No indefinite article is a mistake for the OP's question. | |
| Sep 13, 2019 at 14:59 | history | answered | TypeIA | CC BY-SA 4.0 |