Tell me please which of the following sentences is correct:

  1. It allowed for the election of senators.
  2. It allowed for election of senators.

I thing the first one is correct because "senators" modifies "election", so " the" is needed. But I have seen it being used without "the". So if the is not needed, explain it for me please why.

  • You are correct, and "the" is expected -- but I think this is more because "allow for election" doesn't feel idiomatic, than because of any rule. Although if you have seen it then it must feel idiomatic to some people. – Andrew Dec 27 '17 at 16:18
  • You say you've seen the second one. I'm not sure I believe you.. – J.R. Dec 27 '17 at 17:23
  • Yes I have seen if in crash course politics and govermnent – Dmytro O'Hope Dec 27 '17 at 17:44
  • @DmytroO'Hope then the course materials might be in error. Sometimes editors don't proofread everything, and even good software might not be able to detect this kind of grammatical error. It's a credit to your English skill that you spotted it and thought it weird. – Andrew Dec 27 '17 at 18:06
  • I'd have to see more context to make a ruling. Depending on the preceding sentences, it might be fine without the article: For more than two centuries, senators were appointed, not elected. Sovereigns decide who would represent the people. But the new constitution changed all that – it allowed for election of senators, rather than handpicked cronies. I think it reads a little better with the article, but you'd have a hard time convincing me that the article omission is both incorrect and jarring. – J.R. Dec 27 '17 at 22:31

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.