1

My understanding is when referring to a type of thing in general we can either use the plural form or a singular with the definite article. For example:

The tomato is a fruit, not a vegetable.

Or

Tomatoes are a fruit, not a vegetable.

But can an indefinite article also be used to make a generic reference? I saw this in Google's definition of "scabies":

A contagious, intensely itchy skin condition caused by a tiny, burrowing mite. Skin condition caused by a burrowing mite.

I found this definition kind of odd, because "mite" as a countable noun means an individual organism that belongs to the mite species. I thought the following would make more sense:

A contagious, intensely itchy skin condition caused by tiny, burrowing mites.

A contagious, intensely itchy skin condition caused by a kind of tiny, burrowing mite.

I am almost certain this question must have been asked, but I can't find any related questions. What are the applicable grammatical rules here? Also are there other examples?

3
  • 1
    english.stackexchange.com/a/147384/71740
    – user3395
    Apr 30 '18 at 0:53
  • @userr2684291 Hugely helpful!! Thanks! The answer I am seeking seems to be part of that question's premise. I am hoping someone will be more detailed in outlining the rules surrounding singular noun and generic reference.
    – Eddie Kal
    Apr 30 '18 at 1:07
  • 1
    My pleasure! For a more detailed explanation, read what the author of the answer linked, which is a summary of their work, which is again linked on that website ("a dissertation"). More specifically, part 4 deals with the relevant bits.
    – user3395
    Apr 30 '18 at 9:11
0

It's easiest if you just remember this:

Basically, you don't use a/an with plural nouns at all.

Why? Mostly because when you use a plural noun, you either:

  • mean it as a type or abstractly (no article)

    I like socks on my feet (given anything, if that thing is type=sock, I like it on my feet, but I, for example, might not even have seen a sock today, or be near one at the moment)

    Socks are neat (abstract, I'm talking about attributes of sock)

  • are talking about a group of X such you do not mean "any X"

    I like those socks on my feet (I do not mean any socks, but specifically those socks)

Since the indefinite article has a lot of overlap in meaning with any, it doesn't work when you have a group of something you are talking about (because you no longer mean any X).

If you really mean "any group of X" you have to actually say that, with any X or set of X.

I like a set of socks on my feet.

0

The grammatical books on the English usage give five models, which can be used for defining a noun as a representative of some class (type) of referents.

One of such models is that: indefinite article + countable noun in the singular:'A dog likes to eat manufactured food.' However, it is forbidden to use such model if we talk about a place (location) of animals, of placing things, or residence of humans of some type.

That is why it's impossible to say, for example, such utterence as: (*)'An Indian tiger lives on the Indian subcontinent.' We must say instead such sentence as: 'Indian tigers live on the Indian subcontinent.'

So, from this point of view the sentence 'A contagious, intensely itchy skin condition caused by a tiny, burrowing mite. Skin condition caused by a burrowing mite.' is valid in the modern English usage.

Although your suggestions are also not prohibited and not without their own semantic advantages.

Your Answer

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.