2

Can you explain the author’s use of "the" and "a" in the following sentence:

I heard the crunch of tires in dirt, and a cloud of dust wafted over me.

So, ignoring the two pronouns, “I” and “me”, there are five nouns in that sentence: crunch, tires, dirt, cloud, and dust. However only two of them — crunch and cloud have articles, and even there the articles are different: ”crunch” gets the definite article, the; but the indefinite article, a, is used for “dust”. What rules are used to decide when to precede a noun with an article at all, and then which of “the” or “a” to use when an article is deemed to be appropriate.

For example, compare the original sentence with:

I heard a crunch of tires in dirt, and a cloud of dust wafted over me.

Is that second version wrong? It sounds OK to my ears, but even if it has no grammatical issues, how is it different in meaning? And then, how about this third option:

I heard the crunch of tires in dirt, and the cloud of dust wafted over me.

That now does sound strange. The use of the definite article for “cloud” doesn’t sound right, but what, if anything, is wrong with it?

Or why not even have:

I heard a crunch of the tires in the dirt, and a cloud of the dust wafted over me.

| improve this question | | | | |
  • Please show how you have tried to understand why those words were used in the sentence, and why you are confused by them. – Len Jan 7 at 0:22
0

I heard a crunch of the tires in the dirt, and a cloud of the dust wafted over me.

this seems like one of those unexplainable things. the reason why the bottom line doesn't work is that its broken up way too much and sounds kind of robotic. like its just not good or right English. it uses words that are completely unneeded and redundantly uses the.

I heard the crunch of tires in dirt, and a cloud of dust wafted over me.

the reason this one works is that we usually use the first when describing things like this. its more of just how people talk. you can use a but it sounds strange to use it because people just don't use it.

I think the indefinite article a is used on dust due to the fact that logically we would understand that off-road cars or cars on dirt tend to make clouds of dust. it's in a lot of media. and due to that, say the for the cloud of dust just sounds like you are over-explaining, undermining the reader's competence, and being redundant by using the a little too much.

I heard a crunch of tires in dirt, and a cloud of dust wafted over me.

this one isn't really that wrong, it just shows that the point of view doesn't have the time to realize, or doesn't know where the tires are.

| improve this answer | | | | |

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.