2

When using a relative clause to modify an uncountable noun, should we include "the" before the noun?

What are the differences in meaning?

Example 1

"The coffee that is served at this café is delicious." (with "the")

"Coffee that is served at this café is delicious." (without "the")

Example 2

"The knowledge that she possesses is extensive." (with "the")

"Knowledge that she possesses is extensive." (without "the")

Example 3

"The art that is displayed in the gallery is breathtaking." (with "the")

"Art that is displayed in the gallery is breathtaking." (without "the")

Improve this question
2
  • 1
    There's no semantic difference, but I'd say that all your examples are more likely to include the article than not.
    – FumbleFingers
    Jul 6 at 17:49
  • 1
    ... especially Example 2. Without 'the' its claim is vague.
    – Weather Vane
    Jul 6 at 18:04

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

In all three instances, the grammar is correct both ways, but the version with "the" is the natural way to express what you likely intend.

Without "the", the literal meaning is that coffee served in that café is defined as delicious by virtue of being served in that cafe. Similarly, any knowledge that she has is considered "extensive", and any art displayed in that gallery is automatically "breathtaking".

Since all of that is nonsense, most competent English speakers would assume a missing "the" without really thinking about it, but notice that it doesn't quite sit right.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .