3 ms·

Eh ... I don't see how that's an different from the common English idiom of saying you went to "the store", which actually always irks me too, since people say

by SilasX 4y ago

Eh ... I don't see how that's an different from the common English idiom of saying you went to "the store", which actually always irks me too, since people say it even when it lacks context that would make it definite. If anything, the problem is that she's doing that same thing there.

brigandish 4y ago
It's because the alternative is "I went to a store" which only invites unnecessary questions and isn't relevant to the conversation or will become clear so the indicates that, much like ある人 in Japanese means "someone in particular but I'm not going to mention the name because it's pointless to what I'm telling you and it'll just bog us down if I bring it up but it was someone definite", much like the store.
- SilasX 4y ago
  So then what's the difference between that and saying "the conservatory", as in the original comment, for the same reason?
  - brigandish 4y ago
    Because if I say "I went to the store" or "I went to the pub" it's somewhere we both go or experience or have an expectation of going or experiencing, no further introduction needed. If we both go to the same conservatory then "the conservatory" would work, no further introduction needed. It doesn't if we don't, it becomes special and therefore needs explanation to introduce to the conversation and take on "the".
    - SilasX 4y ago
      > Because if I say "I went to the store" … it's somewhere we both go or experience or have an expectation of going or experiencing, No, it isn’t. I frequently see native speakers refer to “the store” when that doesn’t hold — hence why it feels like a special case or break from the usual rules.
      - brigandish 4y ago
        You know native speakers that don’t go shopping?
        SilasX 4y ago
        That’s not the standard your original comment was using (or you’re intentionally moving the goal posts here and abandoned good-faith). Again, to quote with more context: > I say "I went to the store" or "I went to the pub" it's somewhere we both go or experience or have an expectation of going or experiencing, no further introduction needed. If we both go to the same conservatory then "the conservatory" would work, Native speakers say “the store” even when there’s no expectation that a) I know which store they mean, or b) I go there myself or will in the future. ie, the standard you use for deciding whether “the” would work in the conservatory example. Even under your new standard, you should say that “the conservatory” is fine as long as the listener “goes/has gone to conservatories”. Finally, in case it matters: yes, I have had native speakers (my parents) say “the store” even when I (also a native speaker) didn’t go shopping at all, being too young to do it. (This is why oh-so-clever rhetorical questions should be used with caution.)
        brigandish 4y ago
        > (or you’re intentionally moving the goal posts here and abandoned good-faith) That's the end of our conversation, we're discussing grammar and its colloquial use, not anything that requires "good faith argumentation". Inane.
        SilasX 4y ago
        Every conversation requires good-faith, charitable interpretation of what others are saying. I don't know how to interpret your remark, in its original context, as good faith. I said nothing that could reasonably be interpreted as requiring that native speakers "not go shopping". If you were actually interested in a meaningful exchange of ideas, you would have given a more substantive reply than that one. I agree that if you're not going to take the discussion seriously, you probably shouldn't join it -- it just makes HN worse. Strawman argumentation doesn't suddenly become okay just because "hey man, we were just discussing grammar and its colloquial use", as if it's somehow okay to deliberately misinterpret someone and waste their time in that case.
cecilpl2 4y ago
I feel like this has something to do with whether the identity of the thing is central to the story or incidental. "On my last vacation I went to the beach to work on my tan." vs "on my last vacation I went to a beach to work on my tan". "The beach" feels like I went to a specific beach on purpose (or that there was only one), while "a beach" feels like I just picked one at random. "On my way here I stopped at the store to get an apple" vs "On my way here I stopped at a store to get an apple". Similarly, "the store" implies intentionality/singularity, while "a store" implies I happened upon it.

by SilasX 4y ago

brigandish 4y ago

It's because the alternative is "I went to a store" which only invites unnecessary questions and isn't relevant to the conversation or will become clear so the indicates that, much like ある人 in Japanese means "someone in particular but I'm not going to mention the name because it's pointless to what I'm telling you and it'll just bog us down if I bring it up but it was someone definite", much like the store.

SilasX 4y ago
So then what's the difference between that and saying "the conservatory", as in the original comment, for the same reason?
- brigandish 4y ago
  Because if I say "I went to the store" or "I went to the pub" it's somewhere we both go or experience or have an expectation of going or experiencing, no further introduction needed. If we both go to the same conservatory then "the conservatory" would work, no further introduction needed. It doesn't if we don't, it becomes special and therefore needs explanation to introduce to the conversation and take on "the".
  - SilasX 4y ago
    > Because if I say "I went to the store" … it's somewhere we both go or experience or have an expectation of going or experiencing, No, it isn’t. I frequently see native speakers refer to “the store” when that doesn’t hold — hence why it feels like a special case or break from the usual rules.
    - brigandish 4y ago
      You know native speakers that don’t go shopping?
      - SilasX 4y ago
        That’s not the standard your original comment was using (or you’re intentionally moving the goal posts here and abandoned good-faith). Again, to quote with more context: > I say "I went to the store" or "I went to the pub" it's somewhere we both go or experience or have an expectation of going or experiencing, no further introduction needed. If we both go to the same conservatory then "the conservatory" would work, Native speakers say “the store” even when there’s no expectation that a) I know which store they mean, or b) I go there myself or will in the future. ie, the standard you use for deciding whether “the” would work in the conservatory example. Even under your new standard, you should say that “the conservatory” is fine as long as the listener “goes/has gone to conservatories”. Finally, in case it matters: yes, I have had native speakers (my parents) say “the store” even when I (also a native speaker) didn’t go shopping at all, being too young to do it. (This is why oh-so-clever rhetorical questions should be used with caution.)
        brigandish 4y ago
        > (or you’re intentionally moving the goal posts here and abandoned good-faith) That's the end of our conversation, we're discussing grammar and its colloquial use, not anything that requires "good faith argumentation". Inane.
        SilasX 4y ago
        Every conversation requires good-faith, charitable interpretation of what others are saying. I don't know how to interpret your remark, in its original context, as good faith. I said nothing that could reasonably be interpreted as requiring that native speakers "not go shopping". If you were actually interested in a meaningful exchange of ideas, you would have given a more substantive reply than that one. I agree that if you're not going to take the discussion seriously, you probably shouldn't join it -- it just makes HN worse. Strawman argumentation doesn't suddenly become okay just because "hey man, we were just discussing grammar and its colloquial use", as if it's somehow okay to deliberately misinterpret someone and waste their time in that case.

cecilpl2 4y ago

I feel like this has something to do with whether the identity of the thing is central to the story or incidental. "On my last vacation I went to the beach to work on my tan." vs "on my last vacation I went to a beach to work on my tan". "The beach" feels like I went to a specific beach on purpose (or that there was only one), while "a beach" feels like I just picked one at random. "On my way here I stopped at the store to get an apple" vs "On my way here I stopped at a store to get an apple". Similarly, "the store" implies intentionality/singularity, while "a store" implies I happened upon it.