Talk:Zero-marking in English

This article was created as a result of merging eleven other pages. See old talk-pages at: Talk:Zero at, Talk:Zero did, Talk:Zero do, Talk:Zero if, Talk:Zero of, Talk:Zero to, Talk:Zero definite article, Talk:Zero past marking, Talk:Zero plural marking, Talk:Zero possessive marking, and Talk:Zero third person agreement.

The merger proposal is archived here. Cnilep (talk) 16:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

The disambiguation page page Zero article was redirected to Zero-marking in English. Old talk-page here. Cnilep (talk) 16:22, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Half of this article is great.

Pretty much everything from the beginning of the article down to and including the section labeled "4 Zero pronoun in imperative" seems to be spot-on. Maybe a couple of nit-picky things I might reword, but nothing egregious.

Everything starting with the section labeled "5 Zero prepositions" is an absolute trainwreck.

While the sections do indeed atleast go so far as to label the examples included there as "nonstandard", the mere fact that the next two sections are simply included gives the faulty impression that "we were eating the restaurant" is even in the remotest vicinity of being an acceptable or legitimate way of saying "we were eating at the restaurant", or that "I'll be the store" in any conceivable way even approaches being an appropriate way of saying "I'll be at the store".

I mean, there's nonstandard, and then there's wrong. Sections 5 and 6 are not only devoid of even a solitary reference, but they implicitly encourage the desecration of the English language by insinuating that the given examples are, or could even be considered, valid.

Thoughts, anyone?

-=[(Alexis (talk) 06:48, 7 February 2012 (UTC))]=-

I can't speak to the prepositions, except to say that as a native speaker the examples seem unacceptable to me. But I do know varieties of English that can omit do, past marking, possessive marking, or third-singular marking where Standard English generally requires it. Plus there is a zero-plural cited in the lead section. I agree, though, that better sourcing is definitely needed in those sections. Cnilep (talk) 08:10, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it's the case here, but some people at Wikipedia have a basic problem understanding that some things in English are actually WRONG. They seem to think that any utterance, though not part of "standard" English, is valid in some other "nonstandard" version of English of the speaker's own invention. I had this argument repeatedly at another article, where editors insisted that basic errors like "it had no affect" should not be labelled "incorrect" because that was prescriptivist, or some such rubbish. Total nonsense, of course, but eventually I gave up arguing. 86.148.155.92 (talk) 10:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

In my opinion the zero preposition examples are absolute rubbish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.215.96.137 (talk) 17:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree, these need pruning. Victor Yus (talk) 19:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

With a bit of searching I was able to find three reliable sources to verify the non-rubbish-hood of the concept of nonstandard unmarked ("zero") prepositions. I am hopeful that similar sources might be find to verify the other unreferenced or under-referenced sections of the article. Cnilep (talk) 00:33, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

I was referring to the specific examples that were used in the article as rubbish. Not the entire concept of nonstandard unmarked ("zero") prepositions in itself. But well done on your finds. They look good.--196.215.43.68 (talk) 14:08, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Find sources

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

These links may be helpful to find sources for this article. Cnilep (talk) 00:26, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

headlines

"Two in custody after man shot after high school game" is a typical example (this one from the current Chicago Tribune 's website) of zero-marking of articles in English-language newspaper headlines (and some other headings). I think this category is large enough to deserve mentioning. C. Douay (2001"Grammar-and-Interlocution: English Markers as Recipient of Recipient Role," Revue québécoise de linguistique 29 (2): 79-94) (http://www.erudit.org/revue/rql/2001/v29/n2/039442ar.pdf) has a very brief discussion of this on p. 88, giving two examples, one being "girl, ten, killed by roadsweeper." Zero-marking of articles in Italian and Dutch headlines (and during L1 acquisition) is discussed in Bartens, Angela, and Niclas Sandström. "PLENARIES." (abstract of papers of the 2005 Helsinki conference on Approaches to Complexity in Language. Kdammers (talk) 05:47, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

No article before the word "key"

In some cases there should not be an article before the word "key". For example: "This technology was key to the company's success". However, I can't find a source for this rule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.41.211.254 (talk) 13:33, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

How about things like "die a happy man"

Merriam-Webster classifies the verb die as intransitive, so the expression "to die a happy man" omits the preposition as, does it not? How would this be classified? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.56.73 (talk) 17:32, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Zero prepositions—strange geographical specificity

From the article:

In Northern Britain, some speakers omit the prepositions to or of in sentences with two objects.

I have a few concerns with this line. Firstly, Northern Britain is a fairly uncommon term. Is this just Scotland, or Scotland and Northern England?

Secondly, and more importantly, I'm sure that this syntax—at least in certain contexts—is perfectly normal throughout all of the British Isles; in fact, probably in most English-speaking countries. Perhaps a slightly more typical example (to the one given) would be something like:

• Give me the keys.

Am I missing something?

Other examples include:

• Sing her a song [=sing a song to her].
• Write me [=write to me] (strictly American English; note the verb is being used intransitively here).
• Make me a match [=make a match for me].
• Die a happy man [=die as a happy man] (I'm stealing this one from the unsigned comment immediately above mine!).

That said, I couldn't think of an example using of. Does anyone have an example of of being dropped in this way? If there really is any specificity to Northern Britain with this phenomenon, it must be regarding the dropping of of. Lukeuser (talk) 12:28, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

While "Give me the keys" and "Give them to me" are widespread in dialects of English, "Give them me" with a dative (indirect object) rather than a prepositional phrase is used in the north of England, but I'm not sure about Scotland. I assume that is what the article is referring to. At any rate, it cites a published source, and I have no reason to suspect it misrepresents that source. Cnilep (talk) 00:09, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Which, why, and original research

Several maintenance tags in this article ask for content that may be beyond Wikipedia's remit.

In English, the zero article, rather than the indefinite article^why, is often used with plurals and mass nouns , although some can function like an indefinite plural article

There are various historical, lexical, or syntactic theories that aim to explain why languages such as English have the structure they have, but as far as I know there is no generally accepted explanation for the specific pattern described here (but compare, for example, Universal grinder). Editors wishing to add such an explanation should take care to work carefully around WP:NOR and WP:FRINGE.

English, like many other languages^which, does not require an article in plural noun phrases

The definite article is sometimes omitted before some words for specific institutions, such as prison, school, and (in standard non-American dialects^which) hospital

Both of these requests could, in theory, be answered empirically by listing the languages or dialects that have each feature, but it strikes me as difficult to decide where to draw the line between helpfully illustrative and excessive "WP:LAUNDRY lists". Opinions may vary. Cnilep (talk) 04:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC)