Job Discussion Forums

[valley_girl]

OK, I'm getting a bit blurry-eyed and fuzzy-brained from marking essays, so I'd like to get some opinions on this.

For the term 'Canadian people', we often shorten it to Canadians. For 'American people', we often shorten it to Americans. Why, then, does it look awkward when my students write Chinese instead of 'Chinese people' (they can't write Chineses, after all) or Japanese instead of 'Japanese people'?

"Chinese eat rice with every meal." <---- This looks odd to me. Is it odd, or do I need a serious break from essay marking???

[Henry_Cowell]

Try it with people from France: French drink wine with every meal.

Doesn't work. Add the definite article:

The French drink wine with every meal.

So it's preferable to use the definite article:

The Chinese eat rice with every meal.

National adjectives ending with most consonants can form the plural with a simple s, and you don't need the definite article with those: Americans, Canadians, Australians, Indians, Magyars, Aleuts, etc.

French, Chinese, Japanese, Spanish, Swiss, and others are exceptions that require the definite article.

[isanity]

Henry's examples are misleading: it's nothing to do with articles. Rather than trying to change the adjective into a noun, just start with the noun: Frenchmen (or French people, if you're PC) eat cheese; Spaniards sleep late. Swiss and the -ese endings are tricky because they are derived from adjectives, and their status as nouns is a bit dubious. Your options are 1) to take them as nouns with identical singular and plural forms (Swiss ski every day), or 2) to go for adjective+people (Chinese people eat rice).

[Henry_Cowell]

[isanity]

[denise]

I agree that it looks weird! My Japanese students wrote like that, too. At first, I would "correct" them by adding an article, but then I started thinking that since there wasn't a clear noun form, maybe it was OK. ????? There's always something new to learn about grammar!

d

[Henry_Cowell]

Swiss can indeed be a noun or an adjective. But if it's used as a noun in the examples supplied by the OP, it must be preceded by a definite article.

Same with the words French, Chinese, Japanese, Spanish, and others.

[isanity]

You're talking nonsense. Compare "The British wear bowler hats"- 'British' is not a noun. It's an adjective, standing for the noun phrase 'British people'. 'Swiss' in "The Swiss..." is used in the same way.

'Swiss' can be used as a noun ("I met a Swiss yesterday") but it's unidiomatic and hence dubious.

[Henry_Cowell]

Why is the word British identified as a plural (as well as singular) noun as well as an adjective in the three dictionaries I just consulted? Are the compilers and editors of American English dictionaries somehow in the dark about your "dubious" and "unidiomatic" ideas about language usage?

NOUN: 1. (used with a pl. verb) The people of Great Britain. 2. British English. 3. The Celtic language of the ancient Britons.
_________________

Main Entry: Brit�ish
Pronunciation: 'bri-tish
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English Bruttische of Britain, from Old English Brettisc, from Brettas Britons, of Celtic origin; akin to Welsh Brython Briton
1 a : the Celtic language of the ancient Britons b : BRITISH ENGLISH
2 plural in construction : the people of Great Britain or the Commonwealth of Nations
__________________

Brit�ish [ br�ttish ]
plural noun
Definition: people of United Kingdom: the people of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

noun
Definition: 1. language (Same as British English)
2. language of ancient Britons: the language spoken by the ancient Celtic people who lived in southern Britain

[Henry_Cowell]

We are dealing with words used to denote nationalities. They are names of nationalities and, hence, nouns.

http://www.wordpower.ws/grammar/gramch15.html

c. Names of nationalities
The is sometimes used with the name of a nationality in order to make a general statement about the people of that nationality. A plural verb must be used in such a statement.

When the name of a nationality ends in the sound of ch, s, sh , or z, the name of the nationality must usually be preceded by the.

Nationality --- Example
French --- The French are famous for their fine wines.
Irish --- The Irish are known as poets and songwriters.


When the name of a nationality does not end in the sound of ch, s, sh or z, the letter s must be added to the end of the name when it is used in a general statement. Names of nationalities to which s has been added are often used without being preceded by the.

Nationality ---- Example
Argentinian ---- Argentinians like to eat beef.
Canadian --- Canadians have a tradition of playing hockey.

[valley_girl]

I'm so glad I'm not the only one who is confused by this grammar point.

What is truly odd about it is that if I used "the" with Chinese, I would think it meant all Chinese people, but if I used "the" with Canadians or Americans, I would think we were talking about specific people, not Canadians or Americans in general.

1. The Chinese like to eat rice. (All Chinese people)

2. The Canadians like to eat pizza. (Which ones?)

However, I prefer using the noun "people" to the definite article with Chinese, Japanese, Spanish, etc. I don't know why. It just sounds better to me.

[isanity]

[Henry_Cowell]

No, the collective noun British does not "stand for the whole phrase" (in which British is an adjective). But if you want to go on believing that, be my guest.

I think it's your confused (but common) notion of part of speech that is "dubious."

[TheLongWayHome]

Here's a theory, could be codswallop but you may be able to fob students off with it.

Americans, Canadians, Indians etc. do not require articles because there's no distinction to be made--it is clear that we are talking about the people.

With French, Chinese, Japanese etc. we need the article to make a distinction between the language and the people.

American is not a language, Canadian is not a language. However, French and Chinese are also languages.

Since 'British' doesn't function like a normal plural in this situation, we still need the article to make distinctions. The British people, the British Empire etc.

It's seems way too simple and I'm sure there are exceptions--feel free to piss on my bonfire.

[Gregor]

The Long Way Home has a good enough answer to give to the students.
I'm a little amazed that isanity is arguing with Henry; Mr. Cowell is completely right. Further, it's not really a matter of opinion. It's a basic grammar point that comes up at a fairly low level of most ESL texts.
If you want to be consistent with your students (and that's not a bad idea), the solution is the other way around. Instead of "The Chinese use chopsticks, but Americans use forks," how about this: "The Chinese use chopsticks, but the Americans use forks." This is correct usage according to Michael Swan (Practical English Usage, International Student's Edition, Oxford University Press ninth printing, 2003, pages 348-349).

Further, this works with any number of group adjectives, adding "the" makes it a group noun - the rich, the poor, the tall, the meek, the hungry. You could use other words in place of the article: "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses..." (engraved on the Statue of Liberty).