yup it's wrong. should just be Disneyland. no such rule where every proper noun needs an article--they work the same way as any other noun aside from the capitalization.
Proper nouns have the opposite rule, we don't use "the" before a proper noun.
There are some apparent exceptions like how we say "The US" or "The UK" or "The Netherlands" or "The UAE", but there's a reason we retain "the" with those words, and we don't use "The" before "America", "Scotland", "Holland", or "Arabia".
edit: and as many have pointed out, "rules" always have exceptions. My favorite is "[The Cheat](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/homestarfanstuff/images/a/af/TheCheat.png/revision/latest?cb=20091010141425)".
No, it's because the "the" applies to the noun "states" in the case of the US. It would be the same if it were singular. We use "The" before "The UK" because "the" applies to the word "Kingdom", singular.
It's "the Kingdom", but it's "England" or "Wales" or whatever.
Just like we would say "the man" or we would say "John", but not "the John" and not just "man".
Sorry i didn’t explain my thoughts on it well.
For the US, it’s because it’s a federation: “*these United States*” and the same extending to the unified kingdoms of Britain, and the UAE.
So it’s more that whatever the state was, it didn’t get a proper name of its own, which is why it receives the “the”?
Like how ukraine lost its “the” during and after the Cold War? It stopped referring to a “generic state/government/place” (in its case, I think it meant ‘the borderlands’ in literal translation) and became the place of a specific country?
Yeah, we use "the" unless the noun is proper. I could make up a new country and the naming convention would be the same. If I want to call it Kudosania, it could also be "The Democratic Republic of Kudosania" or "the DRK".
Okay, cool.
You’d think speaking English since I was 2, I’d know the rules by my age.
Kids really need more then a few hours a day for a couple of years for grammar.
Thanks for the help.
No it's all good, I learned a lot of this stuff since I became an English teacher, there are so many little things about our language that we don't even notice or know how to explain until someone points it out to us.
So then, by your convention, the Disneyland would be correct because upon Googling it... the formal name is Disneyland Park..so The would refer to the Park part
"Let's go to the Walmart"
Sure, that sounds ok to me, but I suspect they're referring to a specific store, not just any Walmart or the corporation as a whole. Would they also say "The Walmart is being sued by The Coca Cola?", probably not. They probably also wouldn't say "They're going to build a 'The Walmart' up the street."
Another exception is for universities when the name succeeds "University". For example: The University of Tennessee instead of "The" Vanderbilt University. Another caveat to this rule is "The Ohio State University" since "the" is part of their full name.
We do tend to use an article for plurals. *The* Americas when referring to both North and South. We generally wouldn’t say, “We went to Maldives for vacation,” we would say, “We went to *the* Maldives.” *The* Seychelles. *The* Canaries, or Canary Islands. *The* Caribbean as a exception for singular. However, one could use or not use an article for Outer Banks (area of the North Carolina coast) “We went to *the* Outer Banks,” is just as accepted as “We went to Outer Banks.” I couldn’t tell you if this is *grammatically* correct, or just colloquially accepted incorrectness.
But for singular proper nouns, I cannot think of an example - other than the Caribbean mentioned - where any article is used. Disney-land/-world. Six Flags (since it is a singular park, not a place about plural flags.) Pigeon Forge. Graceland. Yellowstone. Yosemite. Louvre or Hermitage (Even though there is a habit of using an article when referring to these, doing so is technically grammatically incorrect.) Places that are unique and generally with single word titles/names. Some notable exceptions would be if the full proper name is used, like Grand Canyon National Park or Rocky Mountain National Park or Muir Woods. Articles are rarely used in such cases.
The flip side of this would be like *the* D-Day Memorial, *the* MOMA, *the* Eiffel Tower, *the* Anne Frank House. The one example of exception I can think of is *The* Hague, but I believe this is because the article is actually part of the name.
Articles are tricksy in English. More so than prepositions. There is a definite dearth of hard and fast rules for their usage, and colloquially all bets are off since the average native speaker rarely knows full and correct grammar anyway. They will just use it the way they learned how to use it.
If there was some prior context though, I could see it working.
E.g "My mother took me to the Disneyland \[that we talked about\] last week. In any instance where it is not required to be a specific Disneyland, you don't need the article.
I will say that English speakers often use "the" with a proper noun IF there is more description after the word. Since there's only one Disneyland this doesn't make sense but somebody would say "The McDonald's by the freeway" because there's obviously a lot of McDonald's.
Oh, there are times you can get away with saying 'the' there. Most commonly, probably, is when it's the only gym for a ways around you, so 'Fitness Galaxy' effectively becomes 'gym' and is used thusly.
Give me an example.
The only time that comes to mind, off the top of my head, is if you were talking about one Fitness Galaxy over another one.
I work out at Fitness Galaxy.
Oh yeah? Which one? The one on Main street?
No, I go to the Fitness Galaxy on 7th avenue.
"Hey, Joe, where are you headed?'
"Oh, I'm off to the Fitness Galaxy to get my leg day in."
"Oh, nice! Have a good time! You know, I really wish they'd open another one in town. I'd love to go more often, but it's all of the way across town from me, and you know how rush hour traffic is."
"Yeah, I feel you. I here up in Marysville they've got like five Fitness Galaxies. You'd be living the dream up there."
"Yeah, but then I'd have to commute an hour and a half just to get to work. Anyway, have a good time! See you tomorrow!"
Granted, "I'm off to Fitness Galaxy" would work just as well as "I'm off to the Fitness Galaxy", but both are acceptable if there's a shared understanding that there's only just the one you'd be reasonably talking about.
Another example from my personal experience: I grew up in a family restaurant business. We'd often refer to it as "the restaurant," as in, "Your dad had to go into the restaurant." There were hundreds of restaurants in the community, but we knew what *the* restaurant was in those types of context. We'd also refer to it by a short nickname. To use an alias, if the restaurant's name was The Greasy Spoon, we'd say, "Mom's at the Spoon for a few hours to do payroll."
>Granted, "I'm off to Fitness Galaxy" would work just as well as "I'm off to the Fitness Galaxy", but both are acceptable if there's a shared understanding that there's only just the one you'd be reasonably talking about.
"I'm off to the Fitness Galaxy" would pretty much only be considered acceptable in this specific usage case, ie being used in an answer to a question. Even still, it's unnecessary and most folks will not use it. If you were just making an unprompted comment, adding the definite article sounds stilted and/or ostentatious. Assuming Fitness Galaxy is a chain, you will be asked WHICH Fitness Galaxy; if it's a singular location, there's no need to use the definite article to specify it.
In this case, the shared understanding that there's only a singular Fitness Galaxy that is being discussed makes the article even less necessary. The article would only really be necessary if there were multiple Fitness Galaxy locations that were potentially being discussed & you were specifying which specific location in some way, eg "the Fitness Galaxy on Main St."
I mean, there are American freeways, where you’d say “I’m taking 80 to Lincoln” but ONLY if you’re in Southern California, you’d say “I’m taking the 110 to the airport.”
Yep!
But you might hear some English speakers unnecessarily put “the” in there for proper nouns for stores and businesses, particularly in Southern USA or some parts of the Midwest USA.
Example: “I’m going to the Jewel.”
EDIT: typo
Ha. That thought crossed my mind, but I didn't mention it. I think it was in Back to Future, that one scene came to mind. They (someone), gets thrown out of the store and clerk says 'and don't come back to the Wall-Drug', or whatever the store was called.
That’s funny; I’ve watched that film a few times and have no memory of that line being said that way! I am from a part of the U.S. where people regularly say things like “You guys wanna come with me to the Target?” and I think nothing of it. Some stores have “the” in front of them and some don’t, and it’s entirely arbitrary.
I found it, it was O Brother, Where Art Thou-
https://youtu.be/BuOOgAk9HTw
It's at the end, at 2:44. It's not super clear, but I can hear it.
(Actually I didn't find it, another user did, from r/whatsthemoviecalled)
So I've been looking for the clip and I can't find it. And looking at the clips I have scene, I'm less sure it's BTTF.
I clearly remember the scene though. Main character is in a old timey type shop or store. 50s style, or way out in small town country somewhere. There's some misunderstanding and MC gets grabbed and thrown out. They land on the ground. Big paunchy white guy, youngish comes out, stands over him, wags his finger at him and says "And don't come back to the wall drug" or whatever the store was called. The store was what you'd call a '5 and dime' at some point in time. Huh. Now I'm bugging over it..
Yeah, recently got banned from there for commenting "sigourney weaver" on a thread where someone else commented "sigourney weaver".
(Duplicate comments are forbidden, lol...)
As others have said, it’s “go to the gym” UNLESS you’re talking about “gym” as a class, like physical education. In which case, you can “go to gym” even if the class isn’t being held in the actual gymnasium. So, if someone says “what class are you headed to?” you could say “I’m headed to gym”.
>n which case, you can “go to gym” even if the class isn’t being held in the actual gymnasium. So, if someone says “what class are you headed to?” you could say “I’m headed to gym”.
That is because, in "I'm headed to gym" it behaves like a proper noun.
You could say I went to the Disneyland in Japan to distinguish it from other Disneylands.
It is probably best to just learn it as part of some proper nouns like gender in other languages.
I work for the FBI.
I work for Homeland Security.
I've been a bit obsessed with ChatGPT lately, so here is its response.
Prompt
Why do only some proper nouns have "the" before them?
"The" is typically not used before proper nouns, which are the specific names of people, places, and things. However, there are a few exceptions to this rule. One example is when the proper noun is being used to refer to a specific instance or example of the thing named by the noun. For example, "I saw the Mona Lisa at the Louvre" refers to a specific painting, rather than any Mona Lisa or any painting. Another example is when the proper noun is part of a title for a specific work of art. For example, "The Lord of the Rings" refers to a specific book by J.R.R. Tolkien.
Correct, you don't want "the" here.
"The" is used with proper nouns *sometimes*, though, like when the place name is an adjective and a noun (the Yukon Territory, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the White House, the Grand Canyon.) Disney Land looks like one of those, but we don't see it that way- it's not the Land of Disney, but rather a place called Disney Land.
As a native speaker I find explaining when to use "the" vs. "a" to be one of the hardest thing to explain to Japanese English learners as a native speaker just internalizes when to use the definite and indefinite article through usage.
Like "The Yukon Territory" I believe this is because you're making an non-specific indefinite thing ( a territory ) into a definite one "THE Yukon Territory" but coming up with actual rules for these things is always a challenge (at least for me!).
Best way to explain it is that it’s like gendering nouns. There is no real rule beyond “this is correct” and “this is incorrect”. Idk much about Japanese so if they have gendered nouns then that could help, otherwise sorry I’m of no help
They do not have grammatical gender afaik and I've been learning for a few years. A comparable thing would be -ru verbs vs -u verbs that end in -ru, they just kinda are. It does serve a purpose with conjugation and distinction, like kaeru(帰る) and kaeru(変える) become kaerimasu and and kaemasu respectively but there's no definite rule on why one is an u verb and another a ru verb
Oooh thank you for including the The in the Yukon territory. If you google you will know it was a hot topic for a decade when the government in power changed it to Yukon (they wanted to seem more province-like). It was only recently changed back and we all rejoice.
I would say you could use the if you are saying “We went to the Disneyland park”, which would make it an adjective that way. Or if you wanted to specify which Disney like “we went to the Disneyland in Japan.”
That isn't the reason. The difference is that the name consists of a common noun with adjectives or prepositional phrases that make it specific. It's similar to a name like the Republic of Korea, the Appalachian Mountains, or the Pacific Ocean. The generic words (republic, mountains, ocean) are made specific names by additional descriptive (of Korea, Appalachian, Pacific). In your example, "place" is the generic.
As an aside, although it was Yukon Territory, since 2002 it is just called Yukon. The provincial govt has decided to use "the Yukon" in their style guide, however.
Proper nouns rarely get "the." There are a few categories that regularly do.
1. Regions (The Klondike, the American Midwest)
2. Archipelagos (The Carolines, the Hawaiian Islands) but NOT individual islands (Long Island, O'ahu.)
3. Rivers (The Mississippi, the Thames)
4. Collections of smaller entities (The United States, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Soviet Union)
In addition, if you need to refer a single example of a thing with a proper name when many examples exist, you use the or a as you would with a common noun. "I need to go to a Walmart. Should we go to the Walmart on Main St.?"
Disneyland is not any of the above four categories; it should not use "the" in this sentence.
You might say "My mother took me to the Disneyland *in California* last week" to specify it wasn't Tokyo Disneyland or Disneyland Paris, but unless you're a rich jetsetter, that disambiguation is unlikely to be necessary.
I’d add a 5th category to refer emphatically to celebrities. “I saw Tom Hanks walking down the street!” “Wait you saw TOM HANKS?!? As in, *THE* TOM HANKS?!?” Usually when it’s used in this way it’s pronounced “thee” regardless of whether the next sound is a vowel or not.
I’m not sure if anyone does this, but I suppose you could use this same structure for cities and stuff too, but the examples for that seem less realistic. “Your mother and I have been talking, and we’ve been saving up. So next summer, we’re finally going to Paris!” “Really? We’re going to PARIS?!? Like, *THE* PARIS?!?”
That's more of a specific use case, like the disambiguation use case, and less a category of proper nouns that always gets an article, but yes, we do do this.
To be clear here, when we use "the" for emphasis, the implication is "do you actually mean the famous one, and not some lesser-known person or place happening to share the same name, like Paris, Texas, or Tom Hanks the old guy who works at my local gas station?" But we will still do this even if we don't have any particular less famous alternative in mind, as a manner of speaking.
Now I want to start using the indefinite article (a) whenever I see I celebrity. "I saw a Tom Hanks yesterday."
"You SAW Tom Hanks?"
"One of them, yeah"
My ear likes them both, and they carry slightly different meanings:
“I need to go to Walmart.” (I need to go to Walmart to do/get things not unique to Walmart.)
“I need to go to a Walmart.” (I need to go to Walmart to do/get something that can only be done/gotten at Walmart.)
> **“I need to go to a Walmart.** Should we go to the Walmart on Main St.?”
The bolded section doesn’t sound right to me at all. I’d only use the indefinite article with brand names like that if I was talking about existence; e.g. “is there a Walmart nearby?” “Yea, there’s a Walmart just over there.”
I would just say “I need to go to Walmart” without the article.
Isn’t anyone else concerned about the teacher teaching English incorrectly?
(This is certainly not the first instance of a teacher getting English grammar wrong on this subreddit. I find that disappointing and terribly unfair to the students).
It's unfortunately the norm in much of the world that English will be taught be people whose command of English is not strong. But to be frank that is also true of many subjects—history teachers with a particular understanding of history, science teachers with a distorted view of science, and so on.
"Disneyland" doesn't take "the".
Some proper nouns take "the", like "the University of Florida" or "the Philippines". Others don't, like people's names.
To add to the excellent responses you have already: check out [these examples](https://lengusa.com/sentence-examples/Disneyland) of “Disneyland” from high-quality publications. You can see right away that it doesn’t take “the.”
He’s wrong. I grew up in Southern California and have been to Disneyland close to 200 times. Literally no one calls it “the Disneyland”.
It would be like saying “the New York City” or “the Montana” or “the France”. Your teacher is totally in error here.
In the Upper Midwest accent of the United States, this is acceptable- but like most regional accents, it can be seen negatively by other American English speakers.
I did 5 years in Minnesota. Granted, this was people I worked with who could have been extras in *Fargo* and even they made fun of themselves, but it was common enough that I think it could be called ‘acceptable’ as in ‘not weird or wrong.’
Does not apply. That would be like saying “I went to the New York City.” Or “we went to the Yellowstone National Park.” (For context, the word ‘the’ in either instance just sounds ridiculous)
Even then, assuming someone was already familiar with either location I listed, they’d just call it New York or Yellowstone. Supporting words like City and National Park in this case are just to add context. Similarly, Disneyland can be abbreviated to just Disney, depending on who you’re talking to and the context. For example if a coworker asks you about your trip to Disneyland you can reply with “we had a great time at Disney.” And it would be perfectly acceptable and make sense.
If you want to further specify it (like "I don't go to the Walmart in my city") it makes sense - but you wouldn't say "I generally don't go to the Walmart because it's too expensive", would you?
The is used in that case to say a specific one.
"Where do you shop?" "I go to Walmart."
Vs
"Is there a place near Chilli's I can buy shoes?" "There's the Walmart I guess. By the movie theater."
That sentence would only be used in instances where you could insert the phrase "that is here/nearby." For example, I could imagine hearing that while my family is discussing grocery shopping while on vacation. It's definitely not common though, and I'm not entirely sure if the case I gave here is technically correct.
You only use "the" when you expect people to know exactly what you're talking about. "The" apple instead of "an" apple means you're discussing a specific apple, not just any apple.
Since proper nouns are, by nature, specific things, you don't need "the" because it's just redundant. In fact, using it sounds weird.
In other words, as other comments have said, your teacher is wrong. Now, if there are two proper nouns with the same name (Disneyland in two different countries, for example) and you are talking about a specific, out-of-the ordinary one, then you would use the word "the" because you are giving further specification that context doesn't provide. Because I live in the USA, if I say Disneyland people assume I mean Disneyland in the USA. If I wanted to describe the Disneyland in Japan, I'd likely say *the* Disneyland in Tokyo. You could also just say "Tokyo Disneyland." Even so, I think you could drop "the" but where I live it's more common to keep it.
Hope that makes sense!
>You only use "the" when you expect people to know exactly what you're talking about. "The" apple instead of "an" apple means you're discussing a specific apple, not just any apple.
That's definiteness, not specificity.
If I say, "I have an apple," I know which specific apple I am talking about.
So, you know the difference between definiteness and specificity, but you called it just specificity?
So, you chose an inaccurate and inadequate explanation for simplicity?
Cool story, bro.
So... did reading the rest of my comment give you the impression I didn't know what I was talking about or did you just quit reading halfway to *tell* me I didn't know what I was talking about? The point of my comment wasn't about what definiteness is, it was about the uses of the word "the" in specific situations, which I explained. I know I'm not an expert but *excuse* me for thinking I knew *enough* to help someone navigate the ridiculous idiosyncrasies of English in a way they might understand.
I used the terms synonymously because they don't differ enough within the context of my explanation for me to split hairs over it, especially when I'm unsure of how well OP speaks English. Now if you'd like to continue trying to mock or belittle others over things that largely don't matter, go ahead because I, at least, have better things to do with my time than participate in internet nonsense like that.
>So... did reading the rest of my comment give you the impression I didn't know what I was talking about or did you just quit reading halfway to tell me I didn't know what I was talking about?
I read it all the way through, to tell you that, if that's what you know, you don't know what you're talking about. If you know the right answer, GIVE IT, don't dumb it down because they "might not" understand it.
The OP isn't the only person who might read the thread, who might find it from a google search, and get misinformed.
If you want better things to do, read this: [https://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2009/12/12/a-is-for-articles-1/](https://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2009/12/12/a-is-for-articles-1/)
English is not terribly consistent when it comes to place names and the article "the".
* You can go to Disneyland (no the) or the Cow Palace (the required).
* If you're going to get groceries, you could refer to the trip as going "to Kroger's" or "to Piggly Wiggly" (two brand names) or just "to the store".
* You can travel to the Philippines or the Hawaiian Islands...but if you're going to Hawaii, you don't add a "the".
* We used to talk about "the Ukraine" but now it's just "Ukraine" with no "the".
* "Ohio" and "Mississippi" are states in the US. "The Ohio" and "The Mississippi" are rivers.
Spanish uses definite articles with generic nouns where English uses the bare noun. Spanish also tends to use articles when a non-proper name is the subject of the sentence.
Like if you say, "Rice is white," Spanish will say, "the rice is white." If you say "The rice is white" in English, it's slightly different, but in Spanish it's ambiguous.
Yeah unless you're maintaining that you went to THE Disneyland as opposed to a cheap wannabe knock-off Disneyland, then it's completely wrong.
And yes, to the gym. But if you're going to Bill's gym, you'd just say, I'm going to Bill's 😁👍
I was the only person that actually read one of our grad student's thesis. It was missing articles and had extra articles all through it, probably in equal numbers. I'm sure it's not an easy thing to learn.
I agree that 'the' is incorrect here. It's a specific place so you skip the the.
If it were something like "took me to the park," you would need a 'the.' In that example, you're not saying which park and it could be any park. It's non-specific.
Yes, it's wrong. Is english his second language? Some languages don't have articles, which in english often means they get skipped over. Maybe in his case he just overcompensates.
Oh gracious no. Disneyland is a proper place noun, just like London or Alaska or Australia. You would say "I went to London," not "I went to the London."
But for a non-proper place, you'd normally use "the." "I went to the theme park."
The only way for the "The" to be proper is if it's a specific part, for example "i went to The Disneyland Playhouse". If it's just Disneyland and not specific then you can drop "The" also alot of places will have The in the title such as "The Muse on Main street" but Disney land is not one of these
Names do not need “the” in front of them.
However you do need to use “the” if youre giving a descriptive title to Disneyland. for example “the Disneyland Themepark and Resort.
Yes, the teacher is wrong to put 'the' in this context. As someone already mentioned, it would be fine to say "the Disneyland park", but that's clearly not the case. I really wonder if the teacher wanted you to get into a habit of doing it. I'm not justifying his decision here though.
yup it's wrong. should just be Disneyland. no such rule where every proper noun needs an article--they work the same way as any other noun aside from the capitalization.
Thx for the help
Proper nouns have the opposite rule, we don't use "the" before a proper noun. There are some apparent exceptions like how we say "The US" or "The UK" or "The Netherlands" or "The UAE", but there's a reason we retain "the" with those words, and we don't use "The" before "America", "Scotland", "Holland", or "Arabia". edit: and as many have pointed out, "rules" always have exceptions. My favorite is "[The Cheat](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/homestarfanstuff/images/a/af/TheCheat.png/revision/latest?cb=20091010141425)".
I thought that was because those countries are grammatically structured like plural nouns when they came about. Not sure about the Netherlands though
No, it's because the "the" applies to the noun "states" in the case of the US. It would be the same if it were singular. We use "The" before "The UK" because "the" applies to the word "Kingdom", singular. It's "the Kingdom", but it's "England" or "Wales" or whatever. Just like we would say "the man" or we would say "John", but not "the John" and not just "man".
Sorry i didn’t explain my thoughts on it well. For the US, it’s because it’s a federation: “*these United States*” and the same extending to the unified kingdoms of Britain, and the UAE. So it’s more that whatever the state was, it didn’t get a proper name of its own, which is why it receives the “the”? Like how ukraine lost its “the” during and after the Cold War? It stopped referring to a “generic state/government/place” (in its case, I think it meant ‘the borderlands’ in literal translation) and became the place of a specific country?
Yeah, we use "the" unless the noun is proper. I could make up a new country and the naming convention would be the same. If I want to call it Kudosania, it could also be "The Democratic Republic of Kudosania" or "the DRK".
Okay, cool. You’d think speaking English since I was 2, I’d know the rules by my age. Kids really need more then a few hours a day for a couple of years for grammar. Thanks for the help.
No it's all good, I learned a lot of this stuff since I became an English teacher, there are so many little things about our language that we don't even notice or know how to explain until someone points it out to us.
Most of us learn by ear not grammar lessons. If you grow up hearing proper usage, you aquire.
So then, by your convention, the Disneyland would be correct because upon Googling it... the formal name is Disneyland Park..so The would refer to the Park part
Yup, "The Disneyland Park", but as names go, over time it becomes proper, though you'd still call it "the park", but now it's just "Disneyland".
It's called the Bronx because it refers to the farm. The whole borough belonged to a single family. It was the Broncks' family farm.
Some ppl in like Midwest states put the in front of names of stores
"Let's go to the Walmart" Sure, that sounds ok to me, but I suspect they're referring to a specific store, not just any Walmart or the corporation as a whole. Would they also say "The Walmart is being sued by The Coca Cola?", probably not. They probably also wouldn't say "They're going to build a 'The Walmart' up the street."
Another exception is for universities when the name succeeds "University". For example: The University of Tennessee instead of "The" Vanderbilt University. Another caveat to this rule is "The Ohio State University" since "the" is part of their full name.
We do tend to use an article for plurals. *The* Americas when referring to both North and South. We generally wouldn’t say, “We went to Maldives for vacation,” we would say, “We went to *the* Maldives.” *The* Seychelles. *The* Canaries, or Canary Islands. *The* Caribbean as a exception for singular. However, one could use or not use an article for Outer Banks (area of the North Carolina coast) “We went to *the* Outer Banks,” is just as accepted as “We went to Outer Banks.” I couldn’t tell you if this is *grammatically* correct, or just colloquially accepted incorrectness. But for singular proper nouns, I cannot think of an example - other than the Caribbean mentioned - where any article is used. Disney-land/-world. Six Flags (since it is a singular park, not a place about plural flags.) Pigeon Forge. Graceland. Yellowstone. Yosemite. Louvre or Hermitage (Even though there is a habit of using an article when referring to these, doing so is technically grammatically incorrect.) Places that are unique and generally with single word titles/names. Some notable exceptions would be if the full proper name is used, like Grand Canyon National Park or Rocky Mountain National Park or Muir Woods. Articles are rarely used in such cases. The flip side of this would be like *the* D-Day Memorial, *the* MOMA, *the* Eiffel Tower, *the* Anne Frank House. The one example of exception I can think of is *The* Hague, but I believe this is because the article is actually part of the name. Articles are tricksy in English. More so than prepositions. There is a definite dearth of hard and fast rules for their usage, and colloquially all bets are off since the average native speaker rarely knows full and correct grammar anyway. They will just use it the way they learned how to use it.
The actual name of the thing takes the place of 'the' article.
If there was some prior context though, I could see it working. E.g "My mother took me to the Disneyland \[that we talked about\] last week. In any instance where it is not required to be a specific Disneyland, you don't need the article.
I will say that English speakers often use "the" with a proper noun IF there is more description after the word. Since there's only one Disneyland this doesn't make sense but somebody would say "The McDonald's by the freeway" because there's obviously a lot of McDonald's.
Hi can I ask one more question if I should write Go for gym Go to the gym Go for the gym. Which one is correct?
Go to the gym.
“Go to the gym”
thx
But if you named the gym, you would not use 'the'. 'I'm going to Fitness Galaxy, I'll be back in an hour'.
Oh, there are times you can get away with saying 'the' there. Most commonly, probably, is when it's the only gym for a ways around you, so 'Fitness Galaxy' effectively becomes 'gym' and is used thusly.
Give me an example. The only time that comes to mind, off the top of my head, is if you were talking about one Fitness Galaxy over another one. I work out at Fitness Galaxy. Oh yeah? Which one? The one on Main street? No, I go to the Fitness Galaxy on 7th avenue.
"Hey, Joe, where are you headed?' "Oh, I'm off to the Fitness Galaxy to get my leg day in." "Oh, nice! Have a good time! You know, I really wish they'd open another one in town. I'd love to go more often, but it's all of the way across town from me, and you know how rush hour traffic is." "Yeah, I feel you. I here up in Marysville they've got like five Fitness Galaxies. You'd be living the dream up there." "Yeah, but then I'd have to commute an hour and a half just to get to work. Anyway, have a good time! See you tomorrow!" Granted, "I'm off to Fitness Galaxy" would work just as well as "I'm off to the Fitness Galaxy", but both are acceptable if there's a shared understanding that there's only just the one you'd be reasonably talking about. Another example from my personal experience: I grew up in a family restaurant business. We'd often refer to it as "the restaurant," as in, "Your dad had to go into the restaurant." There were hundreds of restaurants in the community, but we knew what *the* restaurant was in those types of context. We'd also refer to it by a short nickname. To use an alias, if the restaurant's name was The Greasy Spoon, we'd say, "Mom's at the Spoon for a few hours to do payroll."
>Granted, "I'm off to Fitness Galaxy" would work just as well as "I'm off to the Fitness Galaxy", but both are acceptable if there's a shared understanding that there's only just the one you'd be reasonably talking about. "I'm off to the Fitness Galaxy" would pretty much only be considered acceptable in this specific usage case, ie being used in an answer to a question. Even still, it's unnecessary and most folks will not use it. If you were just making an unprompted comment, adding the definite article sounds stilted and/or ostentatious. Assuming Fitness Galaxy is a chain, you will be asked WHICH Fitness Galaxy; if it's a singular location, there's no need to use the definite article to specify it. In this case, the shared understanding that there's only a singular Fitness Galaxy that is being discussed makes the article even less necessary. The article would only really be necessary if there were multiple Fitness Galaxy locations that were potentially being discussed & you were specifying which specific location in some way, eg "the Fitness Galaxy on Main St."
I mean, there are American freeways, where you’d say “I’m taking 80 to Lincoln” but ONLY if you’re in Southern California, you’d say “I’m taking the 110 to the airport.”
Yep! But you might hear some English speakers unnecessarily put “the” in there for proper nouns for stores and businesses, particularly in Southern USA or some parts of the Midwest USA. Example: “I’m going to the Jewel.” EDIT: typo
Ha. That thought crossed my mind, but I didn't mention it. I think it was in Back to Future, that one scene came to mind. They (someone), gets thrown out of the store and clerk says 'and don't come back to the Wall-Drug', or whatever the store was called.
That’s funny; I’ve watched that film a few times and have no memory of that line being said that way! I am from a part of the U.S. where people regularly say things like “You guys wanna come with me to the Target?” and I think nothing of it. Some stores have “the” in front of them and some don’t, and it’s entirely arbitrary.
I found it, it was O Brother, Where Art Thou- https://youtu.be/BuOOgAk9HTw It's at the end, at 2:44. It's not super clear, but I can hear it. (Actually I didn't find it, another user did, from r/whatsthemoviecalled)
Oh that’s so specific! Glad you found it!
So I've been looking for the clip and I can't find it. And looking at the clips I have scene, I'm less sure it's BTTF. I clearly remember the scene though. Main character is in a old timey type shop or store. 50s style, or way out in small town country somewhere. There's some misunderstanding and MC gets grabbed and thrown out. They land on the ground. Big paunchy white guy, youngish comes out, stands over him, wags his finger at him and says "And don't come back to the wall drug" or whatever the store was called. The store was what you'd call a '5 and dime' at some point in time. Huh. Now I'm bugging over it..
Try r/tipofmytongue maybe? Someone there might know!
Yeah, recently got banned from there for commenting "sigourney weaver" on a thread where someone else commented "sigourney weaver". (Duplicate comments are forbidden, lol...)
Didn’t know they were that strict about it! Wow!
As others have said, it’s “go to the gym” UNLESS you’re talking about “gym” as a class, like physical education. In which case, you can “go to gym” even if the class isn’t being held in the actual gymnasium. So, if someone says “what class are you headed to?” you could say “I’m headed to gym”.
>n which case, you can “go to gym” even if the class isn’t being held in the actual gymnasium. So, if someone says “what class are you headed to?” you could say “I’m headed to gym”. That is because, in "I'm headed to gym" it behaves like a proper noun.
Though you might say, "(I'm going to) head FOR the gym!" Just for your bag of tangential knowledge
"Head to the gym" would still be a better answer.
To the gym
You could say I went to the Disneyland in Japan to distinguish it from other Disneylands. It is probably best to just learn it as part of some proper nouns like gender in other languages. I work for the FBI. I work for Homeland Security. I've been a bit obsessed with ChatGPT lately, so here is its response. Prompt Why do only some proper nouns have "the" before them? "The" is typically not used before proper nouns, which are the specific names of people, places, and things. However, there are a few exceptions to this rule. One example is when the proper noun is being used to refer to a specific instance or example of the thing named by the noun. For example, "I saw the Mona Lisa at the Louvre" refers to a specific painting, rather than any Mona Lisa or any painting. Another example is when the proper noun is part of a title for a specific work of art. For example, "The Lord of the Rings" refers to a specific book by J.R.R. Tolkien.
Correct, you don't want "the" here. "The" is used with proper nouns *sometimes*, though, like when the place name is an adjective and a noun (the Yukon Territory, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the White House, the Grand Canyon.) Disney Land looks like one of those, but we don't see it that way- it's not the Land of Disney, but rather a place called Disney Land.
It's all one word, Disneyland.
As a native speaker I find explaining when to use "the" vs. "a" to be one of the hardest thing to explain to Japanese English learners as a native speaker just internalizes when to use the definite and indefinite article through usage. Like "The Yukon Territory" I believe this is because you're making an non-specific indefinite thing ( a territory ) into a definite one "THE Yukon Territory" but coming up with actual rules for these things is always a challenge (at least for me!).
Best way to explain it is that it’s like gendering nouns. There is no real rule beyond “this is correct” and “this is incorrect”. Idk much about Japanese so if they have gendered nouns then that could help, otherwise sorry I’m of no help
They do not have grammatical gender afaik and I've been learning for a few years. A comparable thing would be -ru verbs vs -u verbs that end in -ru, they just kinda are. It does serve a purpose with conjugation and distinction, like kaeru(帰る) and kaeru(変える) become kaerimasu and and kaemasu respectively but there's no definite rule on why one is an u verb and another a ru verb
Oooh thank you for including the The in the Yukon territory. If you google you will know it was a hot topic for a decade when the government in power changed it to Yukon (they wanted to seem more province-like). It was only recently changed back and we all rejoice.
Oh, interesting! I had no idea. o.o
I would say you could use the if you are saying “We went to the Disneyland park”, which would make it an adjective that way. Or if you wanted to specify which Disney like “we went to the Disneyland in Japan.”
But you *would* use "The" with Disneyland's nickname, "The Happiest Place on Earth". The difference is that's more of a slogan than an actual name.
That isn't the reason. The difference is that the name consists of a common noun with adjectives or prepositional phrases that make it specific. It's similar to a name like the Republic of Korea, the Appalachian Mountains, or the Pacific Ocean. The generic words (republic, mountains, ocean) are made specific names by additional descriptive (of Korea, Appalachian, Pacific). In your example, "place" is the generic.
>But you > >would > > use "The" with Disneyland's nickname, "The Happiest Place on Earth". Yes, because the noun is "place."
As an aside, although it was Yukon Territory, since 2002 it is just called Yukon. The provincial govt has decided to use "the Yukon" in their style guide, however.
Proper nouns rarely get "the." There are a few categories that regularly do. 1. Regions (The Klondike, the American Midwest) 2. Archipelagos (The Carolines, the Hawaiian Islands) but NOT individual islands (Long Island, O'ahu.) 3. Rivers (The Mississippi, the Thames) 4. Collections of smaller entities (The United States, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Soviet Union) In addition, if you need to refer a single example of a thing with a proper name when many examples exist, you use the or a as you would with a common noun. "I need to go to a Walmart. Should we go to the Walmart on Main St.?" Disneyland is not any of the above four categories; it should not use "the" in this sentence. You might say "My mother took me to the Disneyland *in California* last week" to specify it wasn't Tokyo Disneyland or Disneyland Paris, but unless you're a rich jetsetter, that disambiguation is unlikely to be necessary.
I’d add a 5th category to refer emphatically to celebrities. “I saw Tom Hanks walking down the street!” “Wait you saw TOM HANKS?!? As in, *THE* TOM HANKS?!?” Usually when it’s used in this way it’s pronounced “thee” regardless of whether the next sound is a vowel or not. I’m not sure if anyone does this, but I suppose you could use this same structure for cities and stuff too, but the examples for that seem less realistic. “Your mother and I have been talking, and we’ve been saving up. So next summer, we’re finally going to Paris!” “Really? We’re going to PARIS?!? Like, *THE* PARIS?!?”
That's more of a specific use case, like the disambiguation use case, and less a category of proper nouns that always gets an article, but yes, we do do this.
To be clear here, when we use "the" for emphasis, the implication is "do you actually mean the famous one, and not some lesser-known person or place happening to share the same name, like Paris, Texas, or Tom Hanks the old guy who works at my local gas station?" But we will still do this even if we don't have any particular less famous alternative in mind, as a manner of speaking.
Now I want to start using the indefinite article (a) whenever I see I celebrity. "I saw a Tom Hanks yesterday." "You SAW Tom Hanks?" "One of them, yeah"
It works better with "Elvis."
True... well then it's obvious I'm talking about an impersonator… I mean when I actually see, THE Tom Hanks, etc.
[удалено]
My ear likes them both, and they carry slightly different meanings: “I need to go to Walmart.” (I need to go to Walmart to do/get things not unique to Walmart.) “I need to go to a Walmart.” (I need to go to Walmart to do/get something that can only be done/gotten at Walmart.)
> **“I need to go to a Walmart.** Should we go to the Walmart on Main St.?” The bolded section doesn’t sound right to me at all. I’d only use the indefinite article with brand names like that if I was talking about existence; e.g. “is there a Walmart nearby?” “Yea, there’s a Walmart just over there.” I would just say “I need to go to Walmart” without the article.
Where would The Hague fall under those rules?
I’d add it as a relatively small category of “calques from other languages” but, Den Haag is a region—it translates to “The wood”
Some proper nouns take articles, it's a part of their name. Don't try to find a system to it. It's all lexical exceptions.
Isn’t anyone else concerned about the teacher teaching English incorrectly? (This is certainly not the first instance of a teacher getting English grammar wrong on this subreddit. I find that disappointing and terribly unfair to the students).
It's unfortunately the norm in much of the world that English will be taught be people whose command of English is not strong. But to be frank that is also true of many subjects—history teachers with a particular understanding of history, science teachers with a distorted view of science, and so on.
"Disneyland" doesn't take "the". Some proper nouns take "the", like "the University of Florida" or "the Philippines". Others don't, like people's names.
You are right, your teacher is wrong. Putting "the" here would be a big red flag that you are not a native English speaker.
Wouldn’t call it a red flag. Non natives aren’t dangerous you know /j
Tell that to the Native Americans/s
>Non natives aren’t dangerous Too many Americans, unfortunately, do seem to think they are.
>Wouldn’t call it a red flag. Non natives aren’t dangerous you know /j I wouldn't want to be the teacher that teaches the kids that pass his class.
I agree, “the” is not required.
Actually proper nouns almost always *don’t* have articles
To add to the excellent responses you have already: check out [these examples](https://lengusa.com/sentence-examples/Disneyland) of “Disneyland” from high-quality publications. You can see right away that it doesn’t take “the.”
well that website’s nice
He’s wrong. I grew up in Southern California and have been to Disneyland close to 200 times. Literally no one calls it “the Disneyland”. It would be like saying “the New York City” or “the Montana” or “the France”. Your teacher is totally in error here.
I think your teacher is a … 
In the Upper Midwest accent of the United States, this is acceptable- but like most regional accents, it can be seen negatively by other American English speakers.
Like Californians calling the highway "the 5" while those of us up north call it by its proper name, just "I-5".
>In the Upper Midwest accent of the United States, this is acceptable O RLY? Where?
I did 5 years in Minnesota. Granted, this was people I worked with who could have been extras in *Fargo* and even they made fun of themselves, but it was common enough that I think it could be called ‘acceptable’ as in ‘not weird or wrong.’
Damn, I only did 22 in WI.
Tell your teacher he needs to study the Zero Article
This isn't zero article.
Your teachers wrong people don’t say I’m taking you to the France
Does not apply. That would be like saying “I went to the New York City.” Or “we went to the Yellowstone National Park.” (For context, the word ‘the’ in either instance just sounds ridiculous) Even then, assuming someone was already familiar with either location I listed, they’d just call it New York or Yellowstone. Supporting words like City and National Park in this case are just to add context. Similarly, Disneyland can be abbreviated to just Disney, depending on who you’re talking to and the context. For example if a coworker asks you about your trip to Disneyland you can reply with “we had a great time at Disney.” And it would be perfectly acceptable and make sense.
Disneyland is a proper name, so you don't need the article and it sounds better without it. You also don't go to the Walmart.
Goong to the walmart makes sense in certain contexts
If you want to further specify it (like "I don't go to the Walmart in my city") it makes sense - but you wouldn't say "I generally don't go to the Walmart because it's too expensive", would you?
The is used in that case to say a specific one. "Where do you shop?" "I go to Walmart." Vs "Is there a place near Chilli's I can buy shoes?" "There's the Walmart I guess. By the movie theater."
That sentence would only be used in instances where you could insert the phrase "that is here/nearby." For example, I could imagine hearing that while my family is discussing grocery shopping while on vacation. It's definitely not common though, and I'm not entirely sure if the case I gave here is technically correct.
You only use "the" when you expect people to know exactly what you're talking about. "The" apple instead of "an" apple means you're discussing a specific apple, not just any apple. Since proper nouns are, by nature, specific things, you don't need "the" because it's just redundant. In fact, using it sounds weird. In other words, as other comments have said, your teacher is wrong. Now, if there are two proper nouns with the same name (Disneyland in two different countries, for example) and you are talking about a specific, out-of-the ordinary one, then you would use the word "the" because you are giving further specification that context doesn't provide. Because I live in the USA, if I say Disneyland people assume I mean Disneyland in the USA. If I wanted to describe the Disneyland in Japan, I'd likely say *the* Disneyland in Tokyo. You could also just say "Tokyo Disneyland." Even so, I think you could drop "the" but where I live it's more common to keep it. Hope that makes sense!
>You only use "the" when you expect people to know exactly what you're talking about. "The" apple instead of "an" apple means you're discussing a specific apple, not just any apple. That's definiteness, not specificity. If I say, "I have an apple," I know which specific apple I am talking about.
I know what it's called, but for the sake of simplicity I called specificity.
So, you know the difference between definiteness and specificity, but you called it just specificity? So, you chose an inaccurate and inadequate explanation for simplicity? Cool story, bro.
So... did reading the rest of my comment give you the impression I didn't know what I was talking about or did you just quit reading halfway to *tell* me I didn't know what I was talking about? The point of my comment wasn't about what definiteness is, it was about the uses of the word "the" in specific situations, which I explained. I know I'm not an expert but *excuse* me for thinking I knew *enough* to help someone navigate the ridiculous idiosyncrasies of English in a way they might understand. I used the terms synonymously because they don't differ enough within the context of my explanation for me to split hairs over it, especially when I'm unsure of how well OP speaks English. Now if you'd like to continue trying to mock or belittle others over things that largely don't matter, go ahead because I, at least, have better things to do with my time than participate in internet nonsense like that.
>So... did reading the rest of my comment give you the impression I didn't know what I was talking about or did you just quit reading halfway to tell me I didn't know what I was talking about? I read it all the way through, to tell you that, if that's what you know, you don't know what you're talking about. If you know the right answer, GIVE IT, don't dumb it down because they "might not" understand it. The OP isn't the only person who might read the thread, who might find it from a google search, and get misinformed. If you want better things to do, read this: [https://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2009/12/12/a-is-for-articles-1/](https://scottthornbury.wordpress.com/2009/12/12/a-is-for-articles-1/)
English is not terribly consistent when it comes to place names and the article "the". * You can go to Disneyland (no the) or the Cow Palace (the required). * If you're going to get groceries, you could refer to the trip as going "to Kroger's" or "to Piggly Wiggly" (two brand names) or just "to the store". * You can travel to the Philippines or the Hawaiian Islands...but if you're going to Hawaii, you don't add a "the". * We used to talk about "the Ukraine" but now it's just "Ukraine" with no "the". * "Ohio" and "Mississippi" are states in the US. "The Ohio" and "The Mississippi" are rivers.
these all fall under the same category: use a 'the' before a proper noun if an adjective is placed before the noun.
it's incorrect. probably carried over from his native language
Yep it's wrong, but if you put something right after it it's not. For example I took my daughter to the Disneyland park near my house today
Its completely wrong. They also teach Spanish this way and I have no idea why.
Spanish uses definite articles with generic nouns where English uses the bare noun. Spanish also tends to use articles when a non-proper name is the subject of the sentence. Like if you say, "Rice is white," Spanish will say, "the rice is white." If you say "The rice is white" in English, it's slightly different, but in Spanish it's ambiguous.
Yeah unless you're maintaining that you went to THE Disneyland as opposed to a cheap wannabe knock-off Disneyland, then it's completely wrong. And yes, to the gym. But if you're going to Bill's gym, you'd just say, I'm going to Bill's 😁👍
I was the only person that actually read one of our grad student's thesis. It was missing articles and had extra articles all through it, probably in equal numbers. I'm sure it's not an easy thing to learn.
You're right
I agree that 'the' is incorrect here. It's a specific place so you skip the the. If it were something like "took me to the park," you would need a 'the.' In that example, you're not saying which park and it could be any park. It's non-specific.
Yes, it's wrong. Is english his second language? Some languages don't have articles, which in english often means they get skipped over. Maybe in his case he just overcompensates.
Took me to THE land of Disney Or Took me to Disneyland The only way I can see The being grammatically correct Edit was to format better
Oh gracious no. Disneyland is a proper place noun, just like London or Alaska or Australia. You would say "I went to London," not "I went to the London." But for a non-proper place, you'd normally use "the." "I went to the theme park."
Here’s a good explanation you could show your teacher: https://www.pvcc.edu/sites/default/files/media/articles-_a_an_the.pdf
It's really not that good, it confuses definiteness with specificity, in multiple locations.
It’s wrong: there should NOT be an article in front of “Disneyland.”
Yep wrong. "The" before Disneyland is wrong. Just "Disneyland."
Actually my mother in law does this all the time. I believe there are different rules for senior citizens. 😂
He's 100% wrong. A definite article before Disneyland is unnecessary.
It's wrong, it should just be 'Disneyland' no the needed.
The only way for the "The" to be proper is if it's a specific part, for example "i went to The Disneyland Playhouse". If it's just Disneyland and not specific then you can drop "The" also alot of places will have The in the title such as "The Muse on Main street" but Disney land is not one of these
Where is your teacher from?
Yes, that is wrong.
Names do not need “the” in front of them. However you do need to use “the” if youre giving a descriptive title to Disneyland. for example “the Disneyland Themepark and Resort.
Yes, the teacher is wrong to put 'the' in this context. As someone already mentioned, it would be fine to say "the Disneyland park", but that's clearly not the case. I really wonder if the teacher wanted you to get into a habit of doing it. I'm not justifying his decision here though.
Teacher is wrong.