冠詞を付けるか，付けないか?
前回は主に定冠詞と不定冠詞の選択基準について検討したが，今回は冠詞を付けないケースについて検討する。法律文では冠詞の付いていない名詞が随所に登場する。Upon request of the Licensorや，after written notice of such breach is received by，あるいはas consideration for such clicksなど挙げればきりがないが，こうした無冠詞用法の背景には何か原則のようなものはないか。英文を書く際はぜひクリアしておきたい課題の一つである。今回も生成AIを使って問答を試みた。AIはMicrosoftのCopilot (無料版)。
問
I have a question about the usage of an article in English writing. Let me call your attention to the the following contract provision: "....unless Affiliate objects in writing thereto within 60 days of receipt of the relevant Statement....." In this sentence, it seems that placing the article "the" before "receipt" would be a more natural way of writing, because the word is modified by "of the relevant Statement...” and therefore specific. Why didn’t the legal drafter put the article?
回答
That’s a great question! In English, the use of articles can sometimes be tricky, especially in legal language which often has its own conventions.
In the phrase you provided, “within 60 days of receipt of the relevant Statement”, the word “receipt” is used as an uncountable noun. Uncountable nouns are substances, concepts etc that we cannot divide into separate elements. We cannot “count” them. For example, we talk about “sugar” or “knowledge”, but not “a sugar” or “a knowledge”.
In this context, “receipt” refers to the action or process of receiving something, which is a concept and therefore uncountable. That’s why it doesn’t have an article before it.
However, if we were talking about a specific instance or example of receiving something, then we would use the definite article “the”. For example, “the receipt of your letter was a pleasant surprise”.
So, in your contract provision, the drafter is referring to the concept of receiving something (in this case, the relevant Statement), not a specific instance of receiving something. That’s why there is no article before “receipt”.
I hope this helps clarify the usage for you! If you have any more questions about English grammar or anything else, feel free to ask.
問
Are your suggestions also applicable to other English writings than those in legal contexts?
回答
Yes, absolutely! The rules about the use of articles with countable and uncountable nouns apply to all forms of English writing, not just legal contexts.
In general English writing, we use “the” (the definite article) before a noun when we believe the reader or listener knows exactly what we are referring to. We also use “the” when the noun is something that’s already been mentioned, is unique, or when it’s clear in the situation what we’re referring to.
On the other hand, we often use no article with uncountable nouns when we are talking about something in general, not a specific instance.
So, the explanation I provided earlier about the use of articles with “receipt” would apply to any English text, whether it’s a legal document, a novel, a news article, or a casual email.
Remember, English is a flexible language and context is key. The same word can be countable in one context and uncountable in another. For example, “I’d like a coffee” (countable) vs. “I drink coffee every morning” (uncountable).
I hope this helps! If you have more questions about English usage or anything else, feel free to ask.
後記
英文契約の“within 60 days of receipt of the relevant Statement”といったフレーズで，receiptになぜ定冠詞を付けないのか明確な答が知りたかった。AIによると，法律英語には慣用的表現が多く，冠詞の用法は時に厄介(tricky)であるという。この場合のreceiptは不可算名詞として使用されている。もし冠詞を付けるとすれば定冠詞ということになるが，ここでは何かを受け取る行為やプロセスを概念的に表現したもので，具体的な事例を述べたものではない。したがって冠詞は付けない。AIはこの点を具体的な例文を示しながらわかりやすく解説している。しかも，こうした原則は法律分野以外でも一様に当てはまるという。
AIの回答を簡単にまとめると以上のようになり，確かにそのとおりだと思う。しかし，英作文や英訳の際に，名詞を不可算名詞として使用するとしても，抽象的な概念として使用するか，それとも具体的な事例として使用するかは自分で判断しなければならない。これは英語の発想とも深く関係しており，簡単に答が出てくるわけではない。その解決のためには，在り来りな言い方かもしれないが，日頃から英語に親しみ，書く練習を積み重ねること。それ以外に今のところ名案が浮かばない。
前回は主に定冠詞と不定冠詞の選択基準について検討したが，今回は冠詞を付けないケースについて検討する。法律文では冠詞の付いていない名詞が随所に登場する。Upon request of the Licensorや，after written notice of such breach is received by，あるいはas consideration for such clicksなど挙げればきりがないが，こうした無冠詞用法の背景には何か原則のようなものはないか。英文を書く際はぜひクリアしておきたい課題の一つである。今回も生成AIを使って問答を試みた。AIはMicrosoftのCopilot (無料版)。
問
I have a question about the usage of an article in English writing. Let me call your attention to the the following contract provision: "....unless Affiliate objects in writing thereto within 60 days of receipt of the relevant Statement....." In this sentence, it seems that placing the article "the" before "receipt" would be a more natural way of writing, because the word is modified by "of the relevant Statement...” and therefore specific. Why didn’t the legal drafter put the article?
回答
That’s a great question! In English, the use of articles can sometimes be tricky, especially in legal language which often has its own conventions.
In the phrase you provided, “within 60 days of receipt of the relevant Statement”, the word “receipt” is used as an uncountable noun. Uncountable nouns are substances, concepts etc that we cannot divide into separate elements. We cannot “count” them. For example, we talk about “sugar” or “knowledge”, but not “a sugar” or “a knowledge”.
In this context, “receipt” refers to the action or process of receiving something, which is a concept and therefore uncountable. That’s why it doesn’t have an article before it.
However, if we were talking about a specific instance or example of receiving something, then we would use the definite article “the”. For example, “the receipt of your letter was a pleasant surprise”.
So, in your contract provision, the drafter is referring to the concept of receiving something (in this case, the relevant Statement), not a specific instance of receiving something. That’s why there is no article before “receipt”.
I hope this helps clarify the usage for you! If you have any more questions about English grammar or anything else, feel free to ask.
問
Are your suggestions also applicable to other English writings than those in legal contexts?
回答
Yes, absolutely! The rules about the use of articles with countable and uncountable nouns apply to all forms of English writing, not just legal contexts.
In general English writing, we use “the” (the definite article) before a noun when we believe the reader or listener knows exactly what we are referring to. We also use “the” when the noun is something that’s already been mentioned, is unique, or when it’s clear in the situation what we’re referring to.
On the other hand, we often use no article with uncountable nouns when we are talking about something in general, not a specific instance.
So, the explanation I provided earlier about the use of articles with “receipt” would apply to any English text, whether it’s a legal document, a novel, a news article, or a casual email.
Remember, English is a flexible language and context is key. The same word can be countable in one context and uncountable in another. For example, “I’d like a coffee” (countable) vs. “I drink coffee every morning” (uncountable).
I hope this helps! If you have more questions about English usage or anything else, feel free to ask.
後記
英文契約の“within 60 days of receipt of the relevant Statement”といったフレーズで，receiptになぜ定冠詞を付けないのか明確な答が知りたかった。AIによると，法律英語には慣用的表現が多く，冠詞の用法は時に厄介(tricky)であるという。この場合のreceiptは不可算名詞として使用されている。もし冠詞を付けるとすれば定冠詞ということになるが，ここでは何かを受け取る行為やプロセスを概念的に表現したもので，具体的な事例を述べたものではない。したがって冠詞は付けない。AIはこの点を具体的な例文を示しながらわかりやすく解説している。しかも，こうした原則は法律分野以外でも一様に当てはまるという。
AIの回答を簡単にまとめると以上のようになり，確かにそのとおりだと思う。しかし，英作文や英訳の際に，名詞を不可算名詞として使用するとしても，抽象的な概念として使用するか，それとも具体的な事例として使用するかは自分で判断しなければならない。これは英語の発想とも深く関係しており，簡単に答が出てくるわけではない。その解決のためには，在り来りな言い方かもしれないが，日頃から英語に親しみ，書く練習を積み重ねること。それ以外に今のところ名案が浮かばない。
