Hal Fulton wrote:
Here is one example. (I am also beginner, and I was also bothered with le/lo distinction, so it is how I understand things. Also, forgive me unnaturalness of examples).[]Michael Graff wrote:What puzzles me are these correspondences: definite <-> described as indefinite <-> really isThat says in a nutshell something that has bothered me subconsciously for a long time. I don't think the people who answered you addressed this specifically either (unless I overlooked it). On top of that, I have never seen the need for the distinction between "described as" and "really is." Sometimes I may use metaphors or something; but in general, when I "describe something as" a foobar, I basically mean it "really is" a foobar.
#1) _Rats_ are little creatures, it helps them to inhabit almost every building.
#2) Something felt loudly on a floor and _rat_ ran under the table.In #1, I am not having in mind neither specific rat, not set of rat, I am just stating some property (smallness) of thing that is really rat.
The main difference to example #2 is that I have something in mind, and trying to _describe_ to listener it. (In this simple case humble author decided that description "rat" is enough).
Of course, most probably that rat in #2 is really a rat (because author, probably wishes the readers to understand him). But it is not a point.
PS Eww... I hope, my weak understanding, multiplied with bad knowledge of English will not confuse you more ^_^