Hello! Please, look at the following sentences:
a). Rivers in the USA are beautiful.
b). (The) Rivers of the USA are beautiful.
My questions:
1. Which variant is more idiomatic?
2. Is there any difference in meaning between them?
3. Should I use "the" in (b)?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
@alexey-86 posted:a). Rivers in the USA are beautiful.
b). (The) Rivers of the USA are beautiful. [. . .]1. Which variant is more idiomatic?
2. Is there any difference in meaning between them?
3. Should I use "the" in (b)?
Hi, Alexey—Sentence (a) is more idiomatic than (b) without "the." With "the" included in (b), that sentence is just as idiomatic as (a); however, there will be a difference in meaning: (b) will pick out all the rivers, and (a) will not. Of course, you could add "the" to (a) as well, bringing about synonymy and idiomaticity.
Thank you, David! Would there be any difference in meaning between "The rivers in the USA are beautiful" and "The rivers of the USA are beautiful"?
It seems to me that the former puts more stress on "in the USA" as if I were contrasting the USA with other countries while the latter doesn't imply comparison and simply says something about the USA. What do you think?
@alexey-86 posted:Would there be any difference in meaning between "The rivers in the USA are beautiful" and "The rivers of the USA are beautiful"?
It seems to me that the former puts more stress on "in the USA" as if I were contrasting the USA with other countries while the latter doesn't imply comparison and simply says something about the USA. What do you think?
Alexey, David has told you that the two sentences are synonymous, the one with "in" being more idiomatic than the one with "of." In my experience, and much as it is used, the preposition "of" is not very popular when it comes to idiomaticity and tends to be replaced with others in certain cases, for example, with "in" in locative contexts. Another case that comes to mind is that of superlatives:
- She is the most beautiful girl in the neighborhood. (More idiomatic than "...of the neighborhood").
Well, Alexey, I think there is little, if any, real difference in meaning between those two sentences. However, I do find "The rivers in the USA are beautiful" (compare: "The rivers there/here are beautiful") more natural than "The rivers of the USA are beautiful" (compare: "American rivers are beautiful").
Thank you, Gustavo! I asked about the difference because usually the "noun in noun" and the "noun of noun" consrtuctions are quite different in meaning and usage.
Would you concider these two sentences synonymous:
1) This animal can be found in the snowy regions of the USA
2) This animal can be found in the snowy regions in the USA
"The rivers in the USA are beautiful" (compare: "The rivers there/here are beautiful") more natural than "The rivers of the USA are beautiful" (compare: "American rivers are beautiful").
Thank you, David. Do you mean "in the USA" sounds as if the USA functions as topic/theme (for example, it has been mentiond earlier) and therefore can be substituted by "there"?
@alexey-86 posted:1) This animal can be found in the snowy regions of the USA
2) This animal can be found in the snowy regions in the USA
I find (1) to be more natural and correct than (2). This might be because there is another "in" and, on top of that, because "of" expresses possession more clearly than the sentence about "rivers" (the USA is made up of different regions, and we can find this animal in its snowy areas).
Thank you, Gustavo!
