Skip to main content

Should I use an article with the word “part”?


I’ve noticed that some people use an article with the word “part” and the bulk of them does not (at least at some web pages I skimmed through). Which is the correct variant? I think that parts of something are countable, so there should be an article, whether definite or not.


A few examples right out of my head. Please, do not consider it as meaningful sentences. These are just for demonstrating and mean almost nothing.



KDE is a part of the Linux GUI.
The mentioned district is a part of the city.
This stick was a part of that tree.
Something is the main part of his success.



Here you go – a few real life examples I’ve just stumbled with:



… the resulting moc file is included in a _automoc.cpp file, which is then compiled as part of the target.


DarwinPorts was started in 2002 as part of the OpenDarwin project.


It was part of Tax Day protests held throughout the 1990s and earlier.




Answer



All the sentences with X is/was a part of Y do not require the indefinite article.



KDE is part of the Linux GUI.
The red-light district is part of the city.
This stick was part of that tree.



are all fine without a.



X is *{the/a} main part of his success.*



however, requires the definite or indefinite article. OTOH, it's not a great sentence.



X is the main reason for his success.



is much better and more natural.


If you're talking about a long novel, say, you might be able to say:



Chapters 10-20, which depict in great detail the heroine's biography and the reasons for her unusual personality and character, are {the/a} main part of the novel.



The article is required here because there's a adjective in front of the noun. The other sentences don't include that adjective before part. The sentence



This is main part of the novel



is ungrammatical.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more