# Definite articles in ship names **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 17, 2011, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760 "2011-04-17T21:54:35Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![tmoh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/e5b9ba/32.png) [@tmoh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tmoh)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/1 "2011-04-17T21:54:35Z")
In my limited (read: pop-cultural) experience, it seems like some ships (and spacecraft) take definite articles before their names, but others don’t. Compare: Malcolm Reynolds is the captain of _Serenity_. (no article) Nathan Roberts is the captain of **the** _Sweet Judy_. (article) Is there some linguistic rule for this, or is just a case-by-case thing? Based on all the ship names I’ve run across in songs( **the** _Diamond_, **the** _Mary Ellen Carter_, etc.), it seems like using the article is more common . ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/2 "2011-04-17T21:59:18Z")
All the _good_ Star Trek shows use the definite article before the ship’s name. Kirk and Picard captained _The_ Enterprise. And Sisko had _The_ Defiant. Beginning with Voyager they began the annoying habit of dropping the definite article and that was clearly the cause of the franchise’s demise. ---
**Author:** ![Fish\_Cheer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fish_cheer/32/17179_2.png) [@Fish\_Cheer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish_Cheer)\ **Post date:** [April 17, 2011, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/3 "2011-04-17T22:00:26Z")
From Wikipedia: > [@](#): > > Note that while calling a US ship “the USS Flattop” may make grammatical sense, the preliminary article “the” is discouraged by nearly all style guides, and the U.S. Navy. The U.S. Navy uses ship names without article, except for USS The Sullivans, named for the five Sullivan brothers, all lost at sea during World War II. Its British equivalent (“the HMS Flattop”) is also discouraged, since “the Her Majesty’s Ship” would be grammatically incorrect. > **[Ship prefix](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_prefix)** > > A ship prefix is a combination of letters, usually abbreviations, used in front of the name of a civilian or naval ship that has historically served numerous purposes, such as identifying the vessel's mode of propulsion, purpose, or ownership/nationality. In the modern environment, prefixes are cited inconsistently in civilian service, whereas in government service a vessel's prefix is seldom omitted due to government regulations dictating that a certain prefix be used. Today the common practic... ---
**Author:** ![Llama\_Llogophile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@Llama\_Llogophile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Llama_Llogophile)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2011, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/4 "2011-04-18T02:41:40Z")
The British always called their awesome airplane Concorde, deliberately omitting the definite article. While the rest of the world called it The Concorde. Not sure why. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2011, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/5 "2011-04-18T02:47:19Z")
When the film _Titanic_ came out, among the various media reports surrounding it was one claiming that back at that time, definite articles were never used with ship names. Supposedly, no one at that time said “the Titanic,” but rather just “Titanic.” Adding the article is a modern-day development. ---
**Author:** ![Pasta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecccb3/32.png) [@Pasta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pasta)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2011, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/6 "2011-04-18T16:01:43Z")
> [@friedo](#): > > All the _good_ Star Trek shows use the definite article before the ship’s name. Sort of. It depends on the grammatical context. Compare: “I am captain of the _Enterprise_.” “These are the voyages of the starship _Enterprise_.” (No attached “the”…) The second one could have been “…voyages of the starship _The Enterprise_”, but it isn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2011, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/7 "2011-04-18T16:39:14Z")
> [@Pasta](#): > > Sort of. It depends on the grammatical context. Compare: > > “I am captain of the _Enterprise_.” > “These are the voyages of the starship _Enterprise_.” (No attached “the”…) 😕😕😕😕 > [@](#): > > The second one could have been “…voyages of the starship _The Enterprise_”, but it isn’t. Because the second “the” is redundant. ---
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2011, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/8 "2011-04-18T17:16:31Z")
Without looking hard at it, my guess is that ‘the’ tends to be instinctively added in cases where it’s not clear that the following word refers to a ship. So for something like a person’s name, or an adjective, we’ll want to make it clear that we’re referring to a ship “I’m captain of _The Mary Ann_” or “All aboard _The Lucky_”. When it’s more clear that the name is in fact the name of something, we might tend not to. “Have you seen my boat, _Unlimited Egotism_?” I’m guessing that nouns (e.g. serenity) tend to feel more obviously referring to an object, so don’t need a ‘the’ as often. On the other hand, I suspect pure rhythm also makes some uses sound better than others to us. ---
**Author:** ![paperbackwriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/53a042/32.png) [@paperbackwriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/paperbackwriter)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2011, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/9 "2011-04-18T17:32:31Z")
According to _The Chicago Manual of Style_, 15th ed., “the carrier _Enterprise_” is correct but not “the USS _Enterprise_.” “The _Enterprise_” is also correct, but _The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World_ prefers “USS _Enterprise_ (CVN-65)” (no “the”). In other words if the name is used with the prefix, don’t use the definite article. If the name is used without the prefix, or if the definite article is applied to an adjectival descriptor (e.g, class, type, nationality, etc.) preceding the vessel name, then the definite article is acceptable. When I say “acceptable,” however, I mean according to these style guides. You’re doing it wrong only if the person you’re writing for holds to these guides. Most people don’t have to worry about such things and won’t notice. ---
**Author:** ![Pasta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ecccb3/32.png) [@Pasta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pasta)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2011, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/10 "2011-04-18T18:36:15Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > 😕😕😕😕 > Because the second “the” is redundant. The first “the” is just as unnecessary as the second. It’s a style question, not an information content question. Redundancy is not a _faux pas_ in language. You wouldn’t (I would wager) have any problem with the following sentence: “I like the NBA franchise _the Heat_.” which is the same construction. Without the second _the_ it sounds weird. As a general rule, sport team names in American English have an attached “the”. This rule does not hold for the Star Trek vessel. (A harder-to-pin-down yet perfectly intuitive rule is used instead.) ---
**Author:** ![UncleRojelio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/unclerojelio/32/3160_2.png) [@UncleRojelio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleRojelio)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2011, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/11 "2011-04-18T19:39:09Z")
Using ‘the’ before a ship name is like calling a submarine a ship. Or calling a ship a boat. Just don’t do it. For another interesting construction, don’t say “Aubrey is captain of Leopard”. Say “Aubrey is **in** Leopard”. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2011, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/12 "2011-04-18T21:04:31Z")
Unique inanimate objects almost always get definite articles. The Empire State Building The Golden Gate Bridge The Hope Diamond The Magna Carta OTOH, there are exceptions, like weapons (Excalibur) or musical instruments - things that people tend to assign personalities to. Is that why ships don’t get definite articles? Because they’re people? ---
**Author:** ![Floater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/dc4da7/32.png) [@Floater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Floater)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 9:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/13 "2011-04-19T09:48:59Z")
> [@Mach Tuck](#): > > The British always called their awesome airplane Concorde, deliberately omitting the definite article. While the rest of the world called it The Concorde. Not sure why. We did? Besides, isn’t the discussion about names of specific individual ships (and planes or whatever)? Concorde is/was the trade name of a make of airplanes. ---
**Author:** ![spifflog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@spifflog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/spifflog)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/14 "2011-04-19T11:37:52Z")
I’ve always thought it was correct to omit the article, but as a Naval Officer, I never hear “he was on Enterprise,” I always hear “He was on the Enterprise.” ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 1:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/15 "2011-04-19T13:37:32Z")
> [@UncleRojelio](#): > > Using ‘the’ before a ship name is like calling a submarine a ship. Or calling a ship a boat. Just don’t do it. For another interesting construction, don’t say “Aubrey is captain of Leopard”. Say “Aubrey is **in** Leopard”. I thought it was “the 'orrible old Leopard.” complete with “the”, although I suppose that doesn’t contradict the rules listed above. ---
**Author:** ![UncleRojelio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/unclerojelio/32/3160_2.png) [@UncleRojelio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleRojelio)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/16 "2011-04-19T13:46:01Z")
> [@bump](#): > > I thought it was “the 'orrible old Leopard.” complete with “the”, although I suppose that doesn’t contradict the rules listed above. Yeah, but that was Stephen speaking. He doesn’t know a hawse pipe from a hole in the ground. “You remember longitude Stephen, they are the lines on the map that go up and down instead of side to side”. ---
**Author:** ![MikeF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@MikeF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MikeF)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/17 "2011-04-19T19:04:28Z")
Right. Nobody refers to that most famous of ships as “Titanic”. It always the Titanic or HMS Titanic. And Gordon Lightfoot couldn’t be wrong when he sings of the wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald, could he? ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/18 "2011-04-19T19:39:19Z")
It’s still the _Bismarck_, right? ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2011, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/19 "2011-04-19T19:54:24Z")
> [@MikeF](#): > > HMS Titanic RMS Titanic, for Royal Mail Ship, a designation for vessels contracted to carry the Royal Mail. The current liner Queen Mary 2 is so designated, as is the St Helena. ---
**Author:** ![Siam\_Sam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Siam\_Sam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Siam_Sam)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2011, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760/20 "2011-04-20T03:33:06Z")
> [@MikeF](#): > > Right. Nobody refers to that most famous of ships as “Titanic”. It always the Titanic or HMS Titanic. And Gordon Lightfoot couldn’t be wrong when he sings of the wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald, could he? Nobody says Titanic now, but they did at the time. In the movie, they always did – “We’re sailing on Titanic” or what have you – because again, that was correct style for the time but not used today. It’s just something that’s changed over the decades. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/definite-articles-in-ship-names/578760.md?page=2)