# Why is it now Enterprise and not THE Enterprise? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [August 13, 2002, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741 "2002-08-13T20:01:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Cliffy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/59ef9b/32.png) [@Cliffy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cliffy)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2002, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741/21 "2002-08-14T20:01:23Z")
I recall us commenting on this last year when Enterprise (the show) first came out. My theory is that the producers are making a conscious effort to have the (on-screen) characters refer to the ship without the definite article as a way of distinguishing it from past incarnations of the show. I thought it was kinda a cool idea – a very small thing which would sail under most viewers’ radar but which would nonetheless add a different feel to this crew’s adventures. –Cliffy ---
**Author:** ![gonzoron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a6a055/32.png) [@gonzoron](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzoron)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2002, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741/22 "2002-08-14T20:30:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by AmbushBug \* > \*\* > “Kirk to _Enterprise_, come in, _Enterprise_…” > \*\* OK, you’ve got me on that one, but on the whole, it was “the” Trouble with Tribbles: “I didn’t mean to say that the Enterprise should be hauling garbage. I meant to say that it should be hauled away AS garbage” Generations: “Who am I to argue with the captain of the Enterprise?” ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2002, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741/23 "2002-08-14T20:31:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Steve Wright \* > \*\*When, I wonder, will we see the armies of the Suliban descending on Qo’noS with their orbital sanders, to smooth off all the Klingons’ foreheads? \*\* So the Suliban are orbital mechanics? ---
**Author:** ![TheeGrumpy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/779978/32.png) [@TheeGrumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TheeGrumpy)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2002, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741/24 "2002-08-15T02:57:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tars Tarkas \* > \*\*That extra spaceship enterprise from TMP is mentioned in the Star Trek Chronology as a spaceship design from a failed pilot propsal, but is included as an extra spaceship in Enterprise 1701’s lounge. No other info on it has been mentioned, but i bet if they were to make an “extra” Special Edition of TMP they’d digitally change the Enterprise into Enterprise NX-01. Either that, or the Temporal Cold War changed the name of Humanities first warp 5 ship. \*\* There _is_ a [special edition](http://www.dvdverdict.com/reviews/startrekmotionpicture.shtml) of ST:TMP. I haven’t seen it, but I doubt such a trivial correction would have been made. Especially since, IIRC, the DVD was released over a year ago – before the premiere of “Enterprise.” And it is _Enterprise_ and not “the.” Maybe I’m just a sucker for naval parlance. I think it sounds more distinguished. Note: I have heard many (if not most) contemporary Navy and Coast Guard personnel refer to vessels as “the,” so I guess they don’t teach that at the academy anymore. ---
**Author:** ![Tars\_Tarkas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tars\_Tarkas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tars_Tarkas)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2002, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741/25 "2002-08-15T06:52:12Z")
That’s why i said “extra” 😉 I haven’t had the chance to see it yet, as i’ve been blowing my cash on daikaiju movies and renting HK action flicks. ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2002, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741/26 "2002-09-20T01:06:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Pixellent \* > Calling it “Enterprise” goes back to actual naval usage. Sailors tend to refer to their ships without the definite article attached. 10+ years in the U.S. Navy here, and I’ve always heard the definite article used. ---
**Author:** ![YPOD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e99b99/32.png) [@YPOD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YPOD)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2002, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741/27 "2002-09-20T01:51:08Z")
Maybe the use or dropping of the definite article is determined by the context. For example, let’s say Kirk/Picard or Archer simply want to bring or send something to the ship - they would say “send it to the Enterprise,” or if they can’t get a tramsmission - " I can’t raise the Enterprise." If they want to refer to the crew, ship and mission, as a single entity, in that case the article is dropped, and it becomes something like “Enterprise was designed for that;” or “Enterprise can do that.” Dropping an expected article calls more attention to the statement, and makes you think more. ---
**Author:** ![YPOD](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e99b99/32.png) [@YPOD](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YPOD)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2002, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741/28 "2002-09-20T01:53:36Z")
Maybe the use or dropping of the definite article is determined by the context. For example, let’s say Kirk/Picard or Archer simply want to bring or send something to the ship - they would say “send it to the Enterprise,” or if they can’t get a tramsmission - " I can’t raise the Enterprise." If they want to refer to the crew, ship and mission, as a single entity, in that case the article is dropped, and it becomes something like “Enterprise was designed for that;” or “Enterprise can do that.” Dropping an expected article calls more attention to the statement, and makes you stop and think about it more. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-is-it-now-enterprise-and-not-the-enterprise/123741.md?page=1)