Recently Alexander wrote in a message to Paul Quinn:   
      
    PQ>  There are no errors in the report at the URL that you   
    PQ>  cited. The references to "cat" & "dog" are as a general   
    PQ>  classification of the animal type. Not specific animals.   
      
      
             So far, so good... I can't disagree with anything you've said there.   
   After he'd done some more research on his own, however, Alexander was confused   
   by the word "classification".  Not to worry!  As a teacher I've often had much   
   the same experience.  Okay... so we'll try again.  In context the person being   
   interviewed is referring to the *meat* of these animals.  We generally measure   
   by weight and/or by volume food items which are deemed to be uncountable.  You   
   may have xxx number of packets of meat, fish, or fowl in the freezer... but as   
   Mark says, you don't necessarily know how many individual animals your chicken   
   wings came from.  What you do know is that they cost yyy per pound or per kilo   
   where you live.  And while it is interesting to hear that one barleycorn = one   
   gram I don't know anybody who counts barleycorns when they're making a stew or   
   brewing a batch of beer.  Others measure barley in fistfuls or sackfuls.  :-))   
      
                                        # # #   
      
             Now... is that clear?  Maybe not.  I reckon some clever student from   
   Russia will ask why that kid they read about in the New Testament brought five   
   loaves & two small fishes (plural) in his lunch bag, and what Mrs. Hinton says   
   when she has two or three varieties of sliced deli meat in the fridge....  ;-)   
      
      
      
    ak>  "The definite article is used in front of countable nouns   
    ak>  representing a whole class or category of something."   
      
      
             Note... "The definite article".  In English there is only one, thank   
   goodness.  In more highly inflected languages there may be several.  :-)   
      
             I refer to "the comma" (e.g.) the same way.   
      
      
      
    ak>  The blue whale is thought to be the largest animal ever to   
    ak>  have lived. The computer has changed our lives.   
      
      
             Uh-huh.  And here's another example:   
      
                  As a friend to the children commend me the Yak.   
                  You will find it exactly the thing:   
                  It will carry and fetch, you can ride on its back,   
                  Or lead it about with a string.   
                  The Tartar who dwells on the plains of Thibet   
                  (A desolate region of snow)   
                  Has for centuries made it a nursery pet.   
                  And surely the Tartar should know!   
                  Then tell your papa where the Yak can be got,   
                  And if he is awfully rich   
                  He will buy you the creature - or else he will not.   
                  (I cannot be positive which.)   
      
                                                -- Hilaire Belloc   
      
      
             David Appleyard is apparently reporting on what we do... in much the   
   same way I would.  As to *why* we do it, I don't know of any rules about that.   
   But I can see that while it may be theoretically possible to count every whale   
   in all the world's oceans or every occurrence of the comma in recorded history   
   it isn't really practical.  I figure we make exceptions in such cases....  ;-)   
      
      
      
      
   --- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+   
    * Origin: Wits' End, Vancouver CANADA (1:153/716)