articles in a gap-fill exercise

[Verona_82]

Hello,

I'm doing a gap-fill exercise which is meant to test students' knowledge of articles. The task requires writing only one word. However (with my recently gained knowledge), I managed to come up with three different alternatives. I'd be grateful if someone could have a look at them and tell me if I should get rid of the book.

__ accountant is responsible for ____ company's finances.

an accountant, a company's - to talk about any accountant in any company. Such a sentence could be seen as generalisation.
an accountant, the company - to talk about any accountant in a definite company
the accountant, the company - to talk about a definite accountant in a definite company.

Thank you in advance.

 

[Raymott]

Hello,

I'm doing a gap-fill exercise which is meant to test students' knowledge of articles. The task requires writing only one word. However (with my recently gained knowledge), I managed to come up with three different alternatives. I'd be grateful if someone could have a look at them and tell me if I should get rid of the book.

__ accountant is responsible for ____ company's finances.

an accountant, a company's - to talk about any accountant in any company. Such a sentence could be seen as generalisation.
an accountant, the company - to talk about any accountant in a definite company
the accountant, the company - to talk about a definite accountant in a definite company.

Thank you in advance.

Yes, all those sentences are good. And they mean what you say they do.

 

[5jj]

This is an example the sloppy sort of gap-fill exercises that are presented too often to learners. The person who wrote the question had in mind a basic definition of an accountant: An accountant is responsible for a company's finances, and didn't think of the other possibilities.

The really annoying thing is that your alternative answers would probably be rejected as incorrect by such people.

 

[Verona_82]

Thank you!
And if I rewrite the first and second ones (for the sake of practising the articles) using the preposition 'of', should they look like this:

An accountant is a person who is responisble for __ money of a company.
An accountant is a person who is responsible for the money of the company.

 

[bhaisahab]

Thank you!
And if I rewrite the first and second ones (for the sake of practising the articles) using the preposition 'of', should they look like this:

An accountant is a person who is responisble for __ money of a company.
An accountant is a person who is responsible for the money of the company.

An accountant is a person who is responsible for the money of a company. This is correct.