depth of vs the depth of

[GoldfishLord]

There are interesting trade-offs in the relative importance of subject matter (i.e., figure) and style (i.e., background). In highly representational paintings, plays, or stories, the focus is on subject matter that resembles everyday life and the role of background style is to facilitate the construction of mental models. Feelings of pleasure and uncertainty carry the viewer along to the conclusion of the piece. In highly expressionist works, novel stylistic devices work in an inharmonious manner against the subject matter thereby creating a disquieting atmosphere. Thus, when the work is less "readable" (or easily interpreted), its departure from conventional forms reminds the viewer or reader that an "aesthetic attitude" is needed to appreciate the whole episode. This active involvement provides a basis for depth of aesthetic processing and reflection on the meaning of the work. An ability to switch between the "pragmatic attitude" of everyday life and an "aesthetic attitude" is fundamental to a balanced life.

Source:
The Aesthetics of Emotion: Up the Down Staircase of the Mind-Body
Gerald C. Cupchik — 2016 · Body, Mind & Spirit

What is the reason there is not a definite article before "depth"? It seems to me that "the depth" should be used there instead.

 

[teechar]

Think of the bolded part as adjectival.

This active involvement provides a basis for [ depth-of-aesthetic] processing

This active involvement provides a basis for a kind of processing.
What kind?
: depth of aesthetic processing.
Does that help?

 

[GoldfishLord]

There is no definite ariticle before "depth". Does this imply that there is some other depth of aesthetic processing?

 

[teechar]

No, it doesn't.

 

[GoldfishLord]

"depth" = "one example of depth [from among many]"?

 

[teechar]

Are you reading it as depth of [aesthetic processing] or as [depth of aesthetic] processing?

 

[GoldfishLord]

I'm trying reading it as [depth] [of aesthetic processing].

Depth. What depth? Depth [of aesthetic processing].

 

[emsr2d2]

No. The thing being processed is "depth of aesthetic".

 

[GoldfishLord]

No. The thing being processed is "depth of aesthetic".

What do you mean by "processed"? I'm not sure about the meaning of it.

 

[jutfrank]

Think of the bolded part as adjectival.

This active involvement provides a basis for a kind of processing.
What kind?
: depth of aesthetic processing.
Does that help?

No. The thing being processed is "depth of aesthetic".

Well, I'm reading this very differently from you two!

 

[GoldfishLord]

Well, I'm reading this very differently from you two!

How exactly are you reading it?

 

[jutfrank]

How exactly are you reading it?

Like this: [depth] [of aesthetic processing]

There's no need for a definite article here. We don't use definite articles unless we need them, so you can't ask why we don't use them. Ask instead why we do use them.

 

[GoldfishLord]

strip:
a series of drawings inside boxes that tell a story and are often published in newspapers

Source: https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/strip_1?q=Strip

Do you see the "a series of" part as adjectival?
Drawings. What drawings? [A series of] drawings.

 

[jutfrank]

It's hard to follow any kind of thread here.

Do you see the "a series of" part as adjectival?

Adjectival? No, not at all.

Drawings. What drawings? [A series of] drawings.

No. The constituents are these: [a series] [of drawings]

I thought this was question of some kind about the use of zero articles. However, since the teachers here can't even agree on what the sentence means, it's probably best to abort and end the thread.