Plurals in generic grammar [duplicate]
I don’t agree with the premise. We can, with generic reference, say all of the following:
The Italians are musical, but the British excel in poetry.
Italians may be musical, but you can’t beat Germans for a good brass band.
The Italian is musical, where the Frenchman is artistic.
An Italian is musical, but a Spaniard is more passionate.
Your Italian is musical, but your Englishman prefers football.
There are three different types of generic Noun Phrase, distinguished by their articles.
They are similar in meaning -- positing some proposition over a set -- but they are different.
Plural Generic NPs use no article.
- Pandas are found in China.
Definite Generic NPs use a definite article with a singular noun.
- The panda is found in China.
Indefinite Generic NPs use an indefinite article with a singular noun.
- *A panda is found in China.
Note that the last sentence is ungrammatical, while these three are all fine:
- Pandas eat bamboo.
- The panda eats bamboo.
- A panda eats bamboo.
As for national or cultural names, these vary with the type of generalization being expressed.
And also with the socioeconomic status, and general prejudice against, such groups.
On the whole, generic expressions about human groups are best avoided;
they are far more apt to shed heat than light.
Your belief is incorrect. Both of the following are acceptable and effectively synonymous:
- The Italians are musical.
- Italians are musical.
Furthermore, #2 is actually more common than #1 and seems more natural to me.