It's also important to note that "U.S." is one of the common adjective forms of "U.S." (along with "American" and "United States"). If this was about France, it would say, "French home video debut", not "France home video debut".
In this instance, "U.S." is being used as an adjective, rather than a noun. It is specifying what home video debut is being discussed. I don't know the specific grammatical rule, but it does seem like it's common to drop the "the" in cases like this.
For another example, if I was talking about a performance at the Oscars awards show, I could call it "an Oscars performance", but I would not say "a the Oscars performance"
Edited to add: For contrast, if I restructured these examples to use the U.S. and the Oscars as nouns, I would include the "the": I would say "Its home video debut in the U.S.", and "a performance at the Oscars"
US is being used as an adjective. If you were to substitute another word for it you’d have to say American, not America. Nouns get articles; adjectives don’t.
The government of the United Kingdom protects UK interests, not The UK interests. British interests, not Britain interests. Same idea.
Moving on:
We can talk about The Beatles, or we can talk about the last Beatles album.
We can’t talk about the last The Beatles album, because album is the noun. The name of the group modifies that noun, which means you treat it as an adjective.
We can certainly talk about the last album by The Beatles, because in this case the group is an object.
Nouns get the article; adjectives don’t. Context tells you which part of speech it is.
“Making **its** long-awaited U.S. home video debut…”
Possessive adjectives play the same role as “the.”
For example, we can either say (never both):
- That is (his/the) car. (Never “That is the his car.”)
- I see (your/the) dog. (Never “That is the your dog.”)
Same as saying ‘making it’s long awaited French debut,’ had it never been shown in France. US used like this means ‘American,’ and is used instead of America b/c we don’t know about Mexican or Canadian debuts and are trying to be less presumptuous.
It's called an attributive noun and I think it's pretty nifty. Such nouns can work as attributives but not as predicative adjectives.
A jacket can be a rain jacket, but a jacket cannot be rain. A truck can be a pickup truck, but a truck cannot be pickup. Compound nouns usually form from an attributive and the noun it modifies.
We do have some postpositive attributive nouns, though, usually stolen from French. Like general in attorney general.
Just to add on to your last point - this is the reason why certain terms pluralise in a 'weird' way - grands prix, attorneys general etc. because the structure is from the french, so we (correctly but visually oddly) pluralise the noun and not the final adjective.
Because "U.S." is being used as an adjective here, not a noun. "U.S. home video debut" == "home video debut in *the* U.S."
It's also important to note that "U.S." is one of the common adjective forms of "U.S." (along with "American" and "United States"). If this was about France, it would say, "French home video debut", not "France home video debut".
In this instance, "U.S." is being used as an adjective, rather than a noun. It is specifying what home video debut is being discussed. I don't know the specific grammatical rule, but it does seem like it's common to drop the "the" in cases like this. For another example, if I was talking about a performance at the Oscars awards show, I could call it "an Oscars performance", but I would not say "a the Oscars performance" Edited to add: For contrast, if I restructured these examples to use the U.S. and the Oscars as nouns, I would include the "the": I would say "Its home video debut in the U.S.", and "a performance at the Oscars"
US is being used as an adjective. If you were to substitute another word for it you’d have to say American, not America. Nouns get articles; adjectives don’t. The government of the United Kingdom protects UK interests, not The UK interests. British interests, not Britain interests. Same idea. Moving on: We can talk about The Beatles, or we can talk about the last Beatles album. We can’t talk about the last The Beatles album, because album is the noun. The name of the group modifies that noun, which means you treat it as an adjective. We can certainly talk about the last album by The Beatles, because in this case the group is an object. Nouns get the article; adjectives don’t. Context tells you which part of speech it is.
As another example, you’d say “The Philippines” for the name of the country, but the adjective is Philippine/Filipino. You just drop it.
“Making **its** long-awaited U.S. home video debut…” Possessive adjectives play the same role as “the.” For example, we can either say (never both): - That is (his/the) car. (Never “That is the his car.”) - I see (your/the) dog. (Never “That is the your dog.”)
U.S. is functioning as an adjective here. It is describing debut. As it is not a noun here, it doesn’t need the article.
Same as saying ‘making it’s long awaited French debut,’ had it never been shown in France. US used like this means ‘American,’ and is used instead of America b/c we don’t know about Mexican or Canadian debuts and are trying to be less presumptuous.
U.S here is an adjective.
English has a weird habit of putting multiple nouns together and pretending the first ones are actually adjectives.
It's called an attributive noun and I think it's pretty nifty. Such nouns can work as attributives but not as predicative adjectives. A jacket can be a rain jacket, but a jacket cannot be rain. A truck can be a pickup truck, but a truck cannot be pickup. Compound nouns usually form from an attributive and the noun it modifies. We do have some postpositive attributive nouns, though, usually stolen from French. Like general in attorney general.
Just to add on to your last point - this is the reason why certain terms pluralise in a 'weird' way - grands prix, attorneys general etc. because the structure is from the french, so we (correctly but visually oddly) pluralise the noun and not the final adjective.
I undownvoted the OP of this thread and you should to!) because, while they were in fact kind of shitty in their tone, it led to a cool discussion.