L. 17. _et soupirs et billets_... This departure from current usage
in omitting the definite article, which gives more rapidity to an
enumeration, cannot be imitated in English. It is a feature of the
older syntax which has been most fortunately preserved. The use of the
definite article in Old and Middle French was much the same as in modern
English. It was often omitted (as also the indefinite article) before
_homme_, _chose_, _femme_, before nouns taken in a general sense and
abstract nouns. The English student knows that Old English said
_se mann_ for man (in general), _tha godan menn_ for _good men_ (in
general), _seo gesceadwisnes_ for _wisdom_ (even when personified).
Is it not likely that the present usage in English, established in the
Middle English period, was much influenced by contemporary French usage?