| Author |
Message |
Robert Lieblich
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 11:33 pm
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"Arne H. Wilstrup" wrote:
| Quote: |
"the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:MPG.1dd83db4c30c18e398a1f8@news.ntlworld.com...
But I still don't know why there is this difference.
:-(
The singular is used when the group is/are acting as a
single body.
For example, "The BBC is publishing its report".
The plural is used when the group is/are acting as a set
of
individuals who happen to be doing the same thing. For
example, "My
family are travelling to a wedding tomorrow." This
implies that they
are travelling separately. If I say "My family is
travelling to a
wedding tomorrow" then I am implying that we are all
travelling
together.
That I do understand - but what I do not understand is a
sentence like:
The children or the teacher IS at an outing (or something
like that) -here the conjunktion "or" seems to divide the
plural "children" and the singular "the teacher" so it is
the latter who takes the verb en present tense 3rd person
singular, even if we talk about more persons.
|
The sentence becomes a lot more idiomatic if you insert "Either" at
the beginning.
| Quote: | But if I writes: the children and the teacher ...it is
usually "the children and the children are...
as the English consider the children and the teacher as a
collective noun and as a whole group of individuals.
|
"And" joins. "Or" separates. Their grammar differs accordingly. You
cannot analogize from one to the other.
--
Bob Lieblich
Separately joint |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Arne H. Wilstrup
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 11:37 pm
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"Robert Lieblich" <robert.lieblich@verizon.net> skrev i en
meddelelse news:436E2CD3.831A8B9E@verizon.net...
| Quote: |
[ ... ]
A peculiar thing here is, that you seem to have: "the
students as well as the teacher were enjoying the food",
but
you write: "the baby as well as the mother is in fine
form"
even there are two nouns here as well indicating plural.
"As well as", in traditional English grammar, is a
compound
preposition, not a conjunction, and the phrase containing
those words
is parenthetical, so the number of the verb is supposed to
be
unaffected by whatever follows those words. In your
examples the
number of the verb comes from the subject -- and the
subject does not
include the "as well as ..." phrase. In your first
example,
"students" is the subject, so the verb is plural. In the
second,
"baby" is the subject, so the verb is singular.
As is true of much contemporary English usage, there is an
increasing
tendency to treat "as well as" as a conjunction. So you
will see "The
baby as well as the mother are in fine form." I consider
this an
error, but it is happening often enough that it will
probably become
accepted usage. Meanwhile, you are probably best advised
to follow
the traditional course and ignore the "as well as" phrase
when
determining the number of the verb.
And a sentence like: "Either your brakes or your eyesight
is
at fault" also seems to be correct.
The important thing here is the "or". Reversing the
subject would
result in "Either your eyesight or your brakes are at
fault." Such
sentences are awkward, and many careful authors rewrite
them. E.g.,
"You should blame either your brakes or your eyesight."
|
I thank you for at very good explaination -here it seems
obvious that there is a colloqual form as well as a
grammatical form - sometimes it seems that the grammatical
form is in favour of the colloqual and sometimes it is the
other way round.
I agree that I should follow the course and take the grammar
taught there into consideration - but the course is not only
a grammar course but also a course leading to teaching
English as a foreign language, and in this respect I shall
know at least a little of the "whys" and "hows" so to speak.
:-)
In addition, I always tell my students that English has no
easy grammar, and when even the "wise" disagrees, why should
you be betterī? Especially as the native speaker seem to
disagree, too. :-)
But as I am not a native speaker and as I am making mistakes
frequently, I am still in this humble position that I think
I can be better in order to understand the English
language - so therefore I am grateful for every contribution
from any native speaker in this group - it also has this
advantage, that I get a chance to improve the way I am
writing English and make me aware of the mistakes usually
foreigners do when they talk or write. So thank you for your
contribution to my development in the English language 
--
Arne H.Wilstrup |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the Omrud
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 06, 2005 11:53 pm
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> spake thusly:
| Quote: | In addition, I always tell my students that English has no
easy grammar, and when even the "wise" disagrees, why should
you be betterī? Especially as the native speaker seem to
disagree, too.
|
Just to help you along, "the wise" is a plural noun, so they need to
"disagree". If you want to make it singular you need to add a
singular noun, such as "the wise man". And "the native speaker" is
singular.
--
David
=====
replace usenet with the |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TakenEvent
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:02 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"Harvey Van Sickle" <harvey.news@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9706A239DD450whhvans@62.253.170.163...
| Quote: | On 06 Nov 2005, TakenEvent wrote
"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in
message news:436de8bb$0$84029$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...
You can either say "the family is" or "the family are"
according to how you consider the familiy: as a group of
people or as individual members of the group.
"Family" is singular.
The whole family is going to be there.
Many families are going to be there.
That's a regional thing. What you say holds true in NAmerEng but
not in BrEng, where collective nouns regularly attract a plural
verb.
"The cabinet have discussed this point", "Chelsea are unbeatable",
and "the family are" are perfectly normal and standard
constructions in both formal and informal BrEng.
|
It certainly depends on the sentence. I wouldn't say "My family are going
to be there." "Chelsea is unbeatable" sounds better, in the same way that
"The Lions is playing tonight" sounds awful, where "the Lions" is a football
team. It isn't uncommon to hear "Detroit are going to lose again," but
seeing it in print invites a cringe.
I think it makes a difference if it is understood that many individual
people are being referenced, as in "The cabinet [members] have discussed..."
I wouldn't expect to hear "The cabinet are made up of 8-12 members." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TakenEvent
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:04 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1dd83db4c30c18e398a1f8@news.ntlworld.com...
| Quote: | Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> spake thusly:
"Harvey Van Sickle" <harvey.news@ntlworld.com> skrev i en
meddelelse news:Xns9706A239DD450whhvans@62.253.170.163...
That's a regional thing. What you say holds true in
NAmerEng but
not in BrEng, where collective nouns regularly attract a
plural
verb.
exactly.
"The cabinet have discussed this point", "Chelsea are
unbeatable",
and "the family are" are perfectly normal and standard
constructions in both formal and informal BrEng.
yes! And I wrote earlier in this thread that I was referring
to British English. Thank you for the precision. :-)
But I still don't know why there is this difference. :-(
The singular is used when the group is/are acting as a single body.
For example, "The BBC is publishing its report".
The plural is used when the group is/are acting as a set of
individuals who happen to be doing the same thing. For example, "My
family are travelling to a wedding tomorrow." This implies that they
are travelling separately. If I say "My family is travelling to a
wedding tomorrow" then I am implying that we are all travelling
together.
|
Exactly. Even in America this distinction can be seen, especially in the
speech of fans of professional sports. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TakenEvent
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:12 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in message
news:436e2f0f$0$84015$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...
| Quote: |
"the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:MPG.1dd83db4c30c18e398a1f8@news.ntlworld.com...
But I still don't know why there is this difference.
:-(
The singular is used when the group is/are acting as a
single body.
For example, "The BBC is publishing its report".
The plural is used when the group is/are acting as a set
of
individuals who happen to be doing the same thing. For
example, "My
family are travelling to a wedding tomorrow." This
implies that they
are travelling separately. If I say "My family is
travelling to a
wedding tomorrow" then I am implying that we are all
travelling
together.
That I do understand - but what I do not understand is a
sentence like:
The children or the teacher IS at an outing (or something
like that) -here the conjunktion "or" seems to divide the
plural "children" and the singular "the teacher" so it is
the latter who takes the verb en present tense 3rd person
singular, even if we talk about more persons.
|
I can't imagine anyone is asking you to say "The children is at an outing,"
unless you're in a play and it's part of some ebonics-based dialogue. "The
children are out" or "The children are on an errand" would suffice. I don't
think "children" is a collective noun like "company" can be. It's more of a
plural, like "kids." Would you say "The kids is at an outing"?
| Quote: |
But if I writes: the children and the teacher ...it is
usually "the children and the children are...
|
I'm guessing that's just a typo...
| Quote: |
as the English consider the children and the teacher as a
collective noun and as a whole group of individuals.
|
I maintain that there is a difference between plurals and collective nouns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arne H. Wilstrup
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:18 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"Robert Lieblich" <robert.lieblich@verizon.net> skrev i en
meddelelse news:436E305C.23F9F35D@verizon.net...
| Quote: | "And" joins. "Or" separates. Their grammar differs
accordingly. You
cannot analogize from one to the other.
|
Oh, that is the explaination? hmm! it seems logical, but
language is not only matematics - it is, however, an
explaination which is worth considering. Thank you!
--
Arne H.Wilstrup |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TakenEvent
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:21 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1dd802f2ffeecc1798a1f4@news.ntlworld.com...
| Quote: | Donna Richoux <trio@euronet.nl> spake thusly:
Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote:
You can either say "the family is" or "the family are"
according to how you consider the familiy: as a group of
people or as individual members of the group.
But how about : a group of men? is this "a group of men are
sitting" or is it "a group of men is sitting "according to
the situation above (family)?
And moreover: you say The children or the teacher is ..." as
the sentence with "or" demands that you take the latest noun
in consideration, but how about
the children and the teacher -- is this "the children and
the teacher is" or is it "the children and the teacher are"?
The topic is "agreement."
See, that's an example which makes it extraordinarily difficult for
me to accept the convention of always putting punctuation inside
quotes. It implies that the OP should search for some topic named
"agreement.".
|
Yes, American punctuation styles suck. I hate including commas in
quotations when quoted words run in a series.
He's been called "Bob," "Joe," and "Frank."
That sentence is much harder to read (and type) than:
He's been called "Bob", "Joe", and "Frank".
Does it make sense to include the punctuation in the quotation marks in the
following sentence?
Would you say "The dogs is in the house?"
It could if the sentence in quotations was a question, but if the writer
wanted it to be known that it was a statement, how can it be punctuated to
serve that end?
Would you say "The dogs is in the house"?
That's better, but still somewhat ambiguous. Perhaps I just don't give
people enough credit.
Would you say "The dogs is in the house."?
The double punctuation is bizarre, but it isn't something to which people
couldn't adapt.
Of course, a writer could resort to rewriting, but that can get verbose and
appear confusing.
Would you make the statement, "The dogs is in the house?"
That doesn't *look* like a statement... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harvey Van Sickle
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:21 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
On 06 Nov 2005, TakenEvent wrote
| Quote: |
"Harvey Van Sickle" <harvey.news@ntlworld.com> wrote in
message news:Xns9706A239DD450whhvans@62.253.170.163...
On 06 Nov 2005, TakenEvent wrote
"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in
message
news:436de8bb$0$84029$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...
You can either say "the family is" or "the family are"
according to how you consider the familiy: as a group of
people or as individual members of the group.
"Family" is singular.
The whole family is going to be there.
Many families are going to be there.
That's a regional thing. What you say holds true in NAmerEng
but not in BrEng, where collective nouns regularly attract a
plural verb.
"The cabinet have discussed this point", "Chelsea are
unbeatable", and "the family are" are perfectly normal and
standard constructions in both formal and informal BrEng.
It certainly depends on the sentence. I wouldn't say "My
family are going to be there." "Chelsea is unbeatable" sounds
better, in the same way that "The Lions is playing tonight"
sounds awful, where "the Lions" is a football team.
|
Hearing or reading "Chelsea are unbeatable" -- now, after 23 years
of adjusting to it -- now seems more normal to me than the
singular, and googling on UK sites for <football "Chelsea are"> and
the same for "is" returns over 4 to 1 in favour of the plural.
(Not only that, some of the singular versions are in phrases like
"watching Chelsea is boring".)
| Quote: | It isn't
uncommon to hear "Detroit are going to lose again," but seeing
it in print invites a cringe.
|
That's why I specified that the BrEng usage is both informal and
formal: "Detroit are going to lose" is unremarkable in print here,
and wouldn't cause even a raised eyebrow.
| Quote: | I think it makes a difference if it is understood that many
individual people are being referenced, as in "The cabinet
[members] have discussed..." I wouldn't expect to hear "The
cabinet are made up of 8-12 members."
|
Neither would I, as that's talking about the cabinet as a unit.
But I'd not blench at "the cabinet are split on this issue".
--
Cheers, Harvey
Canadian (30 years) and British (23 years)
For e-mail, change harvey.news to harvey.van |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arne H. Wilstrup
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:22 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:MPG.1dd845132f8e375298a1fa@news.ntlworld.com...
| Quote: | Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> spake
thusly:
In addition, I always tell my students that English has
no
easy grammar, and when even the "wise" disagrees, why
should
you be betterī? Especially as the native speaker seem to
disagree, too. :-)
Just to help you along, "the wise" is a plural noun, so
they need to
"disagree". If you want to make it singular you need to
add a
singular noun, such as "the wise man". And "the native
speaker" is
singular.
|
Yes, you are rigth - that is a fatal error - I know that it
is "the wise man" and not only "the wise" - this
construction is what we call a Danism, as it is the way it
is said in Danish.
En vis = a wise man (or woman) is mandatory here. I
know -sorry! :-(
--
Arne H.Wilstrup |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TakenEvent
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:23 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"Harvey Van Sickle" <harvey.news@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9706B05C85012whhvans@80.5.182.99...
| Quote: | On 06 Nov 2005, TakenEvent wrote
"Harvey Van Sickle" <harvey.news@ntlworld.com> wrote in
message news:Xns9706A239DD450whhvans@62.253.170.163...
On 06 Nov 2005, TakenEvent wrote
"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in
message
news:436de8bb$0$84029$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...
You can either say "the family is" or "the family are"
according to how you consider the familiy: as a group of
people or as individual members of the group.
"Family" is singular.
The whole family is going to be there.
Many families are going to be there.
That's a regional thing. What you say holds true in NAmerEng
but not in BrEng, where collective nouns regularly attract a
plural verb.
"The cabinet have discussed this point", "Chelsea are
unbeatable", and "the family are" are perfectly normal and
standard constructions in both formal and informal BrEng.
It certainly depends on the sentence. I wouldn't say "My
family are going to be there." "Chelsea is unbeatable" sounds
better, in the same way that "The Lions is playing tonight"
sounds awful, where "the Lions" is a football team.
Hearing or reading "Chelsea are unbeatable" -- now, after 23 years
of adjusting to it -- now seems more normal to me than the
singular, and googling on UK sites for <football "Chelsea are"> and
the same for "is" returns over 4 to 1 in favour of the plural.
(Not only that, some of the singular versions are in phrases like
"watching Chelsea is boring".)
It isn't
uncommon to hear "Detroit are going to lose again," but seeing
it in print invites a cringe.
That's why I specified that the BrEng usage is both informal and
formal: "Detroit are going to lose" is unremarkable in print here,
and wouldn't cause even a raised eyebrow.
I think it makes a difference if it is understood that many
individual people are being referenced, as in "The cabinet
[members] have discussed..." I wouldn't expect to hear "The
cabinet are made up of 8-12 members."
Neither would I, as that's talking about the cabinet as a unit.
But I'd not blench at "the cabinet are split on this issue".
|
You're right, there is a difference between "blench" and "blanch." I've
always thought "blench" was a typo, both times I've seen it. Gotta love
dictionaries. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the Omrud
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:29 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> spake thusly:
| Quote: |
"the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:MPG.1dd845132f8e375298a1fa@news.ntlworld.com...
Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> spake
thusly:
In addition, I always tell my students that English has
no
easy grammar, and when even the "wise" disagrees, why
should
you be betterī? Especially as the native speaker seem to
disagree, too. :-)
Just to help you along, "the wise" is a plural noun, so
they need to
"disagree". If you want to make it singular you need to
add a
singular noun, such as "the wise man". And "the native
speaker" is
singular.
Yes, you are rigth - that is a fatal error - I know that it
is "the wise man" and not only "the wise" - this
construction is what we call a Danism, as it is the way it
is said in Danish.
En vis = a wise man (or woman) is mandatory here. I
know -sorry! 
|
Don't misunderstand - "the wise" is perfectly good English. "I light
a firework - the wise stand back". But it's always plural.
--
David
=====
replace usenet with the |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TakenEvent
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:29 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in message
news:436e25cb$0$84023$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...
| Quote: |
"TakenEvent" <lightbulbsnickety@chartermi.net> skrev i en
meddelelse news:b7pbf.9848$7s1.4632@fe04.lga...
"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in
message
news:436de8bb$0$84029$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...
You can either say "the family is" or "the family are"
according to how you consider the familiy: as a group of
people or as individual members of the group.
"Family" is singular.
The whole family is going to be there.
Many families are going to be there.
I must say that I strongly disagree - acording to my grammar
and what I have been told in this group "family" can both be
considered as a group and as individuals. My grammar says
here:
"Collective nouns are countable nouns like administration,
army, audience, class, committee, company,crew, family,
firm, government, group, jury, management, party,press,
public,staff and team. The singular form of these nouns
refers to a group of people. When collective nouns in the
singular functions as subject, they can be accompanied
either by
A. a singular verb, a personal pronoun or determiner like it
and its and the relative pronoun which, which all emphaxize
the impersonal unit referred to by the noun:
"My company sells farm machinery. The committee controls
council spending. Her family has been tracked back to
1300... etc"
B. by a plural verb, personal pronouns and determiners like
they, them, their(s) and relatives like who, whom, which al
emphasize the individuals referred to by the noun:
"The company are sending me on a management course".
|
The company is sending. "Company," in this case, is not necessarily a
collective noun.
| Quote: | A group of us are going up to London for the day.
|
Said, but usually as "A group of us'r goin'..." This is because the
sentence is referencing the behavior of individuals. If, as an established
group, 10 people collectively planned to go to London together, you might
want to consider saying "The group is going..."
| Quote: | My family are all early risers.
|
The preceding sentence doesn't illustrate your point. It's understood that
you're talking about the numerous people each being early risers -- i.e.
"The members of my family are all early risers." It isn't technically
correct to say "The members of my family is all early risers." People do
it, but they sound awful. You could say, "My family is early to rise."
| Quote: | The Government are planning new tax increases.
|
It are?
>snip< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arne H. Wilstrup
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:32 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
"TakenEvent" <lightbulbsnickety@chartermi.net> skrev i en
meddelelse news:qGqbf.9860$7s1.8066@fe04.lga...
| Quote: |
That's a regional thing. What you say holds true in
NAmerEng but
not in BrEng, where collective nouns regularly attract a
plural
verb.
"The cabinet have discussed this point", "Chelsea are
unbeatable",
and "the family are" are perfectly normal and standard
constructions in both formal and informal BrEng.
It certainly depends on the sentence. I wouldn't say "My
family are going
to be there."
|
but would you say: My family are early risers? This is
correctly according to my English grammar book.
And according to this, you can also say: Her family has been
traced back to 1300 -
As the book says: "When collective nouns in the singular
function as a subject, they can be accompanied either by a
singular verb, a personal pronoun or determinder like it,
its and the relative pronoun, which all emphasize the
impersonal unit referred to by the noun and by plural verb,
personal pronouns and determinders like they, them, their(s)
and relatives like who, whom, which all emphasize the
individuals referred to by the noun"
| Quote: |
I think it makes a difference if it is understood that
many individual
people are being referenced, as in "The cabinet [members]
have discussed..."
I wouldn't expect to hear "The cabinet are made up of 8-12
members."
|
But still, you can hear: The Government are planning new tax
increases.
No, it is not that easy.
--
Arne H.Wilstrup |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the Omrud
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 12:37 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> spake thusly:
| Quote: |
"TakenEvent" <lightbulbsnickety@chartermi.net> skrev i en
meddelelse news:qGqbf.9860$7s1.8066@fe04.lga...
That's a regional thing. What you say holds true in
NAmerEng but
not in BrEng, where collective nouns regularly attract a
plural verb.
"The cabinet have discussed this point", "Chelsea are
unbeatable", and "the family are" are perfectly normal and
standard constructions in both formal and informal BrEng.
It certainly depends on the sentence. I wouldn't say "My
family are going to be there."
|
But I would (noting that I am British).
| Quote: | but would you say: My family are early risers? This is
correctly according to my English grammar book.
|
Yes.
| Quote: | And according to this, you can also say: Her family has been
traced back to 1300 -
|
Yes. But I might also say "Her family have been traced back to
1300". It depends on the context, although in this case the
difference is very slight.
--
David
=====
replace usenet with the |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in