| Author |
Message |
Harvey Van Sickle
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 4:38 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
On 06 Nov 2005, TakenEvent wrote
| Quote: | "Maria Conlon" <maria.c-b@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:%cubf.4314$Lv.685@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...
Detroit *is* going to lose again.
Of course you're right in the strict American grammatical
sense, but this is a matter of what people say. Not all of
the people all of the time, but enough that I've noticed it.
Try this example instead:
"What's the score?"
"Detroit are down 21-7."
I'm sure you've heard something similar to that. Apparently
it's par for the course in Britain.
|
It's more than just par: it's grammatically acceptable in both
informal and formal registers.
(Which, I think, is where it differs from AmEng: correct me if I'm
wrong, but I assumed it's strictly limited there to
informal/colloquial use.)
--
Cheers, Harvey
Canadian (30 years) and British (23 years)
For e-mail, change harvey.news to harvey.van |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jeffrey Turner
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:20 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
Arne H. Wilstrup wrote:
| Quote: |
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.
|
Is this use of "in favour of" a Britishism? It seems "off" to
this Yank.
--Jeff
--
The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed
from without. It has to come from within.
--Mohandas K. Gandhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeffrey Turner
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 5:58 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
Arne H. Wilstrup wrote:
| Quote: | "the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> skrev:
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
|
This is English, we do not use the letter "k". Ever. ;)
| Quote: | "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.
|
Neither the football team, the cheerleaders, nor the principal
saw the flying saucer over the field. Agreement goes to the
last element in a disjunction.
| Quote: | But if I writes: the children and the teacher ...it is
usually "the children and the children are...
|
Bob and Carol are going. Conjunctions are plural in most cases
(unless they form a singular unit, viz. "Steak and eggs is my
favorite breakfast.")
| Quote: | as the English consider the children and the teacher as a
collective noun and as a whole group of individuals.
|
--Jeff
--
The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed
from without. It has to come from within.
--Mohandas K. Gandhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Bannister
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:04 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
Jeffrey Turner wrote:
| Quote: | Arne H. Wilstrup wrote:
the children and the teacher -- is this "the children and the teacher
is" or is it "the children and the teacher are"?
The children and teacher _are_ sitting, that's always a group.
|
Note that if you use "or" instead of "and", that changes the situation
entirely.
--
Rob Bannister |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Bannister
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:13 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
TakenEvent wrote:
| Quote: |
"Arne H. Wilstrup" <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote in message
news:436e25cb$0$84023$edfadb0f@dtext01.news.tele.dk...
"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.
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..."
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."
The Government are planning new tax increases.
It are?
|
You must be American. The above examples are completely correct in
rest-of-the-world English. This does not mean that you are wrong or that
we are wrong: just different, but you are attempting to lay down the law
in matters out of your jurisdiction.
--
Rob Bannister |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeffrey Turner
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 7:27 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
TakenEvent wrote:
| Quote: |
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.
|
"Blench" isn't a typo, but that doesn't mean there's a
difference between "blench" and "blanch."
--Jeff
--
The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed
from without. It has to come from within.
--Mohandas K. Gandhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 11:33:32 -0500, Robert Lieblich
<robert.lieblich@verizon.net> wrote:
| Quote: | "And" joins. "Or" separates. Their grammar
|
Oy! (The possibility of Oying the Liebs comes around once in a
millennium or two, so an opportunity must not be missed.)
| Quote: | differs accordingly. You
cannot analogize from one to the other.
|
--
Charles Riggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
On 6 Nov 2005 10:43:22 -0800, "nancy13g" <nancy13g@verizon.net> wrote:
| Quote: |
the Omrud wrote:
Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> spake thusly:
I once won a bet with an Englishman who claimed that you
could not say "I were" - I said that you could use it in the
subjunctive, but he did not agree.
I had to prove it right by showing him the song: If you were
the only girl in the world and I were the only boy"
It's also perfectly normal Northern English dialect.
It's also perfectly normal Broadway musical dialect: "If I were a rich
man ..."
|
"If I was a carpenter, and you were a lady" sums up the distinction
nicely. In other words, I *could* be a carpenter, but a lady, as the
word is used in the song, is born, not made. (Ha-ha, but seriously.)
--
Charles Riggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 20:02:27 +0100, "Arne H. Wilstrup"
<detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> wrote:
| Quote: |
"the Omrud" <usenet.omrud@gmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:MPG.1dd85fb5e58d191398a207@news.ntlworld.com...
"I were feeling a bit ill yesterday."
subjunctive?
|
No, joking. Some British people, not David the O, *do* say such
things, hence the joke.
--
Charles Riggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 17:20:41 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Arne H. Wilstrup wrote:
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.
Is this use of "in favour of" a Britishism? It seems "off" to
this Yank.
|
Off, all right, but it should be noted that Arne is not a Brit.
--
Charles Riggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Charles Riggs
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:07 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:57:30 -0600, Lars Eighner
<usenet@larseighner.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Some people who are
pleased by "a group of men is waiting in your office" will
feel uneasy with "a group of men was arguing in the street."
|
I'm one of them. I wonder if the majority of Americans find "a group
of men was arguing in the street" or, for another example, "The jury
is discussing the evidence" unjarring.
--
Charles Riggs |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harvey Van Sickle
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 2:32 pm
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
On 07 Nov 2005, Jeffrey Turner wrote
| Quote: | TakenEvent wrote:
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.
"Blench" isn't a typo, but that doesn't mean there's a
difference between "blench" and "blanch."
|
"Blench" has two meanings: one of them is the same as "blanch" (to
go pale) and the other is quite different (to flinch, or shy away
from).
I was using it with the second meaning.
--
Cheers, Harvey
Canadian (30 years) and British (23 years)
For e-mail, change harvey.news to harvey.van |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeffrey Turner
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:20 pm
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
Harvey Van Sickle wrote:
| Quote: | On 07 Nov 2005, Jeffrey Turner wrote
TakenEvent wrote:
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.
"Blench" isn't a typo, but that doesn't mean there's a
difference between "blench" and "blanch."
"Blench" has two meanings: one of them is the same as "blanch" (to
go pale) and the other is quite different (to flinch, or shy away
from).
I was using it with the second meaning.
|
So it does. That'll teach me not to read the dictionary too
quickly.
--Jeff
--
The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed
from without. It has to come from within.
--Mohandas K. Gandhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeffrey Turner
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 07, 2005 8:22 pm
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
Charles Riggs wrote:
| Quote: | On 6 Nov 2005 10:43:22 -0800, "nancy13g" <nancy13g@verizon.net> wrote:
the Omrud wrote:
Arne H. Wilstrup <detfaarduejatvide@invalid.dk> spake thusly:
I once won a bet with an Englishman who claimed that you
could not say "I were" - I said that you could use it in the
subjunctive, but he did not agree.
I had to prove it right by showing him the song: If you were
the only girl in the world and I were the only boy"
It's also perfectly normal Northern English dialect.
It's also perfectly normal Broadway musical dialect: "If I were a rich
man ..."
"If I was a carpenter, and you were a lady" sums up the distinction
nicely. In other words, I *could* be a carpenter, but a lady, as the
word is used in the song, is born, not made. (Ha-ha, but seriously.)
|
Do you mean to imply that one could write, "If I was a carpenter
and you was a plumber"?
--Jeff
--
The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed
from without. It has to come from within.
--Mohandas K. Gandhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeffrey Turner
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 12:21 am
Post subject: Re: a "group question" |
|
|
Charles Riggs wrote:
| Quote: | On Sun, 06 Nov 2005 06:57:30 -0600, Lars Eighner
usenet@larseighner.com> wrote:
Some people who are
pleased by "a group of men is waiting in your office" will
feel uneasy with "a group of men was arguing in the street."
I'm one of them. I wonder if the majority of Americans find "a group
of men was arguing in the street" or, for another example, "The jury
is discussing the evidence" unjarring.
|
I'm quite used to the latter. The jury is always deliberating.
Unless I was particularly interested in the topic of the
argument, I'd probably go with "was," as it would more likely
strike me as just a group of men making noise. On the other
hand, "There's a group of men who are arguing, go join them," is
correct.
--Jeff
--
The spirit of democracy cannot be imposed
from without. It has to come from within.
--Mohandas K. Gandhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| |
FAQ
Memberlist
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in