Grammar question - Page 2

monster · 06-17-2010, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jinx

But you wouldn't say "The affidavits was the only evidence" because the verb and the subject don't match up - which is closer to what's being said here.

right, because there the "were" applies to affidavits, which is clearly plural

Cloud · 06-17-2010, 10:57 AM

well, I'm glad I'm not the only one confused.

Undertoad · 06-17-2010, 10:57 AM

It's like the words "assortment" and "collection" and "bunch" and "group" etc which are singular even though they refer to many things.

Cloud · 06-17-2010, 11:04 AM

okay, yes--I now think it is a collective noun, and thus can take a singular or plural verb depending on the context and sentence structure.

Stormieweather · 06-17-2010, 11:17 AM

The only evidence were the affidavits.
The only evidence was the affidavit.

Were/was depends on whether the object is singular or plural.

limey · 06-17-2010, 11:30 AM

"The only evidence was the affidavits."
The affidavits were the only evidence.
I don't see why the sentences have to work the same both way round, you can have a subject in the singular and an object in the plural, or vice versa.
The only food left was five loaves.
The five loaves were the only food left.

"there is a scintilla of evidence that limitations was tolled . . . "
In this instance was is correct if everyone understands the jargon, that "limitations" is singular, because it's shorthand for "statute of limitations."

Stormieweather · 06-17-2010, 12:11 PM

Dammit, made me go look it up...

So here's another explanation:

If I was If I were

Quote:

was or were: difficulty is sometimes experinced in the use of the subjunctive form 'were' in phrases expressing supposition. The basic rule is that 'were' is used when the suggestion is of something hypothetical, unlikely, or not actually the case. When a supposition might be possible or factual then either 'was' or 'were' may be used.

From Wordwizard.com

So I'm wrong (above).

Undertoad · 06-17-2010, 11:02 AM

It's a singulare tantum, according to the plurale tantum Wikipedia page.

Quote:

The term for a noun which appears only in the singular form is singulare tantum (plural: singularia tantum), for example the English words "information", "dust" and "wealth".

BigV · 06-22-2010, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

It's a singulare tantum, according to the plurale tantum Wikipedia page.

"This is the evidence."

"These are the evidence."

I stand corrected. Undertoad is right, singulare tantum. Evidence is "singular".

Undertoad · 06-23-2010, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigV

Undertoad is right, singulare tantum. Evidence is "singular".

How about "advice", I was just thinking about that word, is that plural or singluarey?

"I got lots of advice"

"I got one person's advice"

but one wouldn't say "I got a good advice from my friend"

glatt · 06-23-2010, 12:40 PM

same with "water" and "smoke"

BigV · 06-23-2010, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

How about "advice", I was just thinking about that word, is that plural or singluarey?

"I got lots of advice"

"I got one person's advice"

but one wouldn't say "I got a good advice from my friend"

Quote:

Originally Posted by glatt

same with "water" and "smoke"

"This is my advice."
"These are my advice."

"This is the water."
"These are the water."

"This is smoke."
"These are the smoke."

In each case, these words ring singular to my ear. So, since there isn't a plural form of these words, that makes them singulare tantum. Additionally, they are examples of mass nouns. Ones that can't be quantified by a number, in contrast to collective nouns, as Cloud identified "evidence" earlier, in error I believe. I think evidence is another mass noun.

Also, in the examples quoted above, the change in subj/verb agreement was happening with the count modifier. "This is the (one)" "These are the (several)". The very fact that you attach this counter is because they're uncountable. What you are counting is not advice, it's "lots" or "person".

lumberjim · 06-17-2010, 11:04 AM

One of our salesmanagers pages for "2 available sales personnel"

Cloud · 06-17-2010, 11:16 AM

Glad to know everyone's paying attention in class this morning! Just to mess you up, here's another excerpt:

there is a scintilla of evidence that limitations was tolled . . .

and in this case "limitations" is singular, because it's shorthand for "statute of limitations."

Doncha just love grammar?

Cloud · 06-17-2010, 12:22 PM

but that rule doesn't apply here though--this is not a case of the subjective tense. That rule applies to something like this:

"If I were to go on a cruise, I'd choose the Bahamas."

06-17-2010, 10:57 AM	#2
Cloud ... Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,360	well, I'm glad I'm not the only one confused. __________________ "Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards!"

06-17-2010, 11:04 AM	#4
Cloud ... Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,360	okay, yes--I now think it is a collective noun, and thus can take a singular or plural verb depending on the context and sentence structure. __________________ "Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards!"

06-17-2010, 11:17 AM	#5
Stormieweather Wearing her bitch boots Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Floriduh Posts: 1,181	The only evidence were the affidavits. The only evidence was the affidavit. Were/was depends on whether the object is singular or plural. __________________ "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." - Mahatma Gandhi

06-17-2010, 11:30 AM	#6
limey Encroaching on your decrees Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: An island within the south-west coast of Scotland Posts: 7,016	"The only evidence was the affidavits." The affidavits were the only evidence. I don't see why the sentences have to work the same both way round, you can have a subject in the singular and an object in the plural, or vice versa. The only food left was five loaves. The five loaves were the only food left. "there is a scintilla of evidence that limitations was tolled . . . " In this instance was is correct if everyone understands the jargon, that "limitations" is singular, because it's shorthand for "statute of limitations." __________________ Living it up on the edge ... of civilisation, within the southwest coast of

06-17-2010, 11:04 AM	#13
lumberjim I can hear my ears Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 25,571	One of our salesmanagers pages for "2 available sales personnel" __________________ This body holding me reminds me of my own mortality Embrace this moment, remember We are eternal, all this pain is an illusion ~MJKeenan

06-17-2010, 10:57 AM	#3
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	It's like the words "assortment" and "collection" and "bunch" and "group" etc which are singular even though they refer to many things.

06-23-2010, 12:40 PM	#11
glatt ™ Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 27,717	same with "water" and "smoke"

06-17-2010, 11:16 AM	#14
Cloud ... Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,360	Glad to know everyone's paying attention in class this morning! Just to mess you up, here's another excerpt: there is a scintilla of evidence that limitations was tolled . . . and in this case "limitations" is singular, because it's shorthand for "statute of limitations." Doncha just love grammar? __________________ "Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards!"

06-17-2010, 12:22 PM	#15
Cloud ... Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,360	but that rule doesn't apply here though--this is not a case of the subjective tense. That rule applies to something like this: "If I were to go on a cruise, I'd choose the Bahamas." __________________ "Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards!"

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)