The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
English: do multiple singles make a plural?
Nibble
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
My girlfriend teaches English to Taiwanese students, and she came to me with the following question:
1. There is a man and a dog.
2. There are a man and a dog.
Which one is correct?
I have a feeling that I've said #1 many times, but I'm also quite sure that #2 is "proper" English. I know that I would never say "A man and a dog IS there," so why should it be OK if "there" is at the beginning of the sentence?
1. There is a man and a dog.
2. There are a man and a dog.
Which one is correct?
I have a feeling that I've said #1 many times, but I'm also quite sure that #2 is "proper" English. I know that I would never say "A man and a dog IS there," so why should it be OK if "there" is at the beginning of the sentence?
Nibble on
0
Posts
"There is a man and a dog" seems correct because "there is a man" is fine by itself, and "there are a man" sounds wrong. This is exacerbated by the fact that "there's a man and a dog" is more commonly used than "there're a man and a dog," for spoken contractions.
However, if "a man and a dog" is the subject of the sentence as a unit, then "are" is the correct verb form.
"And" is a tricky bastard, though.
If you wrote "There is a man sitting on the corner, and a dog," it would be correct, if technically poor.
My best guess, as far as "proper" English goes (and I would guess that that is proper English), would be that your verb in that sentence is only applying to the first object, and not the second object (whether or not this is colloquial). For instance, you'd say "there are ten men and a dog," but you'd say "there is a man and ten dogs."
I believe that's correct.
Generally it is accepted that "there is a man and a dog" is implying the sentence you wrote above, yes.
However if you want to use "a man and a dog," it's technically a plural unit.
Actually, "a man and a dog" is still singular. "A man and a dog" is a single unit, even though it is composed of multiple parts. For example, consider the noun "group". It refers to more than one person or thing, yet itself is in singular form. You'd say "there is a group", not "there are a group".
But you don't say "A man and a dog is there," even though you would say "A group is there."
No. The two singulars connected by an 'and' are not equivalent to a group. One says "a husband and wife run by the river every morning" or "a married couple runs by the river every morning."
@OP:
I believe the former is technically correct, but I doubt either usage would be corrected or remarked upon in conversational English.
Typically language teachers teach the most proper forms of the language possible, so that students know how to actually speak the language, since slang usually makes significantly less sense than the proper counterpart.
Anyway, this would be 'are' not 'is.' Let us say the man's name is Joe and the dog's name is Killer.
"Joe and Killer are there." "There are Joe and Killer."
Joe and Killer (the man and his dog) in this case are conjugated in the form "They," as in "they are" or "are they," and thus, "There are a man and is dog."
If the man and his dog were a single unit, which they are not (obviously, because we took the time to distinguish them), it would be different. Such a case can be illustrated in an example where we were referring to groups of man+dog, for instance in a man/dog race. Then we would be referring to a single man/dog team, and thus if we decided to rather clumsily refer to these teams as 'a man and his dog' then it would be correct. However, even in such a case, it would make much more sense to use a single noun than a group to refer to them like this.
'What's out there?'
'There is (a man) and (a dog).'
Even as a collective, the subjects are still singular. In this case, even as a collective, the subject would still be singular, as it is a singular collective:
'Who is out there?'
'There is (a man and his dog).'
To use 'are' you need a multiple or plural subjects:
'What's out there?'
'There are (men) and a dog.
or
'There are men and dogs.'
Singular collectives are not plural, only multiple subjects are plural, collective or otherwise.
Edit: Also, the brit take on this in terms of companies and groups is different than the american.
Multiple subjects for one verb means it is conjugated as having a plural subject and I am fairly certain this doesn't change based on word order, as you are suggesting.
Exactly. There are only 6 ways to conjugate a verb (generally):
I
You
It
All of us (we)
All of you (you all)
All of them (they)
For to be (to be there), the conjugations are:
I am
You are
It is
We are
You all are
They are
If this sentence was structured like: There is a man, and there is his dog
it would be correct. However, since the subject contains more than one subject, it is a group. Thus, the conjugation for it (which would apply ONLY if the ENTIRE subject was a single unit, and even then you'll be in trouble grammatically. Any time you are referring to more than one thing, you are using the second half of the conjugations, we, you (pl.), and they.
True, but the second verb exists, it has just been dropped in conversational english.
There is a man, and [strike]there is[/strike] a dog.
Ima go with this explanation from what I can recall from my schooling days. Besides, they should learn to speak how everyone else does and I don't think anyone says "There are a man and his dog."
B.net: Kusanku
I don't think this is correct. Though you are right, we often drop verbs in conversational english, there's a distinction between a subject being "X and Y" as opposed to two subjects, X, and Y. The context of this sentence is the former, since we're probably pointing out the location of a man who is with his dog. It would be the latter if we were also talking about two locations, ie:
That sentence: *points left* There is a man, *points right* and his dog.
This sentence: *points forward* There are a man and his dog.
Also, #2 is correct assuming we are saying "there are" in order to imply the existence of something which we are, again, treating as a unit. The key is this, and this is what sarcastro is getting at, I believe:
If you're intending to talk about 2 subjects at the same time, regardless, you use they.
If you're intending to talk about 2 subjects individually, even if they are conspicuously close together, use he/she/it. (With exceptions, blah blah)
Though there is some merit in that, there is a definite reason that language students learn the proper way to speak. With the exception of the trickier rules, we all know HOW to speak properly, we just choose not to. The situation being posed is that they will have to speak in slang, they will not know how to speak properly.
For instance, if english is your second language, would you rather interview like:
"Hello. I am not very good at english, i apologize. I will try and do well as i can."
or,
"Wut up, yo, dawg. i 'on't speak english much, y'hear wut'i'm say'n? So bear wif me, aiight?"*
*note: Slight exaggeration may be detectable
It is never advisable to teach conversational or colloquial language as "correct" to someone who's working in their second language
You stick to the standard and they will pick up the conversational language through immersion themselves
from http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/dictionaries/english/data/d0081767.html
"collective noun
A collective noun, or group noun, is a noun which designates a group of people or animals. Crew, committee, gang, government, audience, family, and herd are all collective nouns.
When such a group is considered as a single unit, its collective noun is used with a singular verb and singular pronouns: The committee has reached its decision. But when the focus is on the individual members of the group, British English tends to use a plural verb and plural pronouns with its collective nouns: The committee have been arguing all morning over what they should do. American English usually uses a singular verb and pronouns in these circumstances.
A determiner in front of a singular collective noun is always singular: this committee, never these committee (but of course when the collective noun is pluralized, it takes a plural determiner: these committees)."
Thus: "There is the team. They will be up against the dodgers next week."
"There are the team, they are disagreeing with one another."
A man has a dog. There they are.
Since 'they' is the pronoun we would use to refer to a man and his dog, we conjugate it with they, they happening to be the plural form of he/she/it.
Good find on the source, btw, I couldn't remember exactly where I had read that.
The thing is, there might be more than one noun in the subject, or there may be two subjects. You can't tell by just that one sentance as it can be read either way. Context is going to provide the key in determining which is the case.
This is true, I was simply asserting that it is much more likely we are not referring to them as a single unit, and that most usages of the phrase would probably follow suit.
Though, again, it does depend on the context, always depends on the context, that much is indisputable.
It's slightly idiomatic, but it's not slang.
1. Apple are releasing a new Mac soon.
2. Apple is releasing a new Mac soon.
@gamefacts - Totally and utterly true gaming facts on the regular!
I think this one depends on whether you're British or American.
This is true. And I'm positive it's true, because training language teachers is my job, and the hundreds I've trained will all teach that way.
Or I'll be sarcastic at them.
Yes, this is true too.
Thanks!