The company is having a financial crisis. They will start laying off employees next month.
Management is concerned about high absenteeism. They plan to investigate changing the absent-with-pay guidelines.
The team is taking the bus to the next game. They would prefer to fly, but it's too expensive.
The audience applauds every time she comes on stage. They are a bit overly enthusiastic.
In the context provided, company, management, team, and audience are all singular. In each case the second sentence is wrong. In each case, they should be it.
If you prefer not to use it, you may recast the second sentence.
The company is having a financial crisis. Employees will be laid off starting next month.
Management is concerned about high absenteeism. Managers plan to investigate changing the absent-with-pay guidelines.
The team is taking the bus to the next game. Players would prefer to fly, but it's too expensive.
The audience applauds every time she comes on stage. Fans are a bit overly enthusiastic.
In some cases, a word may be singular or plural:
Her staff are planning a surprise party. They will hold it in two weeks.
Note: Words that are also singular include:
someone
any
anyone
every
everyone
each
Although this may seem obvious when you write the first sentence, it becomes less obvious when you write the second sentence.
Watch out for the British, Roberta. The committee are always up to something or other.
0 Replies
Walter Hinteler
1
Reply
Fri 2 May, 2003 03:36 pm
Just thinking about those "collective nouns" .... The jury is taking its seat in court? ('are taking their seats' "sounds" better, I think).
0 Replies
Dartagnan
1
Reply
Fri 2 May, 2003 04:00 pm
roger is right re the British and collective nouns. Another example:
The team are magic!
0 Replies
Roberta
1
Reply
Fri 2 May, 2003 04:52 pm
Yes, I mention collective nouns. The thing to look out for with them is the plural verb form.
The staff are planning ...
The jury are taking their seats.
The audience are...
Etc.
Sounds strange to my American ears.
The point is that if you use a plural in the first sentence, you must use a plural in all the following sentences that refer to the first. And vice versa re the singular.
0 Replies
Piffka
1
Reply
Fri 2 May, 2003 06:04 pm
Manchester United are traveling to Seattle in June.
0 Replies
Walter Hinteler
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 12:50 am
Well that's just because of the Germanic origin - it's common use in any Germanic language, as far as I remember. (And in romanic languages, too.)
0 Replies
McTag
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 01:39 am
Hey Roberta, just dipping in
This is a minefield, no?
Sometimes usage defeats logic
"None but the brave deserve(s) the fair"
I like people who quote Burns. Weel done, Cutty Sark!
Have you read "Mother Tongue" by Bill Bryson? Anyone? I loved it.
McT
0 Replies
Walter Hinteler
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 02:20 am
Well, McTag, besides Latin -and there are some restrictions to this as well!- languages are seldom completely logical.
Found a nice different example in an old schoolbook:
A number of people are waiting for the bus.
But: The number of people waiting for the bus is growing.
McTag
My heart 's in the Highlands, my heart is not here;
My heart 's in the Highlands a-chasing the deer.
Happy weekend to all!
0 Replies
McTag
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 01:58 pm
A-chasing the wild deer, and following the roe,
My herz in the hielans, wherever I go.
"From scenes like these auld Scotia's grandeur springs"
(And a tune that echoes just like Frank's or Bing's)
And geese, wild, fly with the moon on their wings
Are close to being some of my favourite things
0 Replies
Walter Hinteler
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 02:52 pm
McTag
A special dance in my hometown is called ECOSSAISE.
Quote:
("The Scottish [dance], which about 1830 to 40 was very popular, probably evolved from Hopser, a considerably older German folk dance. It got its name from Ecossaise (French for Scottish), a Counterdance. From 1842 in the cities Scottish was replaced by the faster Polka, but in the country it survived into our century. Scottish has much in common with Rheinländer, which is well known even today." http://www.anidance.de/en/he5e.htm)
Sorry, Roberta, for being out of the topic!
0 Replies
Roberta
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 05:42 pm
Walter, I had planned a separate Fine-Tuning to cover the number/a number. You beat me to the punch.
The number always takes the singular. A number always takes the plural.
A number of people are planning to come to the gathering. At this point, the number is uncertain.
McTag, I'm a Bobby Burns fan from way back. Glad to find another one. Most languages have a bit more logic to them than does English. It may be because most languages have "purer" sources than English, which has been influenced by so many other languages. All the more fun, I say.
Never mind being off topic. Enjoy yourselves.
0 Replies
McTag
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 05:52 pm
What about "less" and "fewer"?
Examples: Fewer people are expected today. The total number is less.
Less bacon, fewer pigs.
Is it old fashioned now, in your opinion, to make that kind of distinction?
McT
0 Replies
Roberta
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 08:10 pm
McTag, No, it isn't old-fashioned. It's correct. Less for things you can't count, and fewer for things you can. The same applies to number and amount. A number of pigs. An amount of bacon.
0 Replies
Diane
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 08:25 pm
Checking in, hoping to finally learn the rules.
0 Replies
nextone
1
Reply
Sat 3 May, 2003 08:51 pm
Less is more, but more are merrier?
0 Replies
McTag
1
Reply
Sun 4 May, 2003 10:38 am
Walter
There is also a musical style called a Schottische
cf. Polonaise, etc. 'Spect you knew that though.
Roberta, I agree, but fewer and fewer people seem to want to use (or are even aware of) the correct comparative word in this case.
And so I think, regrettably, that "fewer" will probably sooner or later sink into obscurity and disuse.
Not if we have anything to do with it though, eh?
McT
0 Replies
Letty
1
Reply
Sun 4 May, 2003 11:04 am
Verra interesting.
(aside to McTag--my heart's in the highland achasing the hart)
Ham and eggs is a delicious breakfast.
What we're talkin' about here is subject-verb agreement, right?
Once more. Grammar is the study of the parts of speech; the parts of a sentence; the phrase and the clause. Usage is another category; sentence structure another, etc.
The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in the stars, but in the translation.
0 Replies
Roberta
1
Reply
Sun 4 May, 2003 08:22 pm
Letty, Not exactly. I'm assuming that we can all get our subjects and verbs to agree. What this thread is about is getting subsequent sentences to agree with the original subject. Hence the it/they subject line.
Diane, Nice to see you here.
McT, You're right. Ignorance can be a powerful force in language usage. But I'll hang onto "fewer" to the bitter end.
nextone, Had to think about that for a bit. You're right.
Less for things you can't count, and fewer for things you can. The same applies to number and amount. A number of pigs. An amount of bacon.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace