You are not logged in to Prodigits. Please register or login. You are not logged in to Prodigits. Please register or login.
Subject: Plural? Singular? I'm confused
mikeymk 19.04.17 - 10:09am
My niece has done that. My sister-in-law is Chinese, she and the brother-in-law have taught her both Chinese and English from the start.
It did seem to disrupt her English a little, but not much considering! And she'll catch up anyway. * +
tazdevil 19.04.17 - 12:00pm
Okay see, a group of people serves as a singular entity so it cannot be a group of people are visiting.
People are visiting is correct. Because the subject is 'people' which is plural. Therefore, it's correct to say 'are'
A group of people are visiting is incorrect. Because now the subject of that sentence is 'group' not people, which is a singular thing. The word 'group' has already classified all the people as one.
If you were to say 'groups of people are visiting' only then it would be correct to say 'are' because groups (subject of that sentence) is plural, would indicate multiple groups.
You see: a jar of, a bunch of, a group of, a plate of, a bundle of etc is a singular thing. Otherwise we couldn't distinguish between jars of pickles and a jar of pickles, bundles of books and a bundle of books, groups of people and a group of people etc
You focus on the subject of the sentence, and see if it's in the plural/singular form, and then use 'is' or 'are' accordingly. * +
tazdevil 19.04.17 - 12:00pm
No confusion there, mikey. My only confusion is why 'people' isn't a singular thing when it can also work as a group/collective noun for some of the examples I've listed.
People should not poke their noses. I agree that it should be 'noses' because the subject 'people' has a plural sense.
But I've definitely made 'people' a group thing when saying people should not poke their nose. Here, the subject 'people' has a singular sense.
I hope that makes sense?
I'm beginning to think that it's an exception to the rules. Maybe 'people' is ALWAYS plural, and has no singular sense even when used as a group/collective noun. Maybe there isn't such a thing as a group/collective noun in the sense I'm thinking.
You know what? I'm letting go of the concept. F*ck it. It's not helpful for English 
* +
tazdevil 19.04.17 - 12:00pm
Oh yes, I certainly agree. The environment makes a big difference on how a person speaks.
I say 'you know, you know' a lot while speaking English, and say 'like' excessively too. I go valley girl when trying to explain things unsuccessfully lol
I have American friends who talk eloquently, and their sentences are well-framed, whereas I talk like a trucker. I mean, I can write eloquently but my spoken English sucks. Eloquent trucker, you can say. * +
tazdevil 19.04.17 - 12:00pm
Besides d*ck, I have a thirst for learning 
* +
kelypso 19.04.17 - 12:14pm
Sorry taz I'm not much for reading right now but from first page examples only I would more likely use the singular option if I put some thought into it but I do believe they can be used fairly interchangebly, colloquially anyway.
The reason number 2 is a bit off is the 'by' seems unnecessary to me and the sentence would work better without it.
Just my uneducated 2c lol. * +
tazdevil 19.04.17 - 12:30pm
You know, I think they are equal too. Singular option sounds perfectly okay to me cause I'm thinking 'people' in the group/collective noun sense, which would serve it as a singular thing. But then, all are saying it's ALWAYS plural so I'll stick to the plural option lol
Google lied and confused me. *
+ refresh
+ go to page 1-14
+ my page
+ functions
3 search
4 submit a reply
6 first page
+ bookmark
8 General Chat Forum
9 Forum Index
