Search results for 'tag:Singular verbs tag:Clauses' matching tags 'Singular verbs' and 'Clauses'

Re: This small clip consists of different pictures spliced together...

Avangi — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 15:50:16 GMT

<< This small clip consists of different pictures spliced together which make the coin look as if it were moving on its own. >>

It's difficult to make "spliced together" the thing referred to by the "which" clause. I think "different pictures spliced together" must be taken as a unit, followed by a comma, and would then take the singular verb "makes."

Alternately, you could say, ". . . . different pictures spliced together [in such a way as] to make the coin look as if it were moving . . . . . ", using the infinitive "to make." It's a bit cumbersome.

Jackson, I'm sorry, I completely misunderstood your objection to "pictures" or "clip" as the reference for the "which" clause. I thought you were making a point about whether the coin really moved on its own or merely seemed to do so.

If your intention or desire is to stress that it's the splicing that brings it off, that should be allowed.

Re: Agreement

Avangi — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 08:05:31 GMT

Awence wrote:

Please kindly indicate the correct answers and justifications for the answers.

1. Various kinds of food (has/have) been prepared. "kinds" is the subject of the sentence and is singular, requiring a singular verb, have [been prepared]. (present perfect, passive, to prepare)

2. They are doing these things quietly. Nobody is ever to know what (is/are) happening. "What" is the subject of the subordinate clause, and is singular, taking the singular verb, is [happening]. (present progressive of to happen)

Thank you.

You're supposed to offer your solution first.

Re: which/that

Kooyeen — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:28:57 GMT

Thanks Jim, I understand, even though it seems kind of complicated to me.
Also because I noticed this strange thing:

CalifJim wrote:

The discussion above covers most of this. which is more often used than who in AmE, and what the team, audience, etc. is/are actually doing may influence the choice, but rewording to avoid the problem is not a bad idea either, where possible.

The team/staff/committee, who were requested to walk into the auditorium one by one, were proud of the awards they received.

You used plural verbs with collective nouns... How come? I thought in American English there were only used with singular verbs. I remember reading in another forum that Americans would never (or "very rarely") say that a class are doing something. The class is waiting for the teacher, the class in playing, the team is not ready, etc.

As a rule of thumb, I would use "which" + singular verb to refer to collective nouns in non-restricitve clauses, and I would only use "who" + plural verb when I also mention the members.
- The audience, which didn't look much interested,...
- The team of engineers, who are waiting for our instructions,...

What do you think?
Thanks

Re: Verb Tense Issues

Clive — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 21:54:18 GMT

Hi,

1. I had to help him because he is my friend.

I am confused if the use of the verb "is" in the dependent clause is correct. There is a rule that if the verb in the independent clause is in its past or past perfect form, the verb in the dependent or subordinated clause should also be in its past or past perfect form. However, I know that there are exceptions to this rule--such as when the object of the verb is a general or widespread fact. I am not sure if I can classify the statement above as falling under this exception. Do I use "is" or "was"?

'Was' is always correct.However, as you know, you can sometimes say 'is'. Here, it would be OK if 'he' is still your friend, and if the past event was in the reasonably recent past. eg If I helped him 50 seconds ago, I'd use 'is'. If I helped him 50 years ago - I'd say 'was'.

2. We said that the title of the book is/was Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire.

In this case, I am more inclined to use the verb "is" because I do not think that the clause "We said" is the independent clause. There is a rule which states that if the verb in the independent clause is in a form other than the two I previously mentioned, there is no need to stick to the "should also be in the past or past perfect form" rule. My confusion lies in whether or not "the title of the book is/was Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" is the independent clause, considering that it is preceded by the dependent marker "that." Please advise. To some degree, what I said above also applies here. To some degree, it also depends on whether we are talking about a specific copy of a book which is not present here but was present at the time of the past discussion, in which case I'd prefer 'was'. I wouldn't really look first at the grammar, as you seem to be doing.

3. Do/Does any of you dance? AND Was/Were any of you called? "Any" is the subject in the abovementioned sentences, right? According to this grammar book I read, "any" is a problematic subject because it can either be singular or plural. Yes. In his Practical English Usage, Michael Swan notes that When 'any of' is followed by a plural noun or pronoun, the verb can be singular or plural. A singular verb is more common in a formal style. I prefer 'do/were' here.

How do I know when to consider it singular/plural? Please advise. The same way that you know any word is singular or plural. As a simple example, consider Is any of the wall painted? Are any of the walls painted?

In your example, when you say 'you', are you referring to more than one person? Yes.

4. If I am narrating a story that happened in the past, do I always have to use verbs that are in their past tense? What if part of my narration involves something that is true until now? Sorry, I have to rush out. I'll try to come back later.

Example:

I used to work for this company in the city. My building there is/was near medical and recreational facilities. One day, my back was in so much pain that I had to ask my secretary to browse the city directory and look for the closest spa to where my office is/was. She found one that is/was five minutes away. After office hours, I decided to proceed to the spa to have my massage. When I finally reached my destination, I was shocked to see that my boss was also there.

Best wishes, Clive

Re: One of the ... that ...

Zj.frank — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:37:23 GMT

Tanit wrote:

Hi, good question!

I was wandering whether a slightly different point of view exists as for the subject of the sentence:
He is one [of the few] that knows the solution to the problem.
or
He is one of the few that know the solution to the problem.

After some research, I came across this:

"one of those who. Constructions such as one of those people who pose a different problem. Many people argue that who should be followed by a plural verb in these sentences, as in He is one of those people who just donât take ânoâ for an answer. Their thinking is that the relative pronoun who refers to the plural noun people, not to one. They would extend the rule to constructions with inanimate nouns, as in The sports car turned out to be one of the most successful products that were ever manufactured in this country.

But the use of the singular verb in these constructions is common, even among the best writers. In an earlier survey, 42 percent of the Usage Panel accepted the use of the singular verb in such constructions. Itâs really a matter of which word you feel is most appropriate as the antecedent of the relative pronounâ one or the plural noun in the of phrase that follows it. Note also that when the phrase containing one is introduced by the definite article, the verb in the relative clause must be singular: He is the only one of the students who has (not have) already taken Latin."

For what it's worth, heere are the Google search results for
"one of the few of that" and
"one of the few of who" in the BBC website only. If you consider only sentences in simple present , you will find both "have" and "has", "do" and "does" and so on.

Thanks, Tanit!

I was writing my previous reply while you posted this one.

The link you provided is really useful.

Re: One of the ... that ...

Tanit — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:18:48 GMT

Zj.frank wrote:
Dear all:

He is one of the few that knows the solution to the problem.
or
He is one of the few that know the solution to the problem.

Do the two "that"s denote different things? Shall we say that the first "that" denotes "he" while the second "that" denotes "the few"? If so, do the two sentences have slightly different meanings?

It seems that the first sentence is more often used. Here is an example from <http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/films/int/1mm/gluttony/-/films/oneminutemovies/watch/snowball.shtml?gluttony.shtml>

This is the best film on here... and one of the few that bothers with any sense of narrative and character.

Surely there are a few films that bother with some sense of narrative and character. Is it to say that in such case, we usually use "that bothers" rather than "that bother"? Thanks in advance for any enlightenment!

Hi, good question!

I was wandering whether a slightly different point of view exists as for the subject of the sentence:
He is one [of the few] that knows the solution to the problem.
or
He is one of the few that know the solution to the problem.

After some research, I came across this:

"one of those who. Constructions such as one of those people who pose a different problem. Many people argue that who should be followed by a plural verb in these sentences, as in He is one of those people who just donât take ânoâ for an answer. Their thinking is that the relative pronoun who refers to the plural noun people, not to one. They would extend the rule to constructions with inanimate nouns, as in The sports car turned out to be one of the most successful products that were ever manufactured in this country.

But the use of the singular verb in these constructions is common, even among the best writers. In an earlier survey, 42 percent of the Usage Panel accepted the use of the singular verb in such constructions. Itâs really a matter of which word you feel is most appropriate as the antecedent of the relative pronounâ one or the plural noun in the of phrase that follows it. Note also that when the phrase containing one is introduced by the definite article, the verb in the relative clause must be singular: He is the only one of the students who has (not have) already taken Latin."

For what it's worth, heere are the Google search results for
"one of the few of that" and
"one of the few of who" in the BBC website only. If you consider only sentences in simple present , you will find both "have" and "has", "do" and "does" and so on.

EDITED: "wandering" is a typo for "wondering". My apologies.

Re: Everybody & Everyone

Mister Micawber — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 05:53:13 GMT

Both are fine. Here is what the American Heritage Dictionary has to say:

USAGE NOTE: Every is representative of a large class of English words and expressions that are singular in form but felt to be plural in sense. The class includes, for example, noun phrases introduced by every, any, and certain uses of some. These expressions invariably take a singular verb; we say Every car has (not have) been tested. Anyone is (not are) liable to fall ill. But when a sentence contains a pronoun that refers to a previous noun phrase introduced by every, grammar and sense pull in different directions. The grammar of these expressions requires a singular pronoun, as in Every car must have its brakes tested, but the meaning often leads people to use the plural pronoun, as in Every car must have their brakes tested. The use of plural pronouns in such cases is common in speech, but it is still widely regarded as incorrect in writing. â¢The effort to adhere to the grammatical rule causes complications, however. The first is grammatical. When a pronoun refers to a phrase containing every or any that falls within a different independent clause, the pronoun cannot be singular. Thus it is not idiomatic to say Every man left; he took his raincoat with him. Nor can one say No one could be seen, could he? Writers unwilling to use plural forms in these examples must find another way of expressing their meaning, either by rephrasing the sentence so as to get the pronoun into the same clause (as in Every man left, taking his raincoat with him) or by substituting another word for every or any (as in All the men left; they took their raincoats with them).

Re: is or are??

MrPedantic — Sat, 27 Jan 2007 13:03:47 GMT

1. Jeff is one of those hyperactive boys who is always falling and breaking something.

If the verb is singular, we have to solve this problem: what does "who" refer to?

We can test for antecedence by moving the relative clause:

2. ?Jeff is one, who is always falling and breaking something, of those hyperactive boys.

3. Jeff, who is always falling and breaking something, is one of those hyperactive boys.

#2 demonstrates that the antecedent isn't "one", since the sentence would then be unintelligible. #3 demonstrates that it can't be "Jeff", since the sentence would then have a different meaning.

This leaves only one possibility: "who" refers to the entire phrase "one of those hyperactive boys". But cf.

4. One of those hyperactive boys is always falling and breaking something.

Here, "of those hyperactive boys" denotes the set of which "one" is a member. The singular verb is therefore "correct".

In our phrase, however, "one of" denotes a member of the set "hyperactive boys...something". The plural verb is therefore "correct".

Thus:

"I'm sorry â what did you say Jeff was one of?"

"Those boys who are always falling and breaking something, of course."

MrP

Re: "all i had"

Cool Breeze — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 12:31:48 GMT

Both are used, that's for sure. Purists may prefer All I had today was two pieces of pizza because all is the subject of the main clause and does not refer to people. Thus it should be followed by a singular verb, as in:

All is well that ends well.

When all refers to people, a plural verb is needed:
All are present. (= Everybody is present.)

However, I am not a purist and don't object to All I had today were two pieces of pizza in the least.

Cheers
CB

Re: What Is or What Are?

Bambang — Wed, 28 Jun 2006 10:04:46 GMT

Just for additional information, here is the usage notes from a dictionary :

When what is the subject of a clause, it may be construed as singular or plural, depending on the sense. It is singular when taken as the equivalent of that which or the thing which, as in I see what seems to be a dead tree; and it is plural when it is taken as the equivalent of those which or the things which, as in He sometimes makes what seem to be gestures of aloofness. - When a what clause is itself the subject of a sentence, it may be construed as singular or plural, but the conditions governing this choice are somewhat more complicated. In general, a what clause will be taken as a plural when the clause contains an explicit indication of its own plurality. There are two principal cases. First, the clause is plural if what is the subject of the clause and the verb of the clause is itself plural: What seem to be two dead trees are blocking the road. What most surprise me are the inflammatory remarks at the end of his article. If the verb in the what clause does not anticipate the plural sense of the predicate in this way, a singular verb is generally used in the main clause as well, though the plural is sometimes found: What truly commands respect is (sometimes are) a large navy and a resolute foreign policy. Second, the what clause is treated as plural when its predicate contains a plural noun phrase that unambiguously establishes the plurality of the clause as a whole, as in What traditional grammarians called "predicates" are called "verb phrases" by modern linguists. What the Romans established as military outposts were later to become important trading centers. In the absence of explicit plural marking of either of these types in a subject what clause, the clause is usually treated as singular for the purposes of agreement, regardless of the sense: What she held in her lap was four kittens. What the apparent diamonds turned out to be was paste. In some cases, however, a clause with what as the subject may be treated as singular or plural, depending on a subtle distinction of sense. In What excite him most are money and power, the implication is that money and power are distinct elements; in What excites him most is money and power, the implication is that money and power are taken as constituting a single entity.