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

Re: singular / plural

Cool Breeze — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 18:16:59 GMT

Goodman
<<<<and "most grammarians accept "there was/were a television, a radio, a sofa and a table" >>> I guess I am not a grammarian.
I personally won't say "there were a television.."

No, I didn't think you would. To a grammarian, there is more to it than the next word. There are at least three views on this.

1. The rule of proximity: The first word after the verb is singular (a television), so a singular verb (was) can/should be used.

2. The rule of number: If only one thing is mentioned, use a singular verb (was); if more things are mentioned, use a plural verb (were). I remember a British graduate of Oxford University who lectured on English Philology at Helsinki University and was an enthusiastic proponent of this rule. He considered was wrong in cases like this. Similarly, he considered media is and algae is always wrong as well. I use the past tense because he is no longer alive.

3. Liberal grammarians, who don't really care which one of the above rules is applied. (As I said, I'm one of them!)

Re: fit(s), saw

Newguest — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:38:10 GMT

Avangi
1. Which is the subject so you need the singular verb, fits. But we would not use "to" in this case.

2. Either one works.

So it should be: Which of these words fits this rule???

I thought that when you say: It was the first time.. then you have to use "the past perfect tense" and when you say: it's the first time.. then you have to use "the present perfect tense"???

Thank you

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: Spelling of Plural noun /vs/ the Third-person-singular verb inflection.

CalifJim — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 07:07:21 GMT

All the rules for adding S are the same for plurals as for third-person singular present tense verbs, including the words that end in y.

That said, there are a few exceptions that you will encounter from time to time, for example, words that end in f or fe. There are so few that you can just make a mental note of them when you encounter them.

Noun: loaf, loaves
Verb: loaf, loafs
Noun: knife, knives
Verb: knife, knifes

CJ

Re: indirect speech?

Kooyeen — Mon, 09 Oct 2006 22:58:27 GMT

Eh, Rothkowitz, this has sometjhing to do with what I just asked! (see the thread "If I knew what you knew")

It seems both "I wish I could say I was happy" and "I wish I could say I'm happy" can be used with the same meaning. Anyway, I think that the sentence with "was" sounds better, maybe because of a kind of tense agreement.

You also wrote "You could say I'm a happy person"... which is similar to "I'd say this sentence is not correct."

"I'd say this sentence is not correct" sounds good without "was" because it is not part of a conditional structure, it's just a way to express your opinion. But if you put it in a conditional environment, you'll get: "If you didn't put a singular verb in that sentence, I'd say that sentence was not correct."

I'll probably be completely wrong Rothkowitz, but since you are asking the same thing I'm asking in another thread, I decided to tell you my opinion.

a singular/plural verb

Minhuoc — Tue, 22 Aug 2006 02:57:44 GMT

Hi,

After percent which tense would I use? a singular verb or a plural verb? Thanks.

"Nearly 40 percent of the people in our town never vote/votes in local elections."

Re: Difference between American and British English

Guest — Thu, 17 Feb 2005 09:29:44 GMT

1. Use of present perfect tense and simple past tense

Speakers of American English generally use the present perfect tense (have/has + past participle) far less than speakers of British English. In spoken American English it is very common to use the simple past tense as an alternative in situations where the present perfect would usually have been used in British English. The two situations where this is especially likely are:

(i) In sentences which talk about an action in the past that has an effect in the present:

American English British/American English
Jenny feels ill. She ate too much. Jenny feels ill. She's eaten too much.
I can't find my keys. Did you see them anywhere? I can't find my keys. Have you
seen them anywhere?

(ii) In sentences which contain the words already, just or yet:

American English British/American English
A: Are they going to the show tonight?
B: No. They already saw it. A: Are they going to the show tonight?
B: No. They've already seen it.
A: Is Samantha here?
B: No, she just left. A: Is Samantha here?
B: No, she's just left.
A: Can I borrow your book?
B: No, I didn't read it yet. A: Can I borrow your book?
B: No, I haven't read it yet.
2. Verb agreement with collective nouns

In British English collective nouns, (i.e. nouns referring to particular groups of people or things), (e.g. staff , government, class, team) can be followed by a singular or plural verb depending on whether the group is thought of as one idea, or as many individuals , e.g.:
My team is winning.
The other team are all sitting down.
In American English collective nouns are always followed by a singular verb, so an American would usually say:
Which team is losing?
whereas in British English both plural and singular forms of the verb are possible, as in:
Which team is/are losing?
3. Use of delexical verbs have and take

In British English, the verb have frequently functions as what is technically referred to as a delexical verb, i.e. it is used in contexts where it has very little meaning in itself but occurs with an object noun which describes an action, e.g.:
I'd like to have a bath.
Have is frequently used in this way with nouns referring to common activities such as washing or resting, e.g.:
She's having a little nap.
I'll just have a quick shower before we go out.
In American English, the verb take, rather than have, is used in these contexts, e.g.:
Joe's taking a shower.
I'd like to take a bath.
Let's take a short vacation.
Why don't you take a rest now?
4. Use of auxiliaries and modals

In British English, the auxiliary do is often used as a substitute for a verb when replying to a question, e.g.:
A: Are you coming with us?
B: I might do.
In American English, do is not used in this way, e.g.:
A: Are you coming with us?
B: I might.
In British English needn't is often used instead of don't need to, e.g.:
They needn't come to school today.
They don't need to come to school today.
In American English needn't is very unusual and the usual form is don't need to, i.e.:
They don't need to come to school today.
In British English, shall is sometimes used as an alternative to will to talk about the future, e.g.:
I shall/will be there later.
In American English, shall is unusual and will is normally used.

In British English shall I/we is often used to ask for advice or an opinion, e.g.:
Shall we ask him to come with us?
In American English should is often used instead of shall, i.e.:
Should we ask him to come with us?
4. Use of prepositions

In British English, at is used with many time expressions, e.g.:
at Christmas/five 'o' clock
at the weekend
In American English, on is always used when talking about the weekend, not at, e.g.:
Will they still be there on the weekend?
She'll be coming home on weekends.
In British English, at is often used when talking about universities or other institutions, e.g.:
She studied chemistry at university.
In American English, in is often used, e.g.:
She studied French in high school.
In British English, to and from are used with the adjective different, e.g.:
This place is different from/to anything I've seen before.
In American English from and than are used with different, e.g.:
This place is different from/than anything I've seen before.
In British English to is always used after the verb write, e.g.:
I promised to write to her every day.
In American English, to can be omitted after write, i.e.:
I promised to write her every day.
5. Past tense forms

Below is a table showing verbs which have different simple past and past participle forms in American and British English.
Note that the irregular past forms burnt, dreamt and spoilt are possible in American English, but less common than the forms ending in -ed.

infinitive simple past (Br) simple past (Am) past participle (Br) past participle (Am)
burn burned/burnt burned/burnt burned/burnt burned/burnt
bust bust busted bust busted
dive dived dove/dived dived dived
dream dreamed/dreamt dreamed/dreamt dreamed/dreamt dreamed/dreamt
get got got got gotten
lean leaned/leant leaned leaned/leant leaned
learn learned/learnt learned learned/learnt learned
plead pleaded pleaded/pled pleaded pleaded/pled
prove proved proved proved proved/proven
saw sawed sawed sawn sawn/sawed
smell smelled/smelt smelled smelled/smelt smelled
spell spelled/spelt spelled spelled/spelt spelled
spill spilled/spilt spilled spilled/spilt spilled
spit spat spat/spit spat spat/spit
spoil spoiled/spoilt spoiled/spoilt spoiled/spoilt spoiled/spoilt
stink stank stank/stunk stunk stunk
wake woke woke/waked woken woken

Note that have got is possible in American English, but is used with the meaning 'have', gotten is the usual past participle of get, e.g.:

American English British English
You've got two brothers. (= you have two brothers) You've got two brothers.
You've gotten taller this year You've got taller this year
from www.onestopenglish.com

Re: Attn MrPedantic , blitz here

MrPedantic — Fri, 24 Dec 2004 00:08:14 GMT

Hey Blitz,

1) "are Amber and Joe going?" is correct.

2)
"your son is not attending college since last two months": incorrect.
"your son has not been attending college for two months now" is ok; but 'has not attended' would be better.
"your son has not been attending college for the past two months": ok; but again, 'has not attended' would be better.

3) 'Medicines' is ok when you're talking about different kinds of medicine; but if it's all the same stuff it's just 'medicine'.

For this one, I'd say: "the medicines you prescribed earlier are finished" (or 'all used up').

4) "for how long am I going to have this facility": ok.
"for how long will I be getting this facility": ok.
"for how long will i get this facility": ok, if you're talking about e.g. a special free trial on a website.

5) "I have been doing this since last two years"/"I have done this since last two years" wouldn't be right; you'd have to say "I have been doing this for the last two years"/"I have done this for the last two years".

The first version ("I have been doing") is the 'present perfect progressive tense' (our old friend the PPP), and the second version ("I have done") is the present perfect (PP). They both relate to actions in the past that have a relation to the present; but the PPP puts more emphasis on the 'doing' as a process, whereas the PP puts more emphasis on the fact that it's completed (i.e. 'doing' vs 'done').

6) "sit in the chair": fine; but probably more usual with an armchair.
"sit on the chair"; also fine; probably more usual with an ordinary hard chair.

7) This is a tricky one. "From the beginning" seems to put the emphasis on the continuity of whatever is 'from the beginning', whereas 'since the beginning' serves more as a simple time-frame:

'From the beginning of 2004, the police were looking for an excuse to pull me in.' (The looking for the excuse was continuous.)

'Since the beginning of 2004, the police have pulled me in five times.' (The important thing here is the number of times he's been pulled in. The 'since' phrase defines the period during which it all happened.)

8) 'aliens have been coming here for more than 2000yrs' - fine.

'aliens have been coming here since 2000 yrs': wrong.

Your first sentence sounds fine to me. You could also say: 'the first aliens came here more than 2000 years ago'.

9) 'None of our experts was able to answer your question/None of our experts were able to answer your question.'

Opinions vary about this one. Some people say you have to use a singular verb ('was'), as if 'no one' = 'not one'; others say you can use a plural verb. The Merriam-Webster dictionary says you can use either.

If I were giving the answer in a test, I would say 'was', because the people who say you have to use 'was' will mark 'were' as incorrect, whereas the people who say you can use 'were' will also accept 'was'.

But when I'm speaking, I say 'were'. I have a feeling 'was' is more usual in American English, though.

See you,
MrP

Re: When to use 'is' and 'are' has caused an argument in the office

Brutus — Sun, 05 Dec 2004 01:37:13 GMT

Calif Jim

I used past tense in the 'posing' example because I was imagining a press article describing the event. When we say "Manchester United are (or is) posing for photos", we are doing so in the belief that the listener or reader will infer we mean the players - or at least those players who are present at the event - and possibly the coaches and certain other non-playing staff as well. If we mean that, there is every chance that we have successfully, yet succinctly, conveyed our meaning. Few people would think we meant each and every employee and shareholder of the company.

Mr P

I am not being 'overly strict'. I am not advocating that the standards of grammar we use in formal (e.g. legal) letters need be adhered to in casual conversation - that would be absurd. If I say to my friend "Manchester United aren't doing very well in the league this year", then my intended meaning is clear even if my grammar has a minor fault. Isabel's original post was talking about a legal correspondence and, as a secretary, she feels she has a responsibility to advise her boss in the event of him making such an error. As I understand her, she is asking whether she was correct in asserting that the singular verbs (is, has) and the pronoun (it) should be used where the referent is National Coal Board. She most certainly was correct in my view.

As for your latter point about "Manchester United ran out onto the pitch", of course the statement refers to the players and, as such, the plural should be used. Manchester United, either as a corporate body or as a cultural concept can't 'run' anywhere.

As far as I am aware, the only occasion in which the use of a plural to describe a single entity is permissible occurs when the subjunctive mood applies (e.g. "if I WERE you", "if he WERE here"). This only happens when a verb is used to indicate a situation or condition that is hypothetical, doubtful, or conditional.

Brutus.

[Feeling] Annoying English

Wai_Wai — Fri, 01 Oct 2004 07:22:48 GMT

[Feeling] Annoying English

I have learnt English for a long and long time.
Today I would like to express my crazy two cents again... (I may offend some people unknowingly...)

Whenever I say such ridiculous things, a lot of people will point the finger at me.

So be prepared! 8)

Q: What is the use of English? What are the uses of rules/usage in English?
A: Once in a while, I ask this question to people all over the world. Most of them says:
- to communicate, to facilitate communication.
- it is used to avoid confusion.
- Rules/Usage (I simply say "rules" afterward) are necessary because if different people use English(Eng) differently, it can be a trouble! No one will understand what you are talking about.
- Without rule, you will feel difficult to learn English. So rule make you easier to use English
- Rule is a useful guide to tell how people use English in the best way
etc.

It is just one side of the coin. People seem to forget another side.

English is at the same time to trouble and burden people. Its rules are not only to eliminate confusion but to raise confusion. On one hand, rules make you easier to handle the language tool (English). On another hand, they make you harder to handle the language tool (English).

English is somewhat playing tricks on us!

Be excel at rules/usage does not mean you really make use of the language tool (English) wisely to achieve the purpose of communication.

- Please eliminate redundant/burdensome/useless English rules
Top 4 outrageous rules
- singular noun; singular verb, vice versa
- Irregular plurals (noun)
- Irregular tense form (verb)
- Make-it-Complex comparatives (adj)
[Extra!] - unreasonable classification of (un)count noun (noun)

I am going to explain how they are annoying (especially to learners, but not limited to learners only. Native speakers suffer too!)

...