Korean Job Discussion Forums

demi · Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Location: London

How do I explain why we can't use 'has' in the following sentence:

Three years 'have' passed since he left.

Please help me. A student wants to know but I can't explain it. Sad

waggo · Joined: 18 May 2003 Location: pusan baby!

Because 'three years' is plural.

One year (it) has pased.

Three years (they) have passed.

seattlespew · Joined: 01 Mar 2006

leebumlik69 · Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 12:29 am Post subject:

billybrobby · Joined: 09 Dec 2004

I think "three years has passed" sounds OK

demi · Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Location: London

Come on peeps. I'm sure some of you out there can help me out. There must be some teachers with good grammar knowledge.
I can't just tell them i don't know.

out of context · Joined: 08 Jan 2006 Location: Daejeon

It's because "years" sounds similar to "ears", and a rabbit's ears are shaped kind of like the letter V, so we say "haVe".

ChuckECheese · Joined: 20 Jul 2006

demi · Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Location: London

thanks for making me smile but i need more input.

Ekuboko · Joined: 22 Dec 2004 Location: ex-Gyeonggi

Umm.. what waggo said? Rolling Eyes

If you can't accept that and want another answer, then give us a better context, or maybe you typed your OP wrong. Confused

communicationbreakdown · Joined: 05 Feb 2007 Location: Bundang

Is your student generally confused about subject-verb agreement, or is it that particular sentence that's tripping him or her up?

The subject ("years") is third-person plural, so the verb is third-person plural.

SUBJECT | SINGULAR | PLURAL
1st person | I have | we have
2nd person | you have | you have
3rd person | he/she/it has | they have

The only thing special about "years" is that, instead of being a concrete, countable object (like "boys" or "girls" or "banana slugs"), it represents an amount of time. Amounts are often treated as singular, so it could be considered correct to say "Three years has passed". We do the same thing with money, weights, and distances. For some reason, we use the singular naturally with "is"--"Three years is a long time" (as opposed to "Three years are a long time")--but the plural "have" sounds more natural than the singular "has".

Is that any help?

leebumlik69 · Posted: Thu Mar 29, 2007 6:29 am Post subject:

Brady · Joined: 25 Jul 2006 Location: Bucheon

The rules of English grammar are based on time + usage. In a situation like that, where even a native speaker doesn't understand the rule, I would simply tell my student both are correct. I think it's better to have multiple variants in English rather than go to the mat over a rule.

If you're still hard up for an answer, "have" is correct because the noun is plural, and "has" is correct because it refers to the implied phrase "a time of," i.e., "a time of three years has passed."

"Three years is passed" is also correct in some situations. So, hey, English is fun.

seattlespew · Joined: 01 Mar 2006

demi · Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Location: London

thanks everyone for the input. I shld have put my whole qst in the OP.

why shld we say:

three years 'have' passed since he left.

how do i explain the above in light of the example below?

three years 'is' not enough (why can't it be 'are')

Obviously i know this stuff 'seattle', but im useless at explaining it so i've asked for some help. u seem rather angry about that. why?

Any input appreciated. Thanks