Page 1 of 1
Neither of them is weak. vs Neither of them are weak.
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 7:33 am
by Ilunga
I know which of these two are grammatically correct (is), but I regularly use the second option (are). Would you regard this as acceptable usage? It seems much more natural to me.
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 8:56 am
by Andrew Patterson
They are both grammatically correct. You can either regard "them" as two individuals focusing on "neither", or you can regard "them" as a group, focusing on "them".
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:57 am
by Ilunga
Thank you Andrew, I was teaching neither recently and came across this point, I told my students that both were acceptable but then couldn't back this up with an example from any of my grammar books, so withdrew my claim until I couild give them some evidence...was a little worried I had been wrong all these years.
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 4:03 pm
by metal56
Ilunga wrote:Thank you Andrew, I was teaching neither recently and came across this point, I told my students that both were acceptable but then couldn't back this up with an example from any of my grammar books, so withdrew my claim until I couild give them some evidence...was a little worried I had been wrong all these years.
Take a look at articles dealing with
notional concord.
For now:
1.3 What is meant by notional concord (as opposed to grammatical concord)?
concord determined by the sg/pl idea of the noun,
not by whether it is sg or pl grammatically
What type of nouns typically occur with notional concord? Give an example.
group nouns: My group / family / team are doing fine
(other cases, OK) A lot / large number (of people) were arrested
Bed and breakfast costs £40
Good luck!
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 7:50 pm
by Andrew Patterson
Bottom line Metal, would you say that notional concord is more important than grammatical concord. I'm used to discussing this with regard to teams and committees, etc, but "Bed and Breakfast" costs..." jumped out at me there, but you are right - since it is indeed viewed as a single entity, "costs" is more common than "cost". I wouldn't say "cost" is wrong there, though, just less common.
Posted: Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:09 pm
by metal56
Andrew Patterson wrote:Bottom line Metal, would you say that notional concord is more important than grammatical concord. I'm used to discussing this with regard to teams and committees, etc, but "Bed and Breakfast" costs..." jumped out at me there, but you are right - since it is indeed viewed as a single entity, "costs" is more common than "cost". I wouldn't say "cost" is wrong there, though, just less common.
If "cost" was needed,
bed would have a separate price to
breakfast.
I wouldn't say that notional concord is more important than grammatical concord, or v.v. .