🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul22.234558.15054@alf.uib.no>, hlirg@alf.uib.no (Roger
Greenwald) writes:
> In article <92204.135724GRV101@psuvm.psu.edu> Callec Dradja
<GRV101@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> >In article <1992Jul21.190619.21438@alf.uib.no>, hlirg@alf.uib.no (Roger
> >Greenwald) says:
> >>
> >>
> >>A worse one is that the New York
> >>Times usually contains at least a few sentences every day in
> >>which the verb does not agree with the subject in number.
> >>The most common case is that of sentences that begin with
> >>"There is" or "there was," and then follow up with a list
> >>of items, each of which is singular. (There is anger and
> >>frustration in Sarajevo tonight.) But there are many other
> >>cases as well. You can say the writers can't count from
> >>one to two; or you can say that the plural form of "to be"
> >>is gradually disappearing from English. The latter is a linguist's
> >>type of description. In this case it's probably correct, even if it
> >>may be regrettable.
> >>--
> >I think that this phenomena is not new. We talked about this very
> >topic in one of my grammar classes and it seems that in a list,
> >Standard English speakers will use a verb that agrees with the nearest
> >subject. This type of speech has been used by educated speakers for
> >quite some time.
> >
> "phenomena" is plural :-) (but I'm sure not everyone who writes
> for the NY Times knows that either).
> 
> It is true that in a sentence that contains a list, especially
> if it starts with expletive "There," a native speaker may feel
> it "sounds funny" to have "are" followed by a singular noun; but
> this tends to be the case only when the noun is preceded by
> an indefinite article. Thus: "There are a chair and a table on
> the east wall" puts "are" next to "a chair", and that can
> sound odd. But "There are anger and frustration here tonight"
> should not sound equally odd (or, in my view, odd at all).
> 
> If you consult Fowler on what to do if a verb comes after, say,
> a subject consisting of a plural noun, "or", and then a singular
> noun, you will probably find that he says one way out is
> to make the verb agree with the noun that is closest, but
> that the BEST way out is to recast the sentence! I agree.
> Note, however, that this was not the sort of case I was referring
> to as a lack of agreement.
> -- 
> Roger Greenwald
> Greenwald@hf.uib.no (address valid only until 10 August 1992)

  In the examples with 'there' in the 'subject', I would like to point out
  that this is an idiomatic expression of the same class as 'It's raining'
  or 'It's snowing' or 'There's trouble here.'  These kinds of expressions
  carry 'META-BAGGAGE' or context information supplied by the listener.
  
  Most of the conflict with number and verb seem to be in constructs where
  one might say "THERE'S" < list or conjucate of items> < some consequence>
  'There's anger and frustration, here'  Seems to be of the idomatic form.
  Can you tell me why this is 'non-standard' English?  Idioms are tricky,
  we say one thing and mean something else, and frequently impose structure
  that is only convenient.
  
          widows
  Linguist in the dark.
  
DISCLAIMER:  BNR builds telephones, not opinions.
ANTIDISCLAIMER:  The wrong stuff is mine, (the right stuff, too)