Sky care that Fine Gael reckon that Leinster are going to win the rugby

xoxyx

This is a bugbear of mine, and I find it amazing how often I come across it.

Sky doesn't care. Sky is a single entity, - it cares.

Fine Gael reckons.

Leinster is... well, maybe it's not... but, it certainly "aren't" going to win its next rugby match.

I've come across so much opposition on this that I've almost started to doubt myself. In work, I have had many, many letters from people who should know better telling me that a client (a bank, for example) are going to x, y and z.

Now, I understand that when a person talks about the Irish team, the reference may be to the team as a group of players - and I'm okay with it. It's not right, but it's ok, and if Whitney Heuston are is ok with it, then so am I. But, when I hear it on Newstalk, or RTE, or BBC, or the like, I'm a little bit astonished that these basic errors are being made. It's not a big deal, but it's just so constant!

So, to you Boards sticklers; I'm not wrong; am I?

Earthhorse

It's a tough one. What I've read in the past is that in British English collective nouns take the plural (U2 are planning a world tour) and in American English they take the singular (U2 is planning a world tour). The former sounds correct to my ear.

But here's a page with some examples that make me think this should be a stylistic rather than a grammatical issue.

The first example on the page is "The police is still looking for him". By your reckoning, this is correct but this sounds totally incorrect to me, even though the police are (is?) a single entity, like Sky or Fine Gael.

pickarooney

It's a very well-known UK/US difference, as Earthhorse says.

"Liverpool is a lovely city/Liverpool are sixth in the table" is normal for the UK whereas
"Detroit is a great town/Dallas is behind by five" is more common in the US.

So while you're not wrong to choose a more American way of expressing yourself, I'd say you are wrong to insist that others are wrong for not doing the same.

xoxyx

That is really interesting. I honestly thought that I was right, even though, as you say, it can sound very awkward at times. How can this classification of single entities as plural objects be justified? I mean, how do you decide when to do it and when not to? That Spar shop down the road are great??? Ahhhhh!!!!

Oh well, I'll fight on my lone battle, but I'll stop pointing and laughing at people who tell me that ESB are better than Bord Gais. Or at least, I'll be less obvious about it.

pickarooney

As a native speaker of a certain age you must be aware from hearing the language all your life of when to use it and when not to, surely?

If you want to justify it, read up on semiotics and get back to us

"That Spar shop down the road" - here you're clearly referring to a building and you should use the singular verb form.

"Spar is great" - this is being used an as umbrella term for all Spar shops or the Spar business model so is again singular.

"Spar are great" - this is shorthand for, e.g. "The people who work for Spar (and the business ethos they promote) are great."

xoxyx

pickarooney wrote: »

As a native speaker of a certain age you must be aware from hearing the language all your life of when to use it and when not to, surely?

If you want to justify it, read up on semiotics and get back to us

"That Spar shop down the road" - here you're clearly referring to a building and you should use the singular verb form.

"Spar is great" - this is being used an as umbrella term for all Spar shops or the Spar business model so is again singular.

"Spar are great" - this is shorthand for, e.g. "The people who work for Spar (and the business ethos they promote) are great."

Yes, but it's not impossible for a person to refer to the Spar shop down the road and have in mind the service from staff. I have heard it before and, I can guarantee, I will hear it again.

I am simply pointing out that, without clearly defined rules, people will lose the run of themselves entirely! I know, I know - this is the nature of language. It doesn't mean I have to like it though.

pickarooney

xoxyx wrote: »

Yes, but it's not impossible for a person to refer to the Spar shop down the road and have in mind the service from staff. I have heard it before and, I can guarantee, I will hear it again.

I suppose it's not an entirely unreasonable way to use it. I'd consider flexibility a
real bonus for a language, myself.

Earthhorse

xoxyx wrote: »

How can this classification of single entities as plural objects be justified?

For the most part, they're plural nouns. Would you say "Irish Children is at a greater risk of obesity"?

I mean, how do you decide when to do it and when not to? That Spar shop down the road are great?

In this case, your use of the word shop changes what the verb is acting on. I accept what you're saying about people using just "Spar" as shorthand for that; I guess it just sounds wrong to the ear in such cases.

pickarooney wrote: »

"Detroit is a great town/Dallas is behind by five" is more common in the US.

But even in the States they will say "The Yankees are behind by five" despite the fact that The Yankees are a single entity, just like Dallas. It seems to me no matter which rule you pick, you will always end up breaking it.

pickarooney

"The Yankees" is clearly plural though, referring to the group of individual players. "New York is behind by five" refers to the team as a unit.

xoxyx

Earthhorse wrote: »

Would you say "Irish Children is at a greater risk of obesity"?

I would not have said so before, but I sure as hell will from now on!!

Earthhorse

xoxyx wrote: »

I would not have said so before, but I sure as hell will from now on!!

I've created a monster!

Donkey Oaty

xoxyx wrote: »

I would not have said so before, but I sure as hell will from now on!!

But is they really?

xoxyx

They flipping well is. Damn fat children...

Yahew

pickarooney wrote: »

"The Yankees" is clearly plural though, referring to the group of individual players. "New York is behind by five" refers to the team as a unit.

No, The Yankees is a team.

hognef

Yahew wrote: »

pickarooney wrote: »

"The Yankees" is clearly plural though, referring to the group of individual players. "New York is behind by five" refers to the team as a unit.

No, The Yankees is a team.

It may be the name of a team, but that doesn't change the fact that the word itself is the plural form of 'yankee'.

Also, 'Children' is the plural form of 'Child'. As a result, both 'Children' and 'Yankees' 'are'.

mathepac

hognef wrote: »

... As a result, ... 'Yankees' 'are'.

I disagree and I think this particular one is a poor example to be honest.

The ball-club is The New York Yankees (trademark, registered, copyright, etc.), that's its name. So a member of the team is not a New York Yankee, but a member of The New York Yankees, which is a different kettle of horses entirely, so to speak.

odds_on

Quote:
Originally Posted by pickarooney View Post
"The Yankees" is clearly plural though, referring to the group of individual players. "New York is behind by five" refers to the team as a unit.
No, The Yankees is a team.

You can hear, "Dublin is/are winning."
However, you won't hear, "Dubs is winning."

pickarooney

mathepac wrote: »

I disagree and I think this particular one is a poor example to be honest.

The ball-club is The New York Yankees (trademark, registered, copyright, etc.), that's its name. So a member of the team is not a New York Yankee, but a member of The New York Yankees, which is a different kettle of horses entirely, so to speak.

Players, and former players, are regularly referred to as "New York Yankee Joe Schmoe". Their stadium is called Yankee Stadium (singular).

slowburner

odds_on wrote: »

You can hear, "Dublin is/are winning."
However, you won't hear, "Dubs is winning."

You might not hear 'Dubs is winning' but you will certainly hear 'THE Dubs is winning'.
Doesn't make it correct though, does it?