Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Mrs Bosher and I think Philip Schofield should say the next couple skating next week are not is;
any English intellects able to help on this
sorry if the question has already been asked
any English intellects able to help on this
sorry if the question has already been asked
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 29
|
By:
Couple - singular, so is would be correct imo...
|
|
By:
I would tend to agree with you but the English language is constantly being butchered, it probably is an either or situation now.
|
|
By:
is, not are, is correct
|
|
By:
Surely a couple is 2 people
 |
|
By:
But only one couple...
|
|
By:
it's really not that difficult
|
|
By:
left school in 81; when we were at school it would definitely be are; oh how times have changed
 thank you for your help  |
|
By:
when we were at school it would definitely be are
what school was that?  |
|
By:
I'm pretty sure the basic rules of grammar haven't changed in the last 30-odd years, however a great deal of 'common-usage' now seems to have become the accepted norm...
|
|
By:
not disputing the answer; just a question which I appear to have got wrong
 |
|
By:
Fwiw I'm not saying that I would actually use the correct version in everyday speech, but that's down to my laziness and Essex/East London dialect
 |
|
By:
so this couple skating next week, who is they?
|
|
By:
init
|
|
By:
You come across a similar distinction in cricket journalism. English writers and commentators will complain that "England are a shambles," while their Australian counterparts gloat that "England is a shambles."
It has to be said that the Convicts are correct in this case. The country of England is singular, in the same way "a couple" is singular. You're talking about one couple and one England; not two couples or two Englands. So ... "One couple is skating next week, while two couples are skating the week after." HMP Australia might be populated by some of the planet's most offensive and disgusting human beings, but it has to be said that the standard of its education system has always been superior to that offered in state schools in this country. The fact that Australian English can distinguish between a singular and a plural in a way that British English can't is a sad little illustration of this imo. |
|
By:
I agree with 'Polybot'. The question of which is correct depends upon the context in which it is used. The sentence provided by the OP is incomplete and, therefore, neither is wrong...or right!
Wouldn't be first time I've been wrong.  |
|
By:
The country of England is singular, in the same way "a couple" is singular. You're talking about one couple and one England; not two couples or two Englands.
But are you talking about the country of England, or about 11 cricket players who happen to come from England and South Africa? There aren't 50 million englanders and St Paul's Cathedral tossing a ball about on the Gabba. Replacing "England" for "the English cricket players" is a great part of the confusion. |
|
By:
Polybot: You're talking about (the) England (team), which is singular.
I mean, I do get your point, and it's obvious why we say, e.g., "England have been an embarrassment." And this relaxed attitude is one of the English language's strengths and one of the reasons for its widespread adoption. But it's grammatically ugly. There's a passage in Clive James' autobiography where he describes how his Sydney technical school made him learn how to parse sentences, and how valuable he found those exercises in later life. If you have that mindset, then you just baulk at following a singular noun with a plural verb form. |
|
By:
But surely you are talking about more than one player being a shambles, the word shambles itself would have to
refer to more than one player, you woulbn`t say the openig batsman is a shambles. |
|
By:
I`m not sure, the aussie way sounds less common the more you say it
|
|
By:
Polybot: You're talking about (the) England (team), which is singular.
Not really, however you could argue "the English cricket team" (no brackets) as an artificial construct where no individual has meaning outside the collective, and singular. Or you could argue "the English players" as eleven individuals from England, but plural. |
|
By:
similar applies to "the next couple", does it refer to what we see as a couple, or does it refer to a desperate celebrity looking to re-ignite a failing career coupled with a wannabe professional dancer looking for a high profile gig?
|
|
By:
How come we never get a shamble on it's own?
 |
|
By:
Mmmmm is it correct touse the term
|
|
By:
Mmmmm is it correct touse the term
|
|
By:
Which is correct; the yolk of an egg is white, or the yolk of an egg are white?
|
|
By:
thats not wright
|
|
By:
The Isle of Wight is another one.
|
|
By:
Very often it depends on the context eg Manchester United is still the biggest club in England is correct because we are talking about Man Utd the club ie a single entity. However it is also correct to say Manchester United (the players on the field), they played badly yesterday.
|
|
By:
thanks for the input again; glad I'm not an English teacher |