|
OT Grammer question
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. |
OT Grammer question
To what degree do Spelling and Grammar matter? ;-) Mike --------------------------------------------------------------- www.rneba.org.uk "David Hill" wrote in message ... Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/13 11:30, David Hill wrote:
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit, therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds" more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000 worth of notes" then "were" would be correct. GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate and understand each other :) Beyond that it is a question of style and elegance. And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement. |
OT Grammer question
"Tom Gardner" wrote in message ... On 16/10/13 11:30, David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit, therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds" more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000 worth of notes" then "were" would be correct. GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate and understand each other :) Beyond that it is a question of style and elegance. And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement. You don't need to. It is self-evident. Steve |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 11:30, David Hill wrote:
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. If you read it as the full sentence it *should* be (instead of contracting the sentence by beginning with the modern and inelegant 'around'), it would read: "A sum of around £10,000 *was* stolen from a house". That's how I was always taught to read it, anyway. The sum is singular. Only one sum of money was stolen. You wouldn't think twice if it was 10 pence (that) was stolen ... It is only because we say "ten thousand poundS that we (wrongly read it as a plural). -- Spider. On high ground in SE London gardening on heavy clay |
OT Grammer question
"shazzbat" wrote
"Tom Gardner"wrote David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit, therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds" more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000 worth of notes" then "were" would be correct. GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate and understand each other :) Beyond that it is a question of style and elegance. And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement. You don't need to. It is self-evident. While we are on this thread when did it become "Bored of this...." instead of "bored with this....". I've even seen it written in adverts lately. Now for a discussion, should it be "Can I help you" or "May I help you" when you answer the phone etc? :-) -- Regards. Bob Hobden. Posted to this Newsgroup from the W of London, UK |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 12:29, Bob Hobden wrote:
"shazzbat" wrote "Tom Gardner"wrote David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit, therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds" more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000 worth of notes" then "were" would be correct. GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate and understand each other :) Beyond that it is a question of style and elegance. And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement. You don't need to. It is self-evident. While we are on this thread when did it become "Bored of this...." instead of "bored with this....". I've even seen it written in adverts lately. Now for a discussion, should it be "Can I help you" or "May I help you" when you answer the phone etc? :-) Can I help you is asking the question "Am I able to help you" whilst May I help you is asking "Do you wish me to help you" My present bug bear is "For Free" Free means "for nothing" so for for nothing makes no sense. |
OT Grammer question
David Hill wrote in news:bc785rF4rhaU1
@mid.individual.net: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Yes thats a poser. I think you are right. I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. Thats not the case, £10,000 WAS stolen. 12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the theives could put IT on their chips. A case of 12 bottles of vinegar WAS stolen so the theives could put THEM on their chips. If it was IT, and not THEM, surely the theives would be putting the case, not the bottle onto their chips. WAS it stolen, or WERE they stolen, was it THEM (or those) or IT that was stolen? Even more confusing. For me at least. That is my stumbling block. Baz |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 13:00, Baz wrote:
David Hill wrote in news:bc785rF4rhaU1 @mid.individual.net: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Yes thats a poser. I think you are right. I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. Thats not the case, £10,000 WAS stolen. 12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the theives could put IT on their chips. A case of 12 bottles of vinegar WAS stolen so the theives could put THEM on their chips. If it was IT, and not THEM, surely the theives would be putting the case, not the bottle onto their chips. WAS it stolen, or WERE they stolen, was it THEM (or those) or IT that was stolen? Even more confusing. For me at least. That is my stumbling block. Baz None of those Baz, they were just put in the wrong part of the store room. But I'd have said "A case of 12 bottles of vinegar was stolen so that the thieves could USE it on their chips". |
OT Grammer question
"I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen." I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete . --------------------------------------------------------------- www.rneba.org.uk "Baz" wrote in message ... David Hill wrote in news:bc785rF4rhaU1 @mid.individual.net: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Yes thats a poser. I think you are right. I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. Thats not the case, £10,000 WAS stolen. 12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the theives could put IT on their chips. A case of 12 bottles of vinegar WAS stolen so the theives could put THEM on their chips. If it was IT, and not THEM, surely the theives would be putting the case, not the bottle onto their chips. WAS it stolen, or WERE they stolen, was it THEM (or those) or IT that was stolen? Even more confusing. For me at least. That is my stumbling block. Baz |
OT Grammer question
Spider wrote in :
On 16/10/2013 11:30, David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. If you read it as the full sentence it *should* be (instead of contracting the sentence by beginning with the modern and inelegant 'around'), it would read: "A sum of around £10,000 *was* stolen from a house". That's how I was always taught to read it, anyway. The sum is singular. Only one sum of money was stolen. You wouldn't think twice if it was 10 pence (that) was stolen ... It is only because we say "ten thousand poundS that we (wrongly read it as a plural). Absolutely right. Please see my post on vinegar and chips within this thread. Baz |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote:
"I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen." I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete . Stop blathering No one said £1.00 notes, you can have £10,000 in notes be they £5.00 £10.00 or what ever denomination. But you could have a numismatists or a notaphilist whose collection had 10,000 £1.00 notes |
OT Grammer question
Malcolm, the very first posting in the thread .... To what degree do Spelling and Grammar matter? ;-) Mike --------------------------------------------------------------- www.rneba.org.uk "Malcolm" wrote in message ... In article , David Hill writes On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote: "I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen." I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete . Stop blathering No one said £1.00 notes, you can have £10,000 in notes be they £5.00 £10.00 or what ever denomination. But you could have a numismatists or a notaphilist whose collection had 10,000 £1.00 notes In the spirit of being helpful, I fear I can't resist pointing out, which no-one else seems to have done, that your subject line contains a spelling error :-) -- Malcolm |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 13:52, Malcolm wrote:
In article , David Hill writes On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote: "I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen." I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete . Stop blathering No one said £1.00 notes, you can have £10,000 in notes be they £5.00 £10.00 or what ever denomination. But you could have a numismatists or a notaphilist whose collection had 10,000 £1.00 notes In the spirit of being helpful, I fear I can't resist pointing out, which no-one else seems to have done, that your subject line contains a spelling error :-) Wow! Me make a spelling mistake. I've been doing that all my life, why change now? I have a habit of using double letters when single are required and single when it should be double. I remember in school having essays back with "Good composition, must learn to spell" nothing has changed. David |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 12:24, Spider wrote:
You wouldn't think twice if it was 10 pence (that) was stolen ... It is only because we say "ten thousand poundS that we (wrongly read it as a plural). Not sure about that - pence is an implicit plural, I think. Plural (along with pennies) of penny. Just as in times gone by you would say tuppence or two pennies, but not one pence. Although I agree with the rest of your reasoning and the fact that it is 'was' and not 'were'. -- regards andy |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 13:46, Martin wrote:
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 11:30:21 +0100, David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Do you say ten thousand pounds or ten thousand pound? were for the former, was for the latter. I don't think so. In normal speech, the £10,000 is spoken as ten thousand pounds and the correct (and as Tom said 'verbally 'elegant') simple past tense would be 'was'. In the same way, the past participle would be "£10,000 has been stolen", as opposed to "£10,000 have been stolen". If a pound was an actual 'thing' it would be different. "10,000 footballs were stolen", rather than "10,000 footballs" was stolen. Or even 10,00 pounds of footballs were stolen, not was stolen. As Spider said, it is "[a sum of] £10,000 pounds" that was stolen. -- regards andy |
OT Grammer question
David Hill wrote:
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. English or American version? -- Gary Woods AKA K2AHC- PGP key on request, or at home.earthlink.net/~garygarlic Zone 5/4 in upstate New York, 1420' elevation. NY WO G |
OT Grammer question
"Malcolm" wrote in message ... In article , David Hill writes On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote: "I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen." I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete . Not in Scotland it isn't, and you can have great fun with them in English Chinese restaurants! Phil |
OT Grammer question
On 2013-10-16 12:29:59 +0100, Bob Hobden said:
"shazzbat" wrote "Tom Gardner"wrote David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit, therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds" more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000 worth of notes" then "were" would be correct. GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate and understand each other :) Beyond that it is a question of style and elegance. And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement. You don't need to. It is self-evident. While we are on this thread when did it become "Bored of this...." instead of "bored with this....". I've even seen it written in adverts lately. Now for a discussion, should it be "Can I help you" or "May I help you" when you answer the phone etc? :-) May I, because you don't know if you Can until they tell you what their enquiry is. ;-) -- Sacha www.hillhousenursery.com South Devon www.helpforheroes.org.uk |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 15:15, Martin wrote:
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:41:20 +0100, News wrote: On 16/10/2013 13:46, Martin wrote: On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 11:30:21 +0100, David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Do you say ten thousand pounds or ten thousand pound? were for the former, was for the latter. I don't think so. In normal speech, the £10,000 is spoken as ten thousand pounds and the correct (and as Tom said 'verbally 'elegant') simple past tense would be 'was'. In the same way, the past participle would be "£10,000 has been stolen", as opposed to "£10,000 have been stolen". If a pound was an actual 'thing' it would be different. A pound is an actual thing. It might not seem much but ... :-) "10,000 footballs were stolen", rather than "10,000 footballs" was stolen. Or even 10,00 pounds of footballs were stolen, not was stolen. As Spider said, it is "[a sum of] £10,000 pounds" that was stolen. £10,000 pounds without the implicit "a sum of" is plural. Only in a strict interpretation of what is actually written - English is often rather ambiguous in native usage with traps for the unwary. £10,000 [of money] were stolen. I think you will find both forms in common usage in the UK with a slight preference for was stolen. Although in certain Lancashire dialects "were" is used when "was" would be grammatically correct. It were good. (sic) as an example. -- Regards, Martin Brown |
OT Grammer question
"Phil Gurr" wrote in news:bc7mpiF7tp9U1
@mid.individual.net: "Malcolm" wrote in message ... In article , David Hill writes On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote: "I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen." I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete . Not in Scotland it isn't, and you can have great fun with them in English Chinese restaurants! Phil :-) |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 12:29, Bob Hobden wrote:
"shazzbat" wrote "Tom Gardner"wrote David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit, therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds" more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000 worth of notes" then "were" would be correct. GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate and understand each other :) Beyond that it is a question of style and elegance. And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement. You don't need to. It is self-evident. While we are on this thread when did it become "Bored of this...." instead of "bored with this....". I've even seen it written in adverts lately. Now for a discussion, should it be "Can I help you" or "May I help you" when you answer the phone etc? :-) Regarding the latter, it should be "can I help you?" or even "How can I help you?" "May" is permissive and your caller is already allowing you to help them, so it only remains to satisfy *if* you can help them. Occasionally, when wishing to help someone but not cause offence, I might say "May I help you?" or "Will you let me help you with ..". In that instance, I have already decided that I *can* help, but wish to be allowed to help. -- Spider. On high ground in SE London gardening on heavy clay |
OT Grammer question
In article ,
Martin Brown wrote: £10,000 [of money] were stolen. I think you will find both forms in common usage in the UK ... Incredible. No you wouldn't, because it's purely and simply wrong! In common usage, any British born-and-bred person when faced with the words "ten thousand pounds" would think instantly in terms of the abstract noun of "money", not in terms the concrete noun, "notes". Your point... Although in certain Lancashire dialects "were" is used when "was" would be grammatically correct. That's not "grammatically correct": that's dialect. (Also common in Yorkshire, where I come from.) And it's not the word "were" as in the plural form of "was", but "wer'" as in the dialect way of saying "was" (more often heard as "wo'" in the West Riding, and "wer'" elsewhere in this belt of the country. The language is going to hell, thanks to generations of young illiterates who are now actually working, and (e.g.) writing newspaper articles, having been brought up with an education of dubious values, and receiving a "further" education in Facebook, Twitter, and the internet in general, from their fellow illiterates. If ever you want to know "the" answer to a question about English Grammar, refer to "Modern English Usage" by H.W. Fowler, revised by Sir Ernest Gowers in 1965 [sic]. It's worth its weight in gold (it weighs a modest 705g, or 1lb 9oz if you prefer). Yes, the English language evolves as the decades go by, but not as fast as some people (the illiterate masses) would have you believe. Not even as fast as the Big Dictionaries would have you believe either: people like Collins and the OED now make regular press releases about "new words" not because these have "entered the language" (because they'll have gone again in a few years) but because they want to sell more dictionaries (or subscriptions to their effing websites). Thank you David, for giving me that opportunity! Nah then: wheer did ah put me pipe? It wer' round ere some wheer.... J. |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 13:00, Baz wrote:
David Hill wrote in news:bc785rF4rhaU1 @mid.individual.net: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Yes thats a poser. I think you are right. I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. Thats not the case, £10,000 WAS stolen. 12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the theives could put IT on their chips. A case of 12 bottles of vinegar WAS stolen so the theives could put THEM on their chips. If it was IT, and not THEM, surely the theives would be putting the case, not the bottle onto their chips. WAS it stolen, or WERE they stolen, was it THEM (or those) or IT that was stolen? Even more confusing. For me at least. That is my stumbling block. Baz Well, I would simply say "12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the thieves could put *some* on their chips". Greedy blighters! Actually, no thief would steal 12 bottles when one would do, so we can only assume it was a case of 12, immediately making it singular and, presumably, resolving your problem. -- Spider. On high ground in SE London gardening on heavy clay |
OT Grammer question
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 12:45:18 +0100, David Hill
wrote: On 16/10/2013 12:29, Bob Hobden wrote: "shazzbat" wrote "Tom Gardner"wrote David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit, therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds" more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000 worth of notes" then "were" would be correct. GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate and understand each other :) Beyond that it is a question of style and elegance. And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement. You don't need to. It is self-evident. While we are on this thread when did it become "Bored of this...." instead of "bored with this....". I've even seen it written in adverts lately. Now for a discussion, should it be "Can I help you" or "May I help you" when you answer the phone etc? :-) Can I help you is asking the question "Am I able to help you" whilst May I help you is asking "Do you wish me to help you" My present bug bear is "For Free" Free means "for nothing" so for for nothing makes no sense. David, you answered your own question about the money. I agree with you. I thought I was alone in fuming about "For free". Another bugbear is "I would of", "He should of" etc which comes from lazy speaking. Oh please bring back Grammar schools. Now how many of you say "somethink" and "anythink" or "I am sat" or "I am stood". They've become more common than the correct phrases. Sorry if I've upset anyone. You've hit on my favourite subject, apart from gadening!!! Pam in Bristol |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote:
"I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen." I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete . Which immediately makes your first question ridiculous, since you're obviously such a pedant that spelling and grammar would be important to you. --------------------------------------------------------------- www.rneba.org.uk "Baz" wrote in message ... David Hill wrote in news:bc785rF4rhaU1 @mid.individual.net: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Yes thats a poser. I think you are right. I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. Thats not the case, £10,000 WAS stolen. 12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the theives could put IT on their chips. A case of 12 bottles of vinegar WAS stolen so the theives could put THEM on their chips. If it was IT, and not THEM, surely the theives would be putting the case, not the bottle onto their chips. WAS it stolen, or WERE they stolen, was it THEM (or those) or IT that was stolen? Even more confusing. For me at least. That is my stumbling block. Baz -- Spider. On high ground in SE London gardening on heavy clay |
OT Grammer question
Oh dear. Speakers set too high for Spider.
Kindest regards Mike --------------------------------------------------------------- www.rneba.org.uk "Spider" wrote in message ... On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote: "I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen." I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete . Which immediately makes your first question ridiculous, since you're obviously such a pedant that spelling and grammar would be important to you. --------------------------------------------------------------- www.rneba.org.uk "Baz" wrote in message ... David Hill wrote in news:bc785rF4rhaU1 @mid.individual.net: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Yes thats a poser. I think you are right. I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. Thats not the case, £10,000 WAS stolen. 12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the theives could put IT on their chips. A case of 12 bottles of vinegar WAS stolen so the theives could put THEM on their chips. If it was IT, and not THEM, surely the theives would be putting the case, not the bottle onto their chips. WAS it stolen, or WERE they stolen, was it THEM (or those) or IT that was stolen? Even more confusing. For me at least. That is my stumbling block. Baz -- Spider. On high ground in SE London gardening on heavy clay |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 15:15, Martin wrote:
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:41:20 +0100, News wrote: On 16/10/2013 13:46, Martin wrote: On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 11:30:21 +0100, David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Do you say ten thousand pounds or ten thousand pound? were for the former, was for the latter. I don't think so. In normal speech, the £10,000 is spoken as ten thousand pounds and the correct (and as Tom said 'verbally 'elegant') simple past tense would be 'was'. In the same way, the past participle would be "£10,000 has been stolen", as opposed to "£10,000 have been stolen". If a pound was an actual 'thing' it would be different. A pound is an actual thing. It might not seem much but ... :-) "10,000 footballs were stolen", rather than "10,000 footballs" was stolen. Or even 10,00 pounds of footballs were stolen, not was stolen. As Spider said, it is "[a sum of] £10,000 pounds" that was stolen. £10,000 pounds without the implicit "a sum of" is plural. £10,000 [of money] were stolen. But we're talking about grammar, Martin. Surely the proper sentence should be "A sum of, etc."; therefore, it is singular. -- Spider. On high ground in SE London gardening on heavy clay |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 14:51, Gary Woods wrote:
David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. English or American version? English, no doubt!;~). How does the American version differ, if it does? -- Spider. On high ground in SE London gardening on heavy clay |
OT Grammer question
Top posting because sooooooooo many people fail to observe the suggestion that dross should be snipped. You've been down the thread once to read what was said, why cover the whole lot again? Kindest regards Mike (I do accept that posters on here will have a poke at me at every opportunity and it gives friends of mine who don't bother to break into the clique a damn good laugh. Please carry on. Hope I have not set the speakers too high for you to) --------------------------------------------------------------- www.rneba.org.uk "Malcolm" wrote in message ... In article , 'Mike' writes "Malcolm" wrote in message ... In article , David Hill writes On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote: "I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen." I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen. I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete . Stop blathering No one said £1.00 notes, you can have £10,000 in notes be they £5.00 £10.00 or what ever denomination. But you could have a numismatists or a notaphilist whose collection had 10,000 £1.00 notes In the spirit of being helpful, I fear I can't resist pointing out, which no-one else seems to have done, that your subject line contains a spelling error :-) ------------------------------------- Top posting brought down to correct (!) position at the bottom. Malcolm, the very first posting in the thread .... Not specifically pointed out. To what degree do Spelling and Grammar matter? ;-) Hardly at all, provided the meaning is clear and, above all, unambiguous. Neither are heinous crimes, unlike top-posting in a thread! -- Malcolm |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 16:55, Spider wrote:
On 16/10/2013 14:51, Gary Woods wrote: David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. English or American version? English, no doubt!;~). How does the American version differ, if it does? I can answer my own question: "It would be (a sum of) $10,000 was stolen". -- Spider. On high ground in SE London gardening on heavy clay |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 16:41, Another John wrote:
In article , Martin Brown wrote: £10,000 [of money] were stolen. I think you will find both forms in common usage in the UK ... Incredible. No you wouldn't, because it's purely and simply wrong! In common usage, any British born-and-bred person when faced with the words "ten thousand pounds" would think instantly in terms of the abstract noun of "money", not in terms the concrete noun, "notes". Your point... Although in certain Lancashire dialects "were" is used when "was" would be grammatically correct. That's not "grammatically correct": that's dialect. (Also common in Yorkshire, where I come from.) And it's not the word "were" as in the plural form of "was", but "wer'" as in the dialect way of saying "was" (more often heard as "wo'" in the West Riding, and "wer'" elsewhere in this belt of the country. The language is going to hell, thanks to generations of young illiterates who are now actually working, and (e.g.) writing newspaper articles, having been brought up with an education of dubious values, and receiving a "further" education in Facebook, Twitter, and the internet in general, from their fellow illiterates. If ever you want to know "the" answer to a question about English Grammar, refer to "Modern English Usage" by H.W. Fowler, revised by Sir Ernest Gowers in 1965 [sic]. It's worth its weight in gold (it weighs a modest 705g, or 1lb 9oz if you prefer). Yes, the English language evolves as the decades go by, but not as fast as some people (the illiterate masses) would have you believe. Not even as fast as the Big Dictionaries would have you believe either: people like Collins and the OED now make regular press releases about "new words" not because these have "entered the language" (because they'll have gone again in a few years) but because they want to sell more dictionaries (or subscriptions to their effing websites). Thank you David, for giving me that opportunity! Nah then: wheer did ah put me pipe? It wer' round ere some wheer.... J. I hate the all-too-common aspiration of "h" when spoken during spelling. It stems from this nonsensical phonetic teaching of the alphabet, where young speakers are obliged to 'huff' when reciting the alphabet or, indeed, when spelling out a word. The letter 'h' can actually be spelled: aitch. It does not begin with an 'h'. It should not be pronounced with one. -- Spider. On high ground in SE London gardening on heavy clay |
OT Grammer question
Thank you David, for giving me that opportunity! Nah then: wheer did ah
put me pipe? It wer' round ere some wheer.... J. As the'd say round here "It's over by there" |
OT Grammer question
In article ,
Another John wrote: In article , Martin Brown wrote: £10,000 [of money] were stolen. I think you will find both forms in common usage in the UK ... Incredible. No you wouldn't, because it's purely and simply wrong! In common usage, any British born-and-bred person when faced with the words "ten thousand pounds" would think instantly in terms of the abstract noun of "money", not in terms the concrete noun, "notes". Not at all. "There was five million in the safe, of which ten thousand were stolen." Your point... Although in certain Lancashire dialects "were" is used when "was" would be grammatically correct. That's not "grammatically correct": that's dialect. (Also common in Yorkshire, where I come from.) And it's not the word "were" as in the plural form of "was", but "wer'" as in the dialect way of saying "was" (more often heard as "wo'" in the West Riding, and "wer'" elsewhere in this belt of the country. All forms of English are dialect or similar, despite the attempts of some self-imposed pedants to hijack ownership of the language. In particular, many of the 'incorrect' grammatical and spelling forms are simply literary or old-fashioned - and, as a professional pedant, I am referring to 18th century literary usage as merely 'old-fashioned'. If ever you want to know "the" answer to a question about English Grammar, refer to "Modern English Usage" by H.W. Fowler, revised by Sir Ernest Gowers in 1965 [sic]. It's worth its weight in gold (it weighs a modest 705g, or 1lb 9oz if you prefer). It is, however, a simplified set of rules of the dogmatic version of the language introduced by the Victorian pedantic establishment. Once you learn enough, you start to break its rules more often! Yes, the English language evolves as the decades go by, but not as fast as some people (the illiterate masses) would have you believe. Not even as fast as the Big Dictionaries would have you believe either: people like Collins and the OED now make regular press releases about "new words" not because these have "entered the language" (because they'll have gone again in a few years) but because they want to sell more dictionaries (or subscriptions to their effing websites). In that paragraph, you have used one word, one meaning of an old word, and two (unquoted) expressions that were not widespread when I was at school. Thank you David, for giving me that opportunity! Nah then: wheer did ah put me pipe? It wer' round ere some wheer.... Ah! I have espied you as one of the manifolde abusers of this vile custome of Tobacco taking, yet you preach of vertue! Regards, Nick Maclaren. |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 16:41, Another John wrote:
The language is going to hell, thanks to generations of young illiterates who are now actually working, and (e.g.) writing newspaper articles, having been brought up with an education of dubious values, and receiving a "further" education in Facebook, Twitter, and the internet in general, from their fellow illiterates. I'd say that one of the worst things with papers and publications in general is that they are no longer proof read, just have spell checker on the computer scan them. I don't believe that they teach English grammar and things like clause analysis in schools nowadays. |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 16:52, Spider wrote:
On 16/10/2013 15:15, Martin wrote: On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:41:20 +0100, News wrote: On 16/10/2013 13:46, Martin wrote: On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 11:30:21 +0100, David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. Do you say ten thousand pounds or ten thousand pound? were for the former, was for the latter. I don't think so. In normal speech, the £10,000 is spoken as ten thousand pounds and the correct (and as Tom said 'verbally 'elegant') simple past tense would be 'was'. In the same way, the past participle would be "£10,000 has been stolen", as opposed to "£10,000 have been stolen". If a pound was an actual 'thing' it would be different. A pound is an actual thing. It might not seem much but ... :-) "10,000 footballs were stolen", rather than "10,000 footballs" was stolen. Or even 10,00 pounds of footballs were stolen, not was stolen. As Spider said, it is "[a sum of] £10,000 pounds" that was stolen. £10,000 pounds without the implicit "a sum of" is plural. £10,000 [of money] were stolen. But we're talking about grammar, Martin. Surely the proper sentence should be "A sum of, etc."; therefore, it is singular. Unless it's "Sums of money ammounting to £10,000" |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 16:55, Spider wrote:
On 16/10/2013 14:51, Gary Woods wrote: David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. English or American version? English, no doubt!;~). How does the American version differ, if it does? Well the English could well be "Some tea-leaf made off with the dosh" |
OT Grammer question
David shouldn't that be Dosh with a Capital 'D'? .... ;-) Mike --------------------------------------------------------------- www.rneba.org.uk "David Hill" wrote in message ... On 16/10/2013 16:55, Spider wrote: On 16/10/2013 14:51, Gary Woods wrote: David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. English or American version? English, no doubt!;~). How does the American version differ, if it does? Well the English could well be "Some tea-leaf made off with the dosh" |
OT Grammer question
On 16/10/2013 16:45, Pam Moore wrote:
On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 12:45:18 +0100, David Hill wrote: On 16/10/2013 12:29, Bob Hobden wrote: "shazzbat" wrote "Tom Gardner"wrote David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit, therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds" more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000 worth of notes" then "were" would be correct. GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate and understand each other :) Beyond that it is a question of style and elegance. And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement. You don't need to. It is self-evident. While we are on this thread when did it become "Bored of this...." instead of "bored with this....". I've even seen it written in adverts lately. Now for a discussion, should it be "Can I help you" or "May I help you" when you answer the phone etc? :-) Can I help you is asking the question "Am I able to help you" whilst May I help you is asking "Do you wish me to help you" My present bug bear is "For Free" Free means "for nothing" so for for nothing makes no sense. David, you answered your own question about the money. I agree with you. I thought I was alone in fuming about "For free". Another bugbear is "I would of", "He should of" etc which comes from lazy speaking. Oh please bring back Grammar schools. Now how many of you say "somethink" and "anythink" or "I am sat" or "I am stood". They've become more common than the correct phrases. Sorry if I've upset anyone. You've hit on my favourite subject, apart from gadening!!! Pam in Bristol What about the seketre? |
OT Grammer question
"Spider" wrote
Bob Hobden wrote: "shazzbat" wrote "Tom Gardner"wrote David Hill wrote: Around £10,000 were stolen from a house Or should it be Around £10,000 was stolen from a house. If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen. It's niggling me. IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit, therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds" more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000 worth of notes" then "were" would be correct. GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate and understand each other :) Beyond that it is a question of style and elegance. And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement. You don't need to. It is self-evident. While we are on this thread when did it become "Bored of this...." instead of "bored with this....". I've even seen it written in adverts lately. Now for a discussion, should it be "Can I help you" or "May I help you" when you answer the phone etc? :-) Regarding the latter, it should be "can I help you?" or even "How can I help you?" "May" is permissive and your caller is already allowing you to help them, so it only remains to satisfy *if* you can help them. Occasionally, when wishing to help someone but not cause offence, I might say "May I help you?" or "Will you let me help you with ..". In that instance, I have already decided that I *can* help, but wish to be allowed to help. But "can I help you?" is a question the caller cannot answer because they don't know if the person can or cannot. -- Regards. Bob Hobden. Posted to this Newsgroup from the W of London, UK |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:15 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
GardenBanter