Pete
Collective nouns and pseudo collective nouns, such as company names,
often create a clash of logic and grammar.
A large number of people IS of the opinion that the word DATA IS a
plural in English as it is in Latin. I would argue that it IS really
a collective noun in English because DATUM has a separate meaning in
English. We could even justify a plural of DATUM as in "Different
DATUMS are in use in different locations".
If anyone still believes that the word DATA is a plural in English, I
can only ask what your AGENDA are.
Then were have those wonderful spurious plurals in English such as
TROUSERS and SCISSORS which confuse non-native speakers. Try
ordering (or wearing/using) just one.
Trevor Jordan
CF29281U
At 3:54 PM -0800 1/3/02, Pete & Aprille Chadwell wrote:
>Well, I know what some people mean when they say that Americans have
>corrupted the English language, and I certainly won't argue that
>point. However, the British certainly take their liberties with it
>as well. I've noticed on many occasions that the British appear to
>be confused about one particular point of grammar:
>
>An American would say: "Triumph has built some beautiful sports cars."
>
>But the British would say: "Triumph have built some beautiful sports cars."
>
>Of course, Triumph is NOT plural, so the latter grammar is incorrect.
>Triumph is a SINGLE company, so the correct past-tense form of the
>verb is 'has built,' not 'have built.' And yet whenever I've heard
>someone from Britain say something similar, they always say it
>incorrectly, as if the company's name is plural. I understand that
>the company is made of up many PEOPLE, but in the example the word
>TRIUMPH is used, not 'the people of Triumph.'
>
>You could correctly say "The PEOPLE of Triumph have built some
>beautiful sports cars." But it I'd love to know how it is correct to
>say "Triumph HAVE built some beautiful sports cars."
>
>--
>Pete Chadwell
>1973 TR6
|