Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Comments on Plural agreement with a syntactically singular subject

Parent

Plural agreement with a syntactically singular subject

+5
−0

Many quantity words trigger agreement with their object rather than themselves. For instance, syntactically, "a lot, "a bunch", "an amount" seem to all be singular. However, as a native speaker, "There are a lot of people", with the plural form of the verb "are", seems just as grammatical as "There is a lot of people".

I am curious about how and when these "singular but plural" constructions came to be, and how they can be analyzed. From intuition, I would hazard a guess that "a lot of", "a bunch of" etc. used to be simple measurements in the same way we would say "a pound of" (though "a pound of" still takes singular agreement in modern English) and later became lexicalized, but this is merely my own conjecture.

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

1 comment thread

Semantic agreement (1 comment)
Post
+1
−0

In your example, "lot", bunch", "amount", are collective nouns. There are many collective nouns that aren't quantifiers. For example: "Microsoft have never said they have extended the free period." or "The team agreed."

Collective nouns that denote various groupings of animals appear to have started as an upper class hunting fad in England, during the 14th and 15th century. I am unable to find any earlier examples although I have made some attempts.

Your examples of quantifiers either didn't exist as nouns, or were used with singular verbs exclusively prior to 15th century, which is consistent with the possibility that they got reinterpreted or inspired by the collective nouns originating from hunting jargon (which was no longer mere hunting jargon a few generations down the line).

History
Why does this post require attention from curators or moderators?
You might want to add some details to your flag.

2 comment threads

Collective nouns from hunting fad (2 comments)
AME vs BRE split (4 comments)
Collective nouns from hunting fad
Greg Price‭ wrote over 1 year ago

I'm curious about that origin of collective nouns as an upper-class hunting fad. What are some of the nouns where you've seen the earliest evidence of this treatment? Do you have a source handy where one can read more?

Jirka Hanika‭ wrote over 1 year ago

Greg Price‭ - https://people.howstuffworks.com/shrewdness-apes-collective-nouns-500-year-old-language-fad.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Saint_Albans (Certainly not earliest nor too original, but enormously influential in the spread of the joke throughout the English speaking world.) Gaston Phoebus: The Master of Game (late 14th century French text with at least one famous copy commissioned and created in England in about 1407)

I'm unable to find any written English examples earlier than 1452. There may be many, I just haven't searched extensively. Note that the second half of the 14th century is the period where English royalty and, I presume, upper class in general, underwent a very gradual language shift from (Parisian) French to English.

I was probably wrong thinking that this mighty wave of collectives might have introduced the very first collectives into the English language (from French), though. Old English had some words like "gewǣpne" ("weapons", singular).