3 ms·
I'm more frustrated by my own inability to tell the "rules" of English. I can tell something "sounds odd" but I don't know enough grammar rules to know what is
by mcny 8y ago
I'm more frustrated by my own inability to tell the "rules" of English. I can tell something "sounds odd" but I don't know enough grammar rules to know what is "correct" grammar and what isn't.
For example, saying "Google are deciding to go back to China PR" sounds completely incorrect to me. It ought to be Google IS, imo but clearly enough people do this.
- sborra 8y agoI think it's the standard in British English to treat organizations as a plural noun.
- gt_ 8y agoIt’s not. An exception could be when the organization is referenced by a pronoun like “they”, but “they” can be used in singular or plural contexts, so it’s not exactly an exception.
- piker 8y ago"Google IS deciding to go back to China PR" is correct in American English. The entity is singular.
- justwalt 8y agoI was taught that because Google is made up of many people, it should be treated as plural. It’s probably subjective.
- jpindar 8y agoIt's a US vs UK thing. In the US, a group or organization IS <something>, in the UK, they ARE <something>. This was particularly noticeable during the World Cup coverage.
- paulgb 8y agoIt's a UK/US thing; in the UK your understanding is correct (I like it better stylistically too, but I use "singular companies" to fit in in the US)
- thomasedwards 8y agoAnd if you mean past tense, possibly “Google decided to go back to China PR”!