Subject-Verb Agreement?

[Musushi-tamago]

Are there specific rules on subject-verb agreement?

If so, what is the general rule in it?

What are the rules when there are compound subjects connected by an "and" or an "or"?

They're just really quick questions; I'd appreciate any quick help to it. 

[Joe Carillo]

Are there specific rules on subject-verb agreement?

If so, what is the general rule in it?

What are the rules when there are compound subjects connected by an "and" or an "or"?

They're just really quick questions; I'd appreciate any quick help to it. 

The basic grammar rule in English is, of course, the subject-verb agreement rule. It prescribes that the operative verb of a sentence should always agree with its subject in number. This means that a subject that’s singular in number should take a verb in the singular form, and that a subject that’s plural in number should take a verb in the plural form.

Here, just by way of review, are examples of the basic application of this rule:

Singular subject (“singer”), verb in singular form (“sings”): “The singer sings so beautifully.”

Plural subject (“singers”), verb in plural form (“sing”): “The singers sing so beautifully.”

A notable exception to this rule, however, is the pronoun “you.” It takes a plural verb whether it is in its singular form or in its plural form: “You [singular sense, meaning just one singer] sing so beautifully.” “You [plural sense, meaning two or more singers] sing so beautifully.”

As a general rule, a compound subject of a sentence—meaning that the subject consists of two nouns linked by the conjunction “and”—requires a plural subject, as in “When properly motivated, the singer and the orchestra perform beautifully.” There are exceptions to this rule, though. The notional sense of unity between two subjects can sometimes prevail over grammatical agreement, such that the compound subject—although plural in form—takes a singular verb: “Her name and e-mail address is [not are] listed in my directory.” “My better half and only love has been [not have been] faithful to me all these years.” “The long and the short of it is [not are] that we parted ways.”

We must be aware, too, that the subject-verb agreement rule fails when sentences have two subjects, one singular and the other plural, such that the verb can’t agree in number with both of them. Consider this sentence: “Either Teresa or her sisters is/are not being truthful about what happened.” Which of the subjects should determine the number of the verb—the singular “Teresa” or the plural “sisters”?

To resolve the dilemma, English uses the so-called “agreement by proximity” rule. This rule says that in the case of compound subjects in “either…or” constructions, the verb should agree in number with the subject closer to it. Thus, by virtue of the proximity of their subjects to the verb, these sentences are both grammatically correct: “Either Teresa or her sisters are not being truthful about what happened.”  “Either her sisters or Teresa (herself) is not being truthful about what happened.” 

And here’s another complication to the subject-verb agreement rule that we must beware of. When a singular subject is followed by the conjoining prepositional phrases “as well as,” “in addition to,” and “along with,” the accepted usage is that the verb in such constructions should be singular: “Gerry as well as Tony works [not work] in my office.” “The necklace in addition to her bracelet is [not are] missing.” “The summer cottage along with the adjoining farm is [not are] for sale.”

[maxsims]

“Her name and e-mail address is [not are] listed in my directory.”

I don't see any sense of unity here; despite their affinity in written communication, names and  addresses are entirely separate.  I plump for "are"..!

And what about when a statement is made in the negative?  For example, compare:

"He wants his dinner now."
"He doesn't want his dinner now."

Singular subject, but "plural" form of verb.

[Joe Carillo]

It might help those who don't see a sense of unity in the sentence “Her name and e-mail address is listed in my directory” to think of its compound subject as a single unified item listed in a directory. Consider a directory list like the following:

(1) Elena Petrova, epetrova@yahoo.com
(2) Maximo Soames, msoames@hotmail.com
(3) Gloria Hemingway, glohem@zpdee.net
(4) Alfredo Gomez, algomez@pldtdsl.net

When a statement is in the negative form, of course, it's the helping verb that takes the number and tense--not the main verb. So, in the example "He doesn't want his dinner now," it is the helping verb "do" that takes the number and tense--"does"--and the main verb takes its bare infinitive form--"want."

Now here's that same sentence when the subject is in the plural form: "They do not want their dinner now." When the verb is in the negative contracted form, of course, this reads as "They don't want their dinner now."

[maxsims]

Joe,

How does the phrase "He does want his dinner now" square with your explanation?

[Joe Carillo]

Joe,

How does the phrase "He does want his dinner now" square with your explanation?

The sentence “He does want his dinner now” is grammatically different from the examples I gave earlier in that it uses the auxiliary verb “want” in its emphatic form. In English, as you know, the emphatic form uses the verb “do” in tandem with the main verb to express emphasis in the present tense and past tense, as in “She does think it’s time for you to go” and “She did think it was time for you to go.”

Usually, the emphatic form is used by a speaker to contradict a statement made by another speaker. For instance, when the first speaker says, “George doesn’t want his dinner now,” the other speaker can use the emphatic form to contradict that statement by saying, “That’s not right; George does want his dinner now.”

[maxsims]

How about "Does he want his dinner now"?

(Note how I cunningly placed the question mark outside the quotation marks to make it function for both the question inside the quotes and my question!)

[Joe Carillo]

Of course, in questions or interrogative sentences like "Does he want his dinner now?", the form requires a singular subject to be preceded by the helping verb "does" and a plural subject by the helping verb "do," after which the main verb follows immediately. The formula is:

Do/Does + subject + main verb + predicate complement

Examples:
Singular subject: "Does the boy want his dinner now?"
Plural subject:    "Do the boys want their dinner now?"

[maxsims]

Here's a good one, Joe Carillo.

My Filipina friend was telling me about her new accommodations when she remarked, .."but the rats running over the ceiling keeps me awake."

At first, I thought, "Hold on.  That should be "keep".

But then I realised she had actually said, "but the rats' running over the ceiling...etc.", a perfectly acceptable use of the gerund.

All that coaching is paying off!

 

[Joe Carillo]

Maybe so, but I have a feeling it's just a happy, lucky happenstance that illustrates the sometimes hairline difference between spoken and written English. I'll bet you an Australian dollar that your Filipina friend actually violated the subject-verb agreement rule but got away with it by the skin of a single close quote!   

[maxsims]

I prefer my explanation...!     

[maxsims]

Here's another good one, Joe Carillo.   It should sound familiar to you.

"He discovered that those many gallons of petrol was not enough to get him to Sydney."

The armchair critics have leapt to their feet with the cry, "all those gallons of petrol" is plural, and so the verb should be "were".

[Joe Carillo]

Yes, maxsims, very familiar indeed! So many people—even well-respected academics—fall for the plural form of the verb in that construction, and more’s the pity. Grammatically, of course, the verb should take the singular form because the operative subject in the noun phrase “those many gallons of petrol” isn’t the plural “those many gallons” but the singular mass noun “petrol.” The usage is admittedly confusing and slippery when it comes to a mass noun like “petrol,” but the fact that the subject in such noun phrases is actually singular gets much clearer in the case of other mass or collective nouns like “cloth,” “rice,” “teaching,” and “rain”:

“The tailor found out that the five meters of cloth was not enough.”
“Five kilos of rice is the weekly consumption of that family of four.”
“Over 20 years of teaching has made her feel a truly accomplished person.”
“Two days of rain was enough to flood the low-lying town near the river.”

[Joe Carillo]

After my column on “The correct verb form for noun phrases” came out in The Manila Times last Saturday (January 23), the paper’s editor in chief, Rene Bas, sent me the following note:

“Here is another explanation of the use of the singular in the sentences you and Max Sims cited.

“A noun-phrase subject naming a unit of measurement, currency, length of time, etc., calls for a singular verb because no matter the quantity, amount, length of time, number of units, etc., the sense is that of a totality, a whole. Therefore: “five meters of rope was needed,” “ten pesos is the selling price,” “40 minutes is too long for a speech,” “30 pieces of silver was Judas’ bribe.”

I must admit that I hadn’t thought of this very succinct explanation for why the singular verb should be used in such noun phrases. It’s much clearer and simpler than my own, don’t you think?

My thanks to Rene Bas for this grammar insight!

[maxsims]

Excellent explanation.    I believe we can safely assume that Rene did not come through TMTC...!