A + plural?

Question

"Victory has a hundred fathers but defeat is an orphan". Could anyone tell me why "hundreds fathers" is accompanied with "a" in this wonderful phrase?Regards, Alexander Bodnarchuk

Usenet · Accepted Answer

on 18 Dec 2003:
[nq:1]"Victory has a hundred fathers but defeat is an orphan". Could anyone tell me why "hundreds fathers" is accompanied with "a" in this wonderful phrase?[/nq]
If you look at it again, you will see that it is "a hundred fathers", which is prefectly correct English, and not *"a hundreds fathers", which is naught but a series of three English words ungrammatically strung together.

It could have been "one hundred fathers" or "hundreds of fathers", but never *"hundreds fathers" nor *"a hundreds fathers".

-- Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]"Victory has a hundred fathers but defeat is an orphan". Could anyone tell me why "hundreds fathers" is accompanied with "a" in this wonderful phrase? Regards, Alexander Bodnarchuk[/nq]
Alex, a more useful answer to your question is that the indefinate article 'a' is qualifying the number 'hundred' - although there are 100 fathers, there's only one number.

Merry Christmas DC Cat

Usenet · Answer

on 18 Dec 2003:
[nq:2]"Victory has a hundred fathers but defeat is an orphan". Could anyone tell me why "hundreds fathers" is accompanied with "a" in this wonderful phrase?[/nq]
[nq:1]Alex, a more useful answer to your question is that the indefinate article 'a' is qualifying the number 'hundred' - although there are 100 fathers, there's only one number.[/nq]
Wouldn't it be even clearer and more useful to say that the indefinite article "a" is always used with a singular noun and that it indicates "one"? Then how do you explain the singular indefinite article being used with the plural noun "fathers" if you want to call "hundred" a "number" instead of a "noun" or a "quantifier", which is also a noun. Because, of course, "a hundred" is an adjective phrase all by itself that can also be used as a noun phrase, as in "A hundred died on that fateful day".

W3NID:

Main Entry: 2hundred Function: adjective Etymology: Middle English, from Old English, from hundred, n.

: being 100 in number a hundred years usually preceded by a, an, or a numeral (as one, four)

And what is useful about providing unclear information? Better that Alex should look up the word "hundred" all by himself in a decent English dictionary, of which there are many online.

Main Entry: quantifier Function: noun Inflected Form: -s

1 : a word (as a numeral) expressive of quantity two, thirty, many, and much are quantifiers 2 : a prefix that binds the variables in a logical formula by specifying their quantity see EXISTENTIAL OPERATOR, UNIVERSAL QUANTIFIER

-- Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1] on 18 Dec 2003:[/nq]
[nq:2] Alex, a more useful answer to your question is ... - although there are 100 fathers, there's only one number.[/nq]
[nq:1]Wouldn't it be even clearer and more useful to say that the indefinite article "a" is always used with a ... a prefix that binds the variables in a logical formula by specifying their quantity see EXISTENTIAL OPERATOR, UNIVERSAL QUANTIFIER[/nq]
Quote Wouldn't it be even clearer and more useful to say that the indefinite
[nq:1]article "a" is always used with a singular noun and that it indicates "one"?[/nq]
It's pretty obvious from the title of the posting that Alex knows this and wants to know why what appears to him to be a plural phrase is being used with 'a' which he's been taught goes with singular objects.

Quote "Victory has a hundred fathers but defeat is an orphan". Could

It's also surely grindindly clear from the context of Alex's question, that the 's' at the end of the second "hundred" is a typo - something none of us here are immune to. BTW I called 'hundred' a number because that's what it is - yes it's a noun, but so is "banana"; it's a quantifier but so is "some". Neither of these things are numbers. I wasn't using the word 'number' as an attempt at simplified grammatical metalanguage if that's what you're suggesting.

I just think it's more helpful to answer L2 learners' very straightforward queries straightforwardly rather than huffing and puffing about 'a series of three English words ungrammatically strung together.'

But there is something curious going on here, isn't there? I think all the 'quantifier' stuff may be a red herring, (so 'hundred' is a quantifier and a noun - what about 'fifty'?) but why is it that the numbers 'hundred', 'thousand' and 'dozen' (and probably some others) can be used with articles:-

"Anne of a Thousand Days" "The hundred years war" "A dozen eggs"

while, 'two', 'fifty', '999,999' can't be. I expect the answer 'because that's how it is' any day now.

Thanks for the dictionary quotation.

Seasonal felicitude DC
-- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/

Usenet · Answer

Thank you, CyberCypher and Django Cat, for your thorough explanations. It was really my fault to not address LDCE first:

hundred number

1 100: a hundred years | two hundred miles

I could not catch why 'a' is perfect correct from the first reply of CyberCypher. But the further discussion and the citation from W3NID shed the light on the issue. It's all clear to me now.

Thank you again.

Regards, Alexander Bodnarchuk

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]But there is something curious going on here, isn't there? I think all the 'quantifier' stuff may be a red ... dozen eggs" while, 'two', 'fifty', '999,999' can't be. I expect the answer 'because that's how it is' any day now.[/nq]
Because that's how it is. :-)

Consider this explanation: When followed by a word that represents a number, e.g., the three above, 'a' is effectively the same as 'one.' So any number that can be preceded by 'one' can be preceded by 'a' instead.

In many Indo-european languages 'one' IS the indefinite article.

-- Wes Groleau -- The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers. -- Thomas Jefferson

Usenet · Answer

on 19 Dec 2003:
[nq:2] on 18 Dec 2003: Wouldn't it be even clearer ... by specifying their quantity see EXISTENTIAL OPERATOR, UNIVERSAL QUANTIFIER[/nq]
[nq:1]Quote Wouldn't it be even clearer and more useful to say that the indefinite[/nq]
[nq:2]article "a" is always used with a singular noun and that it indicates "one"?[/nq]
[nq:1]It's pretty obvious from the title of the posting that Alex knows this and wants to know why what appears to him to be a plural phrase is being used with 'a' which he's been taught goes with singular objects.[/nq]
Yes, and this indicates that he knows more grammar and its technical terms than most native speakers of English. Which is also true here in Far East Asia.
[nq:1]Quote "Victory has a hundred fathers but defeat is an orphan". Could It's also surely grindindly clear from the context of Alex's question, that the 's' at the end of the second "hundred" is a typo - something none of us here are immune to.[/nq]
No, it's not grindingly clear. In many other languages, adjectives agree in both gender and number with the nouns they modify. It could just as easily have been a reading error as a typo.
[nq:1]BTW I called 'hundred' a number because that's what it is - yes it's a noun, but so is "banana"; ... are numbers. I wasn't using the word 'number' as an attempt at simplified grammatical metalanguage if that's what you're suggesting.[/nq]
Yes, that is what I was suggesting. EFL students usually know all the grammar terms, unlike native anglophones, so it's not useless to explain things in technical terms. Sometimes students ask me technical questions that I have to check my grammar book before answering. I loved the study of syntax in my linguistics program, but who wants to remember all these technical terms that are normally useless when discussing real English with real people who are not linguists or grammarians? EFL students, because their teachers make them learn all that essentially-useless-for-producing-English metalanguage.
[nq:1]I just think it's more helpful to answer L2 learners' very straightforward queries straightforwardly rather than huffing and puffing about 'a series of three English words ungrammatically strung together.'[/nq]
that.
[nq:1]But there is something curious going on here, isn't there? I think all the 'quantifier' stuff may be a red ... but why is it that the numbers 'hundred', 'thousand' and 'dozen' (and probably some others) can be used with articles:-[/nq]
It is, of course, possible to use the definite article with any number when it is being used a head noun, as in "The fifty who shared first prize in today's lottery will each receive 1 million dollars". The numbers that take "a" sometimes, "hundred", "thousand", "million", "billion", "trillion", "dozen", etc, all seem to be collective nouns (and numbers and quantifiers) that are considered singular while the rest seem to be considered plural. Plural nouns can take "the" but not "a" or "one", the numerical equivalent of "a". I don't know if this is an adequate or correct answer, but it seems plausible at first utterance.
[nq:1]"Anne of a Thousand Days" "The hundred years war" "A dozen eggs" while, 'two', 'fifty', '999,999' can't be. I expect the answer 'because that's how it is' any day now.[/nq]
That is sometimes the only answer possible, but I don't think it's helpful in this case. There are reasons.

-- Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]The numbers that take "a" sometimes, "hundred", "thousand", "million", "billion", "trillion", "dozen", etc, all seem to be collective nouns (and ... of "a". I don't know if this is an adequate or correct answer, but it seems plausible at first utterance.[/nq]
Hmmm. I'm inclined to agree. At first, I thought:

Well, I could get away with saying, 'Divide them into four groups of fifty. Put a fifty over here, another fifty over there, one fifty by the hill, and the last fifty on the bridge.'

But when I actually typed it, I realized that sentence would almost certainly NOT have the word 'a' in it.

-- Wes Groleau -- Curmudgeon's Complaints on Courtesy: http://www.onlinenetiquette.com/courtesy1.html (Not necessarily my opinion, but worth reading)

Usenet · Answer

on 20 Dec 2003:
[nq:2]The numbers that take "a" sometimes, "hundred", "thousand", "million", "billion", ... or correct answer, but it seems plausible at first utterance.[/nq]
[nq:1]Hmmm. I'm inclined to agree. At first, I thought: Well, I could get away with saying, 'Divide them into four ... an "a" in front of any of them, but if you're talking about the Arabic numeral "50", there could be:[/nq]
50 50 50 50

On four of the lines above, I've put a "50". On the first line, there's a 50 in column 1. On the second line, there's a 50 in column 11. On the third line, there's a 50 in column 21. And on the fourth line, there's a 50 in column 31.

But in this case, the "50" refers to a singular entity.

-- Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor.

A + plural?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

hundred number

1 100: a hundred years | two hundred miles

Related Questions

A + plural?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

hundred number1 100: a hundred years | two hundred miles

Related Questions

hundred number

1 100: a hundred years | two hundred miles