No Subject versus No Subjects

Question

Hi,

I am hoping that someone can help me.
I am reviewing a report that contains the following line:

'No subjects took a concomitant medication.'

should this be amended to:

No subject took a concomitant medication.'

Is there a general rule for when to use singular or plural nouns following 'no'?

'No man is an island.'
'No children allowed in the bar' or 'No child allowed...'
'No cars can park here.' or 'No car can park here.'

Is it to do with action on an individual level or on a group level?

Thanks for any help.

Kieran.

Rommie · Accepted Answer

Yes, I think it should be amended as you suggest. You could also keep "subjects" if you replace "No subjects" with "None of the subjects".

1. "No subject took a concomitant medication" (as you suggested)
2. "None of the subjects took a concomitant medication"

I've never seen a written down general rule for this, but in most circumstances it would be okay to consider zero count nouns as plural and zero continuous nouns as singular. Zero always seems to be singular when in subjunctive mood, or when you're talking about a generic rather than specific item (e.g. "no man is an island"). Oh, and when you want to add emphasis too.

It also has to do with expectation. If you expect that lots of subjects might have taken a concomitant medication then "None of the" might be better. If you expect that at most one will have done so, then "No" might be better.

I can't figure why "No subjects" (as opposed to "None of the subjects") sounds wrong though, but it does.

Rommie

No Subject versus No Subjects

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions