The problem of agreement

Question

The underlined part is from a website as following :
http://theacro.com/zbxe/567458

In the sentence the underlined part seems to violate the rule of agreement.
I mean, the subject of underlined "were" is exposure, so there is no reason the verb has past tense.

Am I right? And if not, why is that?

(I also thought about the chance of the sentence being subjunctive mood, but I‘m not sure.)

The results suggest that the rats behaved as though they assumed that (if they became sick) this must have been caused by something they ate, but that exposure to noises and lights were not the sorts of thing that could cause sickness.

CalifJim · Accepted Answer

Stenka25subjunctive mood

No. Forget that.

Stenka25 ... but that exposure to noises and lights were not the sorts of thing that could cause sickness.

"that" is not the subject. It's a complementizer after "assumed", just like the other "that" in the sentence is.

... they assumed that ..., but (they assumed) that ....
______________

Explanation 1.
The author preferred to make the agreement with the following plural "sorts" rather than with the preceding subject "exposure". This can happen when there is only a linking verb (were) between the two parts of the sentence.

Exposure to noises and lights | were not | the sorts of thing that could cause sickness.
~
The sorts of thing that could cause sickness | were not | exposure to noises and lights.
______________

Explanation 2.
The exposure was to two different stimuli. The author conceives of "exposure to noises and lights" as two different exposures, thus, "exposure to noises and exposure to lights". Therefore, he thinks of the subject as plural, and that, in turn, requires a plural verb.

Exposure to noises and (exposure to) lights were not the sorts of thing that could cause sickness.

CJ

Enoon · Answer

That's just careless writing. You have to sympathize, though. He couldn't write "exposure to noises and exposure to lights" or "exposures to noises and lights" because they both suck, but that's what he meant, and he hoped we wouldn't notice that the subject was, as you say, the singular "exposure". The writer let the nearest nouns, "noises and lights", dictate the conjugation, which happens to the best of us from time to time. "Sorts of thing", though, is where desperation gets the better of him. We can't all be F. Scott Fitzgerald, and this guy decidedly is not. There are several mistakes in this one sentence.

The verb is in the past tense, as it should be, be it "was" or "were", because the rats are in the past. You could make a case for the present tense, since the exposure still doesn't cause sickness, and the rats probably still know that somehow.

My stab at a rewrite: The results suggest that the rats behaved as though they assumed that this must have been caused by something they ate and that noises and lights were not the sort of thing that could cause sickness.

Stenka25 · Answer

Thanks as always, CJ.

Stenka25 · Answer

Thanks a lot, enoon.

Stenka25 · Answer

In the original post, "as following" should be "as follows."

The problem of agreement

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions