0
Stenka25 Posted 17 years ago
Grammar
There was vs. there were
StartFragment>StartFragment>
There is a sentence which seems to have a problem in agreement.
During the Pleistocene glacial periods there were portion of the Earth where plant and animal life flourished, making it possible for people to subsist.
"there was" seems better than "there were" because "portion of the Earth" sounds singular.
So I looked up Longman Dicitonary of Contemporary English.
In that dictionary :
3 [usually singular] a share of something, such as responsibility, blame, or a duty, that is divided between a small number of people
• The other driver must bear a portion of the blame for the accident.
It says "portion of" is [usually singular].
That is, we cannot say it should be 100% "there was."
Sometimes "there were" can be possible.
Do you agree with my reasoning?
There is a sentence which seems to have a problem in agreement.
During the Pleistocene glacial periods there were portion of the Earth where plant and animal life flourished, making it possible for people to subsist.
"there was" seems better than "there were" because "portion of the Earth" sounds singular.
So I looked up Longman Dicitonary of Contemporary English.
In that dictionary :
3 [usually singular] a share of something, such as responsibility, blame, or a duty, that is divided between a small number of people
• The other driver must bear a portion of the blame for the accident.
It says "portion of" is [usually singular].
That is, we cannot say it should be 100% "there was."
Sometimes "there were" can be possible.
Do you agree with my reasoning?
Top answer
I suspect that the case where portion is used with a plural form is when what follows has a very strong plural force - a portion of the many different liquids which went into those containers. But even then the singularity of a portion overrides the plural for me and for many English natives, I imagine. Here where you have a portion of the Earth I can see no problem: it has to be was not were .
- I suspect that the case where portion is used with a plural form is when what follows has a very strong plural force - a portion of the many different liquids which went into those containers.
- But even then the singularity of a portion overrides the plural for me and for many English natives, I imagine.
- Here where you have a portion of the Earth I can see no problem: it has to be was not were .
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
4 Answers
0
I suspect that the case where portion is used with a plural form is when what follows has a very strong plural force - a portion of the many different liquids which went into those containers. But even then the singularity of a portion overrides the plural for me and for many English natives, I imagine. Here where you have a portion of the Earth I can see no problem: i
00
0
During the Pleistocene glacial periods it seems a portion of the Earth harboring plant and animal life comprised a suitable environment for people to live.
00
Somehow, it sounds right to me
Pretty much like how I used to argue "peoples" or "fishes" or similar such irregular forms of grammatical usage are contextually correct -back in the good 'ol days of (secondary) school.
But if I "were" to write for an audience, I'd stick to creating content that "reads" as grammatically "conventional"; otherwise the flow of the idea I wish to purp
Pretty much like how I used to argue "peoples" or "fishes" or similar such irregular forms of grammatical usage are contextually correct -back in the good 'ol days of (secondary) school.
But if I "were" to write for an audience, I'd stick to creating content that "reads" as grammatically "conventional"; otherwise the flow of the idea I wish to purp
0
Related Questions