0
Nsfs2 Posted 13 years ago
Grammar
Verb agreement
Hi,
1. A variety of items are/is sold in the mall.
1.#. A variety of items that is/are sold in the mall is/are ... .
2. A set of rules is/are being discussed.
2. #. Law is a set of rules that governs/govern society.
3. A bag of jewels was/were found in the park.
3.#. The bag of the jewels that was/were found ... .
Which noun does the verb agree with in each pair?
Thanks.
1. A variety of items are/is sold in the mall.
1.#. A variety of items that is/are sold in the mall is/are ... .
2. A set of rules is/are being discussed.
2. #. Law is a set of rules that governs/govern society.
3. A bag of jewels was/were found in the park.
3.#. The bag of the jewels that was/were found ... .
Which noun does the verb agree with in each pair?
Thanks.
Top answer
nsfs2 Which noun does the verb agree with in each pair? com/questions/44942/a-variety-of-x-is-vs-a-variety-of-x-are There you will find that a variety of [plural noun] are is favored 3 to 1 over a variety of [plural noun] is . The preference for the plural is seen in both British and American English.
- nsfs2 Which noun does the verb agree with in each pair?
- com/questions/44942/a-variety-of-x-is-vs-a-variety-of-x-are There you will find that a variety of [plural noun] are is favored 3 to 1 over a variety of [plural noun] is .
- The preference for the plural is seen in both British and American English.
- CJ
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
5 Answers
0
nsfs2Which noun does the verb agree with in each pair?a variety of [plural noun] are/were
a [set / bag] of [plural noun] is/was
CJ
For the statistics on "variety", see http://english.stackexchange.com/question
00
Thanks CJ.
I read many definitions of 'law' as ' a set of rules that govern, deal with, etc. ... .' where they seem to take 'rules' as the antecedent of 'that' and not 'set'.Is this incorrect?
I am confused as sometimes the antecedent seems to be the first word and other times the second in a prepositional 'of' phrase.Does it have to do with using a relative clause? Could you elaborat
I read many definitions of 'law' as ' a set of rules that govern, deal with, etc. ... .' where they seem to take 'rules' as the antecedent of 'that' and not 'set'.Is this incorrect?
I am confused as sometimes the antecedent seems to be the first word and other times the second in a prepositional 'of' phrase.Does it have to do with using a relative clause? Could you elaborat
00
nsfs2where they seem to take 'rules' as the antecedentRight. I only showed the cases where the verb is in the main clause.
Those other cases, where you have a subordinate clause, the agreement can be made with either of the preceding nouns, depending on what you want to emphasize. The relative clause can modify either of the nouns. You just have to say
00
CJ, please allow me to thank you a thousand times for your patience ,dedication and simple but elaborate explanation.You are a true educator.*** bless you.
00
Related Questions