Plain Words (24 page)

He did not think that the Bill would be introduced this month, nor indeed before the recess.

‘He did not think' affects everything that follows
that
. Logically therefore
nor
produces a double negative, as though one were to say ‘he didn't think it wouldn't be introduced before the recess'.

The blame for this disorder does not rest with Parliament, or with the bishops, or with the parish priests. Our real weakness is the failure of the ordinary man.

Here the negative phrase ‘does not rest' is carried right through the sentence, and applies to the bishops and the parish priests as
much as to Parliament. There is no need to repeat the negative, and
or
is logically right. But
nor
is so often used in such a construction that it would be pedantic to condemn it: if logical defence is needed one might say that ‘did he think it would be introduced' in the first example and ‘does it rest' in the second were understood as repeated after
nor
. By changing the framework of the sentence, it is a positive verb,
rests
, that runs through
:

The blame for this disorder rests not with Parliament nor with the bishops, nor with the parish priests, but with the ordinary man.

The original negative (
not
) is attached not to the verb but to
Parliament
, and exhausts itself in exonerating Parliament. The negative must be repeated, and
nor
is rightly used.

(4)
Not all
. It is idiomatic English, to which no exception can be taken, to write ‘All officials are not good at drafting legal documents' when you mean that only some of them are (compare ‘All that glitters is not gold'). But it is clearer, and therefore better, to write ‘Not all officials are good at drafting legal documents'.

(5)
Not … but
. It is also idiomatic English to write ‘I did not go to speak but to listen'. It is pedantry to insist that, because logic demands it, this ought to be ‘I went not to speak but to listen'. But if the latter way of arranging a ‘not … but' sentence runs as easily and makes your meaning clearer, as it often may, it should be preferred.

(6)
Not
…
because
.
Not
followed by
because
sometimes leads to ambiguity. ‘I did not write that letter because of what you told me' may mean either ‘I refrained from writing that letter because of what you told me' or ‘It was not because of what you told me that I wrote that letter'. Avoid this ambiguity by rewriting the sentence.

The rule that a singular subject requires a singular verb, and a plural subject a plural verb, is an easy one to remember and generally to observe. But it has its difficulties.

(1) Collective words

In using collective words or nouns of multitude (
department
,
parliament
,
government
,
committee
and the like), ought we to say ‘the government have decided' or ‘the government has decided'; ‘the committee are meeting' or ‘the committee is meeting'? There is no rule. Either a singular or a plural verb may be used. The plural is more suitable when the emphasis is on the individual members, and the singular when it is on the body as a whole. ‘A committee
was
appointed to consider this subject'; ‘the committee
were
unable to agree'. Sometimes the need to use a pronoun settles the question. We cannot say ‘the committee differed among itself', nor ‘the committee were of one mind when I sat on them'. But the number ought not to be varied in the same document without good cause. Accidentally changing it is a common form of carelessness:

The firm
has
given an undertaking that in the event of
their
having to restrict production …

The industry
is
capable of supplying all home requirements and
have
in fact been exporting.

It will be for each committee to determine in the light of
its
responsibilities how far it is necessary to make all these appointments, and no appointment should be made unless the committee
are
fully satisfied of the need.

Conversely, a subject plural in form may be given a singular verb if it signifies a single entity such as a country (‘the United
States has agreed') or an organisation (‘the United Nations has resolved') or a measure (‘six miles is not too far'; ‘twelve months is a long time to wait').

Note
. It is hard to argue against emphasising the singular when two people have just united in marriage, yet the following will probably strike most British readers as awkward: ‘A South Korean couple on its honeymoon was found alive and in good condition two decks below the waterline' (
New York Post
). ~

(2) Words linked by
and

To the elementary rule that two singular nouns linked by
and
should be given a plural verb, justifiable exceptions can be found where the linked words form a single idea. The stock example is taken from Kipling's poem ‘Recessional': ‘The tumult and the shouting dies'.
The tumult and the shouting
, it is explained, are equivalent to ‘the tumultuous shouting'. (Even if that were not true, the singular
die
would not have allowed for the rhyme with the line ‘Still stands Thine ancient sacrifice', and rhyming poets must be allowed some licence.)

Perhaps these official examples might be justified in the same way:

Duration and charge was advised at the conclusion of the call.

Your desire and need for a telephone service is fully appreciated.

It might be argued that
duration and charge
were equivalent to ‘the appropriate charge for the duration', and that
your desire and need
were equivalent to ‘the desire arising from your need'. But it is safer to observe the rule, and to leave these questionable experiments to the poets.

Other instances of singular verbs with subjects linked by
and
cannot be so easily explained away. They are frequent when the verb comes first. Shakespeare has them (‘Is Bushy, Green, and the
Earl of Wiltshire dead?'), and so have the translators of the Bible (‘Thine is the Kingdom, the power and the glory'). If we may never attribute mere carelessness to great writers, we must explain these by saying that the singular verb is more vivid, and should be understood as repeated with each noun – ‘Is Bushy, (is) Green, and (is) the Earl of Wiltshire dead?' Those who like to have everything tidy may get some satisfaction from this, but writers of official English should forget about these refinements and stick to the simple rule.

(3) Words linked by
with

In a sentence stating that ‘X
with
Y did such-and-such', the subject is X alone. If X is singular, the verb should be too: ‘The boss with his partners is responsible'; ‘The Secretary of State together with the Under-Secretary is coming'.

(4) Alternative subjects

Either
and
neither
must always have a singular verb if the alternative subjects are singular. It is a very common error to write sentences like these:

I am unable to trace that either of the items have been paid.

Neither knowledge nor skill are needed.

Have
and
are
should be
has
and
is
. But where a plural subject is included, the verb should be plural:

Neither knowledge nor sophisticated skills are needed.

(5)
Each

When
each
is the subject of a sentence the verb is singular and so is any pronoun:

Each man has a room to himself.

When a plural noun or pronoun is the subject, with
each
in apposition, the verb is plural:

They have a room each.

(6) Attraction

The verb must agree with the subject, and not allow itself to be attracted into the number of the complement. Modern authorities will not pass ‘the wages of sin is death'. The safe rule for the ordinary writer in such sentences is to regard what precedes the verb as the subject and what follows it as the complement, and so to write ‘the wages of sin are death' and ‘death is the wages of sin'.

A verb some way from its subject is sometimes lured away from its proper number by a noun closer to it, as in:

We regret that assurances given us twelve months ago that a sufficient supply of suitable local labour would be available to meet our requirements has not been fulfilled. (Assurances … have not been fulfilled.)

So far as the heating of buildings in Government occupation are concerned … (So far as the heating … is concerned …)

Sometimes the weight of a plural pushes the verb into the wrong number, even though they are not next to one another:

Thousands of pounds' worth of damage have been done to the apple crop.

Here
have
is a blunder. And so (as we have just seen) is the common attraction of the verb into the plural when the subject is
either
or
neither
in such sentences as ‘neither of the questions have been answered' or ‘either of the questions were embarrassing'.

However, in one or two exceptional instances the force of this
attraction has conquered all. With the phrase
more than one
the pull of
one
is so strong that the singular is always used (e.g. ‘more than one question was asked'); and owing to the pull of the plural in a sentence such as, ‘none of the questions were answered',
none
has come to be used indifferently with a singular or a plural verb. Conversely, owing to the pull of the singular
a
in the expression
many a
, it always takes the singular verb. ‘There's many a slip twixt cup and lip' is idiomatic English, as ‘there are many a slip' is not.

(7)
There are
or
were

It is a common mistake to write
there is
or
there was
where a plural subject requires
there are
or
there were
. The following is wrong:

There was available one large room and three small ones.

This should be

There were available …

It is true that Ophelia said ‘there is Pansies; that's for thoughts', but she was not herself at the time.

(8) Certain nouns are sometimes puzzling

(
a
)
Agenda
, though in form plural, has been admitted from Latin into English as a singular word. Nobody would say ‘the agenda for Monday's meeting
have
not yet reached me'. If a word is needed for one of the components of the agenda, say ‘item No. so-and-so of the agenda', not ‘agendum No. so-and-so', which would be the extreme of pedantry. If a plural is wanted for
agenda
itself, it must be
agendas
or
agenda papers
.

Note
. When he wrote this, Gowers contrasted the singular
agenda
with what he considered the definitely plural
data
. These days, however, many authorities use
data
as a singular word too (‘the
data was inconclusive').
Media
is similarly treated as both plural and singular. In the singular, an
agenda
is being thought of as a (singular) list of things to be done, the
data
as a (singular) set of items of information, and the
media
as a (singular) range of different forms of communication. But where
criteria
and
phenomena
are used as though singular (‘it was an amazing phenomena'; ‘they judged it on one criteria alone'), this is simply incorrect.

There are other words, not all Latin in origin, that are treated as both singular and plural in English, e.g.
politics
,
headquarters
,
whereabouts
,
livestock
and
variety
. Sticklers tend to use them in the singular (‘The whereabouts of our bull
is
unknown. Our livestock
was
already in decline. A variety of them
is
sick'). ~

(
b
)
Means
in the sense of ‘means to an end' is a curious word. It may be treated either as singular or plural. Suppose, for instance, that you want to write about means having been sought to do something. You may if you choose treat the word as singular and say ‘a means was sought' or ‘every means was sought'. Or you may treat it as plural and say ‘all means were sought'. Or again, if you use just the word
means
without any word such as
a
or
every
or
all
to show its number, you may give it a singular or a plural verb as you wish: you may say either ‘means was sought' or ‘means were sought'; both are idiomatic. Perhaps on the whole it is best to say ‘a method (or way) was sought' if there was only one, and ‘means were sought' if there was more than one.

Means
in the sense of monetary resources is always plural.

(
c
)
Number
, like other collective nouns, may take either a singular or a plural verb. Unlike most of them, it admits of a simple and logical rule. When all that it is doing is forming part of a composite plural subject, it should have a plural verb, as in:

A large number of people are coming today.

But when it is standing on its own legs as the subject it should have a singular verb, as in: