NationStates Jolt Archive

You guys keep refering to music bands in the singular! STOP IT GODAMMIT!!

"insert name here is a super duper band"
NO!!!

"insert name here ARE a super duper band"

Now get that straight and maybe the world won't hate u guys so much

and just for good measure................:sniper:

END TRANSMISSION

Finished off with Gun Smilie, quintisential noobishness.

You're silly. :p

If you are referring to the band as a whole, it ought to be singular. If you are referring to the individual members of the band or to the band collectively, it should be plural.

Same with family, class, team, etc.

I personally think using the singular sounds better.

Finished off with Gun Smilie, quintisential noobishness.

Could have been worse considering the title.

"Band" is a singular noun, even though it refers to a plurality of members. It's similar to "government" or "herd." So you're just wrong.

Also, the world hates America cuz of our freedoms. Bush says so.

You guys keep refering to music bands in the singular! STOP IT GODAMMIT!!

"insert name here is a super duper band"
NO!!!

"insert name here ARE a super duper band"

Now get that straight and maybe the world won't hate u guys so much

and just for good measure................:sniper:

END TRANSMISSION

Well we are refering to ONE band. Tool IS a great band. There is only one band by that name. Now if there were three bands named Tool, the statement Tool ARE great bands might make sense.

That's why we Yanks hate you damn filthy foreingers. You don't make any sense.

We hoped you have enjoeyd your stay on NSG. Please let the door hit you on the way out.

We hoped you have enjoeyd your stay on NSG. Please let the door hit you on the way out.

...another reason the world hates america.

...another reason the world hates america.

People hate America because a british person insulted you?

....indeed. Don't get me started on the brittish now, thats a whole diffrent kettle of fish

Tool IS a great band.

Yea, but that's a lie right there.

Ah now, Tool ARE NOT a bad band.

LOL
If you're going to get all bent out of shape for other people being stupid, you should check your facts first. You sound like a jerk and an idiot.
As has been said,"NIN is a great band." is the correct way. Band in that sentence is singular. One band.

...another reason the world hates america.

Yep I'm one of the reasons.

jokes on u buddy, Iam a jerk and an idiot. And your all wrong. Goddam Yanks

Ah now, Tool ARE NOT a bad band.

They're.....listenable when drunk.

And that's honestly the best thing I can say about them.



Anyway.....in Northern Ireland (and I assume the rest of the UK), it's "they are" rather than "it is".

I guess it's because it's more....referring to the members of the band as in "I like Nirvana", "Yeah, they're a really good band". So the band name is used as a common name for the members....if you know what I mean. I suck at explaining this.

I personally think using the singular sounds better.

And it is the correct form. A band is a singular entity.

theres not much thats isnt "listenable when drunk"

the honourable exception being James Blunt, who deserves a mighty flogging.

And it is the correct form. A band is a singular entity.

No, a band is a collection of musicians. Not a super musician with several music playing mutant limbs

jokes on u buddy, Iam a jerk and an idiot. And your all wrong. Goddam YanksObviously. Since you can't capitalize, can't type and misspelled Goddamn.

Well we are refering to ONE band. Tool IS a great band. There is only one band by that name. Now if there were three bands named Tool, the statement Tool ARE great bands might make sense.

That's why we Yanks hate you damn filthy foreingers. You don't make any sense.

We also hate them because they don't speak english, yet they tell us how to use it.

We invented english!!! And Al Gore invented the Internet, so thank him too!!

No, a band is a collection of musicians. Not a super musician with several music playing mutant limbs

It depends on whether you are speaking of the band as a singular entity (in reference to the group as a whole) or as a corporate entity (in reference to each individual member). Same with all the collective nouns.

It depends on whether you are speaking of the band as a singular entity (in reference to the group as a whole) or as a corporate entity (in reference to each individual member). Same with all the collective nouns.

Now this makes sense. Still though..... shush

No, a band is a collection of musicians. Not a super musician with several music playing mutant limbs

Out of curiosity, do you also say that your family are nice, the pasta are tasty, the class are going on a field trip - in short, do you believe that all collective nouns are plural, or just "band"?

No, a band is a collection of musicians. Not a super musician with several music playing mutant limbs

And the government is a collection of politicians.

So I assume you say things like, "The government are stupid."

No, a band is a collection of musicians. Not a super musician with several music playing mutant limbs
You fail English. A band is a collection of players, and collections are singular.

theres not much thats isnt "listenable when drunk"

Yeah, so what does that say about Tool?

the honourable exception being James Blunt, who deserves a mighty flogging.

Pretty much

You guys keep refering to music bands in the singular! STOP IT GODAMMIT!!

"insert name here is a super duper band"
NO!!!

"insert name here ARE a super duper band"

Now get that straight and maybe the world won't hate u guys so much

and just for good measure................:sniper:

END TRANSMISSIONLook, no "s" on band. That means it's singular.

And the government is a collection of politicians.

So I assume you say things like, "The government are stupid."

I do now

We also hate them because they don't speak english, yet they tell us how to use it.

We invented english!!! And Al Gore invented the Internet, so thank him too!!

Nope I'm pretty sure that came from England :P

Nope I'm pretty sure that came from England :P

But Al Gore did invent the internet, no argueing that one!!

That's a good band.
That are a good band.

:confused:

Let me clear this up, im just talking about when referring to bands. Theres always bendings and exceptions in English. (aka Impearialish)

You guys keep refering to music bands in the singular! STOP IT GODAMMIT!!

"insert name here is a super duper band"
NO!!!

"insert name here ARE a super duper band"

Now get that straight and maybe the world won't hate u guys so much

and just for good measure................:sniper:

END TRANSMISSION

Oh, piss off.

The verb in your example refers the band as a singular unit, that's why "is" is perfectly adequate and acceptible. BTW, "refeRRing" has two Rs.

Just listen to how it sounds: "Rush IS a great band" versus "Rush ARE a great band". The latter example sounds wrong because there is only ONE (singular) band being referred to, not more than one.

However, if the band's name implies a plural, such as The Dead Milkmen or Fine Young Cannibals or The Sex Pistols, then the verb should agree with the implication for the sake of sounding correct: "The Sex Pistols are (were) a decent sideshow act that masqueraded as a band."

Oh, and this infernal nit-pickery you've complained about? Yeah, that's why "the world" hates you Pommies (or Aussies or Kiwis, or wherever in the erstwhile Empire you're from).

That's a good band.
That are a good band.

:confused:

Thats just silly. Wheres the is the first one??

Keep track of the subject, especially when there is a singular pronoun or collective noun for the subject and a plural element in the phrase that separates the subject and verb.


Collective noun: A group of senators was calling for an investigation.

Singular pronoun: One of the many galaxies was proven to be near a black hole.

Check it out.
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000026.htm

Oh, piss off.

The verb in your example refers the band as a singular unit, that's why "is" is perfectly adequate and acceptible. BTW, "refeRRing" has two Rs.

Just listen to how it sounds: "Rush IS a great band" versus "Rush ARE a great band". The latter example sounds wrong because there is only ONE (singular) band being referred to, not more than one.

However, if the band's name implies a plural, such as The Dead Milkmen or Fine Young Cannibals or The Sex Pistols, then the verb should agree with the implication for the sake of sounding correct: "The Sex Pistols are (were) a decent sideshow act that masqueraded as a band."

Oh, and this infernal nit-pickery you've complained about? Yeah, that's why "the world" hates you Pommies (or Aussies or Kiwis, or wherever in the erstwhile Empire you're from).

Right chillax man.

This was meant as a light hearted thread where people can harass eachother in good humour.

Way to ruin it.
Go you.

It depends for me whether their name is plural or not.

Emperor is a great band. So are the Beatles.

Generally speaking, many bands refer to themselves in the singular, because together they form one entity. Most of the bands I listen to do, unless their name is plural. Plus, most bands I listen to are from Europe, not America.

In short, the OP is a moron.

Thats just silly. Wheres the is the first one??

Where's what?

Did you know that adding " 's " is like adding is?

Wheres what?

The IS.

Thats just silly. Wheres the is the first one??

"That's" = "That is"

dumbass.

Right chillax man.

This was meant as a light hearted thread where people can harass eachother in good humour.

Way to ruin it.
Go you.

A gun smiley in the OP isn't the best way to get folks to see your thread as light-hearted.

If the OP wanted to harass the US version of English, he should have gone with the following two examples:

"A man was arrested Tuesday on suspicion of"....argh....he was arrested on Tuesday, maybe, but he wasn't arrested Tuesday. That makes no sense.

"I could care less". Really? What about? Because, frankly, I couldn't care less. About anything.

"That's" = "That is"

dumbass.

ah sush, you grammer nazi..... :p

Keep track of the subject, especially when there is a singular pronoun or collective noun for the subject and a plural element in the phrase that separates the subject and verb.


Collective noun: A group of senators was calling for an investigation.

A group of senators called for an investigation.

Singular pronoun: One of the many galaxies was proven to be near a black hole.

One of the many galaxies proved to be near a black hole.

Check it out.
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000026.htm

Correction of passive voice in bold. Efficiency and the active voice are your friends.

A gun smiley in the OP isn't the best way to get folks to see your thread as light-hearted.

The gun smiley was meant as a joke, hense me showing that i put it in for no reason. i may not post on these threads often, probably because of this, but i do read them.

Correction of passive voice in bold. Efficiency and the active voice are your friends.You'll have to correct the grammar site. :D

Right chillax man.

This was meant as a light hearted thread where people can harass eachother in good humour.

Way to ruin it.
Go you.

Ah, so it's "light hearted" to title a thread "Why the world hates Yanks", is it? I see. So if I titled a friendly thread designed to poke gentle fun at the English "Why the world thinks the English are complete gits", that would be okay?

The fault for the ruination you see falls on thee, not me.

Correction of passive voice in bold. Efficiency and the active voice are your friends.

Nothing incorrect about using the passive voice, no matter how friendly efficiency and the active voice were with me during the party.

ah sush, you grammer nazi..... :p

I'm (I am, in case you were wondering what that meant, too) not a grammar nazi. I do, however, know how to use contractions. Most people learn that when they're (they are) about six years old or so.

So, the fact that you apparently don't (do not) makes you seem hopelessly stupid.

Ah, so it's "light hearted" to title a thread "Why the world hates Yanks", is it? I see. So if I titled a friendly thread designed to poke gentle fun at the English "Why the world thinks the English are complete gits", that would be okay?

The fault for the ruination you see falls on thee, not me.

I promote any harassment of the English. So feel free.
Im Irish myself, feel free to make stereotypes of alchoholism, because i CAN take a joke.

Im Irish myself, feel free to make stereotypes of alchoholism, because i CAN take a joke.

No one's questioning your ability to take a joke. Making them is a different story. ;)

I promote any harassment of the English. So feel free.
Im Irish myself, feel free to make stereotypes of alchoholism, because i CAN take a joke.

Alcoholism is not funny, until the fifth or sixth drink... then everything is funny.

ah sush, you grammer nazi..... :p

You're funny. (that's a contraction. So was that.) :p

No one's questioning your ability to take a joke. Making them is a different story. ;)

ZING! I'll admit my abilities do need to be mended to be applied to those form west of the Atalantic. Not the brightest, God love them, subtlety not a strong point.

No, a band is a collection of musicians. Not a super musician with several music playing mutant limbs

What about one-man bands?

Out of curiosity, do you also say that your family are nice, the pasta are tasty, the class are going on a field trip - in short, do you believe that all collective nouns are plural, or just "band"?

We say "your family are nice" and "the class are going on a field trip", not "the pasta are tasty"

That's a good band.
That are a good band.

:confused:

*They are a good band

Right chillax man.

This was meant as a light hearted thread where people can harass eachother in good humour.

Way to ruin it.
Go you.

Light hearted? On NS general? good luck:p

Anyway, just to clarify, in british english we refer to a group of people as plural, not singular. And to be honest, to me they both sound acceptable, although i nearly always use the british english versions...

But "I could care less" just sounds stupid:D IMHO

If the OP wanted to harass the US version of English, he should have gone with the following two examples:

"A man was arrested Tuesday on suspicion of"....argh....he was arrested on Tuesday, maybe, but he wasn't arrested Tuesday. That makes no sense.

"I could care less". Really? What about? Because, frankly, I couldn't care less. About anything.

On "care less", you are wholly correct.

"Arrested Tuesday" is a shortcut taken by US English speakers that retrofitted itself into printed English. It may annoy you, but the point is not lost -- the hearer/reader understands that the clause that follows occurred on Tuesday. Think of it as a misplaced appositive statement: "On Tuesday, a man was arrested..." became "A man was arrested on Tuesday..." and the preposition was simply elided to "A man was arrested Tuesday...".

I've got no beef with shortenings and elisions if the original meaning of the sentence is unaffected. In the case of the dropped preposition, the meaning of the sentence has not suffered any confusion, despite what you say. It does make sense, it just isn't "proper".

And just to prove I can be just as big a hypocrite as anyone here, I'll contradict what I just said by ranting thus: I draw the line at text message speak. 4 is a number, not a preposition, context clarity be damned. So there.

Thats just silly. Wheres the is the first one??

?

That's = That is

And just to prove I can be just as big a hypocrite as anyone here, I'll contradict what I just said by ranting thus: I draw the line at text message speak. 4 is a number, not a preposition, context clarity be damned. So there.

Most of that stuff is painful for me to read.

Nothing incorrect about using the passive voice, no matter how friendly efficiency and the active voice were with me during the party.

Ah, yes -- they can be a naughty pair, those two.

I never said that passivity was incorrect, just inefficient. Passive voice can be a nice change from constant active-voiced writing, but too many use the passive voice too often, and it gets confusing. I suppose it's the copy-editor in me. Now, how do I get him out of there?

Ah, yes -- they can be a naughty pair, those two.

I never said that passivity was incorrect, just inefficient. Passive voice can be a nice change from constant active-voiced writing, but too many use the passive voice too often, and it gets confusing. I suppose it's the copy-editor in me. Now, how do I get him out of there?

You use a crowbar and some duct tape.

ZING! I'll admit my abilities do need to be mended to be applied to those form west of the Atalantic. Not the brightest, God love them, subtlety not a strong point.

Ah, I see. I'll remember to include gun smilies in my posts to ensure that I'm perceived as subtle. Since when do the Irish get to label anyone as "not the brightest"?

I can take a joke just fine -- I'm Polish (Prussian, really, but nobody cared about that distinction when Von Montekopfske became Mantikoski at Ellis Island in about 1860 or so), so it's a required trait -- you go ahead and crack one, and I'll laugh, I promise.

I promote any harassment of the English. So feel free.
Im Irish myself, feel free to make stereotypes of alchoholism, because i CAN take a joke.

Nah -- harassing the English is too easy.

*Recalls Family Guy episode in which a movie marquee features:
HUGH GRANT in "WHAT'S MY APPEAL?"*

*Chuckles silently*

You use a crowbar and some duct tape.

Yikes! That's bound to leave a mark...







...do it again.

Yikes! That's bound to leave a mark...







...do it again.

*does*

That'll (Contraction for "that will." See? I can do it too!) be fifty bucks. :D

The gun smiley was meant as a joke, hense me showing that i put it in for no reason. i may not post on these threads often, probably because of this, but i do read them.

I guess we're all just a bit too old, tired and jaded, eh? I personally never use the silly gun things, I suppose because the people who do often mean it.

*does*

That'll (Contraction for "that will." See? I can do it too!) be fifty bucks. :D

Wow! (interjection) That's (that is) a very reasonable rate. I'd (I would) like to contract you for your services every week for that price. (you're (you are) right...it's almost fun to do it!)

If the OP wanted to harass the US version of English, he should have gone with the following two examples:

"A man was arrested Tuesday on suspicion of"....argh....he was arrested on Tuesday, maybe, but he wasn't arrested Tuesday. That makes no sense.

"I could care less". Really? What about? Because, frankly, I couldn't care less. About anything.

"Tuesday, a man was arrested" becomes "A man was arrested Tuesday." It's not the best way to phrase it, but it's not improper. It leads to confusion.

This seems like the appropriate thread to make the following point:

It's not "the" Batman.

This seems like the appropriate thread to make the following point:

It's not "the" Batman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%27s_Al_Ghul

And he called him "The Bat Man"

"Tuesday, a man was arrested" becomes "A man was arrested Tuesday." It's not the best way to phrase it, but it's not improper. It leads to confusion.

"Tuesday, a man was arrested" makes no sense either. "On Tuesday, a man was arrested", however, does.

This seems like the appropriate thread to make the following point:

It's not "the" Batman.

I don't know how much weight this has...

"Joker: And where is the Batman? HE'S AT HOME WASHING HIS TIGHTS!"

From the original movie script.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra%27s_Al_Ghul

And he called him "The Bat Man"

From Wikipedia:
Not only can he physically and mentally challenge "the Detective" (the name by which Ra's always refers to Batman)

Ah, so it's "light hearted" to title a thread "Why the world hates Yanks", is it? I see.

I thought you were commenting on the hates; that would have been clever.. alas not.

I wrote "the pair is" in English and the teacher "corrected" it. :(

"Tuesday, a man was arrested" makes no sense either. "On Tuesday, a man was arrested", however, does.

It does in French. :)

From Wikipedia:

Aye. I am incorrect. "The Bat Man" was the original name for the character when Bob Kane created him. I hang my head in shame.

I thought you were commenting on the hates; that would have been clever.. alas not.

I wrote "the pair is" in English and the teacher "corrected" it. :(The teacher's an idiot. "The pair are" is incorrect. It's one pair.

The teacher's an idiot. "The pair are" is incorrect. It's one pair.

It didn't sound very good to me, but I was trying to be grammatically correct. "The pair are" sounds more natural to me.

And the teacher is an idiot; she says "different to." :eek: :p

It does in French. :)

Oui, mais j'avais ne parlé pas de Français :p

Oui, mais j'avais ne parlé pas de Français :p

Manifestement.

But what of nouns that are both plural and singular? Words such as "deer", "sheep", and "moose".

E.g.
"Those deer are beautiful!"
"That deer is beautiful!"

Grammatical number is then determined on a context sensitive basis.

Although, I do enjoy saying "Those meeses[groups of moose] sure are majestic."

Yea, but that's a lie right there.

OK, the greatest band.

OMG! some-one has bad grammar! call the Police!

honestly, I'm sure most people who hate america have better reasons to hate america then you do.

wait... your using a gun smiley, so you were prolly not being serious.

OK, the greatest band.

Are your ears OK?

OMG! some-one has bad grammar! call the Police!

honestly, I'm sure most people who hate america have better reasons to hate america then you do.

wait... your using a gun smiley, so you were prolly not being serious.

Of course we did have that guy who wrote a Greenday topic and used gun smileys, he was serious IIRC :p

And it think at this point you just have to accept that british english and american english are different

But british english is still the best

The world should hate the Yanks cause they are, quite simply the root of all evil. From Steinberner to Derek Jeter, the whole organisation wants to eat kitties and take over the world. In fact they are so horrible the members of the organisation shouldn't count as pe....*reads*

Wait... this thread isn't about discussing how evil the New York Yankees are?

:(

The world should hate the Yanks cause they are, quite simply the root of all evil. From Steinberner to Derek Jeter, the whole organisation wants to eat kitties and take over the world. In fact they are so horrible the members of the organisation shouldn't count as pe....*reads*

Wait... this thread isn't about discussing how evil the New York Yankees are?

:(

There should be one. *nods*

Oui, mais j'avais ne parlé pas de Français :p
Je n'ai pas parlé, no?

If the OP wanted to harass the US version of English, he should have gone with the following two examples:

"A man was arrested Tuesday on suspicion of"....argh....he was arrested on Tuesday, maybe, but he wasn't arrested Tuesday. That makes no sense.

"I could care less". Really? What about? Because, frankly, I couldn't care less. About anything.

Sounds like you could care less about that first example, if you tried.

Are your ears OK?

Just fine. So why don't you like good music?

There should be one. *nods*

If there was one, and if there are any even semi-Yankee fans here, I would be banned for trolling or worse sooooo quickly.

Je n'ai pas parlé, no?

Not if she's using the pluperfect. The negation should be around the auxiliary verb though (also the f of français shouldn't be capitalized).

Just fine. So why don't you like good music?

I don't like Tool, that isn't good music :p

If you listen to Tool then the terrorists win / you'll shoot up a school.

It's true. Concerned mothers say so.

Sounds like you could care less about that first example, if you tried.

Eh?

"Tuesday, a man was arrested" becomes "A man was arrested Tuesday." It's not the best way to phrase it, but it's not improper. It leads to confusion.

Confusion? For who?

I don't like Tool, that isn't good music :p

If you listen to Tool then the terrorists win / you'll shoot up a school.

It's true. Concerned mothers say so.

Concerned mothers should be gang raped by AIDS patients if they don't like tool. I'm sorry, but that's the only way they'll learn their lesson.

Concerned mothers should be gang raped by AIDS patients if they don't like tool.

*reports in moderation*

Je n'ai pas parlé, no?

That means "I did not speak of", whereas "I wasn't speaking of" (which is what I said) makes more sense :)

It has everything to do with Peanut Brittle.

Not if she's using the pluperfect. The negation should be around the auxiliary verb though (also the f of français shouldn't be capitalized; and it should be en français).

Ok, so je n'avais parlé pas en français then. I haven't done French in about 5 years, so I thought I was doing well even using pluperfect at all, leave me alone :p

Eh?

Well, you said you couldn't care less about anything, but I figure there was something you could care less about.

And, as stated before, 'arrested Tuesday' makes a good deal of sense, whether or not it is proper may be in question.

Ok, so je n'avais parlé pas en français then. I haven't done French in about 5 years, leave me alone :p

You were right about the de.. :p and I'm not sure about the capitalization anymore. *runs*

Concerned mothers should be gang raped by AIDS patients

To be honest, you could have ended it there and you would have had agreement from most people.

*reports in moderation*
Why?

*reports in moderation*

...KIIP!

"Tuesday, a man was arrested" makes no sense either. "On Tuesday, a man was arrested", however, does.

They both mean the same thing: On the day known as Tuesday, a man was arrested. How is that confusing...at...all? Even a little?

Why?

Because it upset me. :(
I didn't really.
And it didn't.
It was kinda.. :eek: though.

The teacher's an idiot. "The pair are" is incorrect. It's one pair.
No, it is indeed "The pair are". You wouldn't say "the pair was at the shops" or "the pair is located in Hull", now, would you?

"The pair were at the shops" and "the pair are located in Hull" sounds better and is correct, methinks.

Maybe US grammar differs.

Because it upset me. :(
I didn't really.
And it didn't.
It was kinda.. :eek: though.

My sense of humor is kind of :eek:

No, it is indeed "The pair are". You wouldn't say "the pair was at the shops" or "the pair is located in Hull", now, would you?
I think Bitchkitten would..

Maybe US grammar differs.
Bingo!

Well, you said you couldn't care less about anything, but I figure there was something you could care less about.

Well, no, I was saying that as a way of showing my response to someone who says they "could care less" about something. So "Really? I couldn't care less. About anything" would be my response, even if I know what they mean.

And, as stated before, 'arrested Tuesday' makes a good deal of sense, whether or not it is proper may be in question.

It's understandable, but it doesn't make grammatical sense....if you know what I mean.

You were right about the de.. :p and I'm not sure about the capitalization anymore. *runs*

I thought I was right about "de"....

Well, no, I was saying that as a way of showing my response to someone who says they "could care less" about something. So "Really? I couldn't care less. About anything" would be my response, even if I know what they mean.



It's understandable, but it doesn't make grammatical sense....if you know what I mean.

Like "last summer, I went on holiday" doesn't make sense?

I thought I was right about "de"....

I thought you'd been saying "I'd not spoken in French" not "...about French." ;)

They both mean the same thing: On the day known as Tuesday, a man was arrested. How is that confusing...at...all? Even a little?

Oh, the meaning is perfectly clear in both. However, grammatically, "A man was arrested Tuesday" doesn't make sense.

And I find it very annoying...I can understand people making grammatical errors every now and then, fair enough everybody does it, but for an entire nation to have adopted it and use it constantly...it saddens me.

Yes, I know I need to get out more.

Like "last summer, I went on holiday" doesn't make sense?

It does, but it's not the same thing. I suppose "last" fills the role of "on". You wouldn't say "summer, I went on holiday".

Well, no, I was saying that as a way of showing my response to someone who says they "could care less" about something. So "Really? I couldn't care less. About anything" would be my response, even if I know what they mean.

Ah. Well, for the record, it's not all us 'Mericans that say that, just the stupid ones. Yes, that's most of them.

It's understandable, but it doesn't make grammatical sense....if you know what I mean.

Eh, why not? What, precisely, would the preposition do for the sentence anyways?

I thought you'd been saying "I'd not spoken in French" not "...about French." ;)

Nope, definitely about French :p

It does, but it's not the same thing. I suppose "last" fills the role of "on". You wouldn't say "summer, I went on holiday".

It's still ungrammatical though, no? ;)

Oh, the meaning is perfectly clear in both. However, grammatically, "A man was arrested Tuesday" doesn't make sense.

And I find it very annoying...I can understand people making grammatical errors every now and then, fair enough everybody does it, but for an entire nation to have adopted it and use it constantly...it saddens me.

Yes, I know I need to get out more.

Actually, about the time an entire nation adopts something, it sorta stops being a grammatical error. Language for ya.

You guys keep refering to music bands in the singular! STOP IT GODAMMIT!!

"insert name here is a super duper band"
NO!!!

"insert name here ARE a super duper band"

Now get that straight and maybe the world won't hate u guys so much

and just for good measure................:sniper:

END TRANSMISSION

Using proper grammar is why people hate the US? Sweet, I can live with that.

That means "I did not speak of", whereas "I wasn't speaking of" (which is what I said) makes more sense :)
Ah ok - haven't done the pluperfect yet, sorry :(

Ah ok - haven't done the pluperfect yet, sorry :(

Pff. That's nothing.

"Je n'aime pas le lundi"

Is the extent of my French. And it's not even right!

Oh, the meaning is perfectly clear in both. However, grammatically, "A man was arrested Tuesday" doesn't make sense.

And I find it very annoying...I can understand people making grammatical errors every now and then, fair enough everybody does it, but for an entire nation to have adopted it and use it constantly...it saddens me.

Yes, I know I need to get out more.

Grammar's job is to ensure clarity. Since there's nothing unclear about omitting the preposition from "a man was arrested on Tuesday", the point of its correctness is moot.

Though I completely understand your annoyance. Plenty of grammatical constructions that are technically correct can make a meal of my sanity.

Now look at that last phrase there -- "make a meal of my sanity". You understod that even without the auxilliary preposition required by technically correct grammar, right? Should it not read "make a meal out of my sanity"? See? It's all relative.

So, when Grand Funk sang "we are an American band" they should have been singing "we is an American band" ?

:confused:

Pff. That's nothing.

"Je n'aime pas le lundi"

Is the extent of my French. And it's not even right!

It is right.. :)

So, when Grand Funk sang "we are an American band" they should have been singing "we is an American band" ?

:confused:

No, because then "we" becomes the subject.

It does, but it's not the same thing. I suppose "last" fills the role of "on". You wouldn't say "summer, I went on holiday".

So, you'd be okay with "last Tuesday, a man was arrested..." or

"A man was arrested last Tuesday..."?

...despite the absence of "on"?

Heh. Your complaint, then, isn't one of grammar, it's one of flow or rhythm (perhaps even meter). Cool problem to have, fine sir.

Eh, why not? What, precisely, would the preposition do for the sentence anyways?

It...completes it.

Yes, I know I suck at explanations like these.

It's still ungrammatical though, no? ;)

Nope, because "last" fulfils the role of "on" :p

Actually, about the time an entire nation adopts something, it sorta stops being a grammatical error. Language for ya.

Well, "entire nation" was hyperbole.

It is right.. :)

It is? Sweet!

So, when Grand Funk sang "we are an American band" they should have been singing "we is an American band" ?

:confused:

Grand Funk Railroad used the contraction "We're" in that song...but yeah, you got it.

So, when Grand Funk sang "we are an American band" they should have been singing "we is an American band" ?

:confused:

No, 'An American band is us'.

Naddy, see my last post quoting you -- I have edited it.

So, you'd be okay with "last Tuesday, a man was arrested..." or

"A man was arrested last Tuesday..."?

...despite the absence of "on"?

Heh. Your complaint, then, isn't one of grammar, it's one of flow or rhythm (perhaps even meter). Cool problem to have, fine sir.

You only feel comfortable with writing sentences that flow through your head smoothly, or just sorta feel right? Is that what you're on about?

Nope, because "last" fulfils the role of "on" :p

Lies, all lies!

Naddy, see my last post quoting you -- I have edited it.

I figured you were going to edit that 'fine sir' bit.

Grammar's job is to ensure clarity. Since there's nothing unclear about omitting the preposition from "a man was arrested on Tuesday", the point of its correctness is moot.

Being correct is never moot :p

Now look at that last phrase there -- "make a meal of my sanity". You understod that even without the auxilliary preposition required by technically correct grammar, right? Should it not read "make a meal out of my sanity"? See? It's all relative.

Oh, of course, but I 'pick' the things I get annoyed by. Not all grammatical errors annoy me, just most of them.

Being correct is never moot :p

Though I completely understand your annoyance. Plenty of grammatical constructions that are technically correct can make a meal of my sanity.



Oh, of course, but I 'pick' the things I get annoyed by. Not all grammatical errors annoy me, just most of them.

Oh, what about that 'preposition at the end of a sentence' thing?

So, you'd be okay with "last Tuesday, a man was arrested..." or

"A man was arrested last Tuesday..."?

...despite the absence of "on"?

Heh. Your complaint, then, isn't one of grammar, it's one of flow or rhythm (perhaps even meter). Cool problem to have, fine sir.

I would see "last" as substituting "on" to make it correct.

Flow, rhythm, metre...whatever, that's important too.

I have to say, I is impressed to the response to this thread.

Oh, what about that 'preposition at the end of a sentence' thing?

Hm?

lol

lol

Your sentence needs a subject.

LOL
If you're going to get all bent out of shape for other people being stupid, you should check your facts first. You sound like a jerk and an idiot.
As has been said,"NIN is a great band." is the correct way. Band in that sentence is singular. One band.

No the correct way is "NIN is a shit band."

J/K NIN rock.

Being correct is never moot :p

Though I completely understand your annoyance. Plenty of grammatical constructions that are technically correct can make a meal of my sanity.



Oh, of course, but I 'pick' the things I get annoyed by. Not all grammatical errors annoy me, just most of them.

Hah -- don't we all? Well put, and I concede the point.

lol
Bugger it all, if you'd simply have put in the slimy gun smilie, this would be a perfect example of a top-notch first post.

Your sentence needs a subject.

Ah, but it was palindromic. All grammar is redundant.

I have to say, I is impressed to the response to this thread.

Mainly because it's a thread about grammar,claiming people hate Americans purely because of their grammar,and then finished off with a sniper smiley.People are bored and need someone to laugh at.

Your sentence needs a subject.

Yea, plus full-stops and capital letters to denote an abbreviation.

Something along the lines of "I L.O.L.".

Yea, plus full-stops and capital letters to denote an abbreviation.

Something along the lines of "I L.O.L.".

Yeah but that looks plain silly :P

You only feel comfortable with writing sentences that flow through your head smoothly, or just sorta feel right? Is that what you're on about?

Mostly -- the rules of grammar should be observed, but flow is important to both writer and reader.

No, because then "we" becomes the subject.

I thought the subject was that they were going to party down and rock this town. Or it was. Or is. I don't know anymore.

:confused: :confused:

I thought the subject was that they were going to party down and rock this town. Or it was. Or is. I don't know anymore.

:confused: :confused:

I believe it's "we're comin' to your town / we're gonna party down..."

Dear Lord, why do I remember THIS crap and not remember where my bleeding CAR KEYS are?

Yeah but that looks plain silly :P

It does indeed. Just as well abbreviations don't annoy me then...

Confusion? For who?

For whom.

For whom.

Fragment: consider revising.

Fragment: consider revising.

http://www.eos.ncsu.edu/help/docs/Win2kguide_files/image023.gif

Although, I suppose your post should read "Fragment; consider revising."

No, it is indeed "The pair are". You wouldn't say "the pair was at the shops" or "the pair is located in Hull", now, would you?

"The pair were at the shops" and "the pair are located in Hull" sounds better and is correct, methinks.

Maybe US grammar differs.

It depends on the context of how you are expressing the pair. "The pair is at the shops" and "the pair are at the shops" are both perfectly valid depending on how the pair is being expressed. If we are to understand the pair to be two individual objects/beings/etc. combined, then they are plural. If we are to understand the pair to be an inextricably linked duo, then it is singlular. I'm trying to think of good examples to show the context, but I'm having difficulty.

Fragment: consider revising.

Typed that into Microsoft Word, did you?

http://www.eos.ncsu.edu/help/docs/Win2kguide_files/image023.gif

Although, I suppose your post should read "Fragment; consider revising."

No, I meant: "Fragment (consider revising)."

Typed that into Microsoft Word, did you?

Clearly not—I'd have got the brackets right had I.

No, I meant: "Fragment (consider revising)."

Then you truly are the paper-clip.

I must say that I did indeed R.O.F.L. (Though not literally!) quite a bit reading this delightful little thread. Why, thank the graces that have shown me the error of my ways with such gentle modus operandi. To think that, us poor, filthy Americans would be harming public relations with our deplorable grammar.

(Though that's a misnomer considering that America would also apply to people in Middle and South America! Why even Canada if we look at the continents! Maybe we should be called the United State-isans! Or the Ussers!)

Thank you so very much for bringing this to our attention.
A mighty fine :sniper: to you to!

(Though that's a misnomer considering that America would also apply to people in Middle and South America! Why even Canada if we look at the continents! Maybe we should be called the United State-isans! Or the Ussers!)

"USians", apparently. And that's a debate we don't need again...

I must say that I did indeed R.O.F.L. (Though not literally!) quite a bit reading this delightful little thread. Why, thank the graces that have shown me the error of my ways with such gentle modus operandi. To think that, us poor, filthy Americans would be harming public relations with our deplorable grammar.

(Though that's a misnomer considering that America would also apply to people in Middle and South America! Why even Canada if we look at the continents! Maybe we should be called the United State-isans! Or the Ussers!)

Thank you so very much for bringing this to our attention.
A mighty fine :sniper: to you to!

When did modus become plural?
And "to?" Pff.

"USians", apparently. And that's a debate we don't need again...

That's a debate I think may have been banned from NS.

That's a debate I think may have been banned from NS.

Oh...what...a pity.

That's a debate I think may have been banned from NS.

A debate not fit for the halls of NSG?
Pah!I laugh at your lies!

You guys keep refering to music bands in the singular! STOP IT GODAMMIT!!

"insert name here is a super duper band"
NO!!!

Actually, yes.

A band, like any other organization, is a singular entity in and of itself. It may be comprised of several individuals, but the organization itself is singular and so should be treated as such.

You guys keep refering to music bands in the singular! STOP IT GODAMMIT!!

"insert name here is a super duper band"
NO!!!

"insert name here ARE a super duper band"

Now get that straight and maybe the world won't hate u guys so much

and just for good measure................:sniper:

END TRANSMISSION

....Cream IS a great band. Correct.
....Eric Clapton, Jack Bruce and Ginger Baker are a great band. Correct.

Drop dead.

Cream is not more then one band, it is a single band...it IS a single band not it are a single band.

There are plural members, not plural of the band.

A debate not fit for the halls of NSG?
Pah!I laugh at your lies!

I think you perhaps severly underestimate the sort of acrimony that argument caused.

ah sush, you grammer nazi..... :p

What does 'sush' mean? Were you trying to say shush?

That's a debate I think may have been banned from NS.


Yeah, I remember that.

What about one-man bands?



We say "your family are nice" and "the class are going on a field trip", not "the pasta are tasty"



*They are a good band



Light hearted? On NS general? good luck:p

Anyway, just to clarify, in british english we refer to a group of people as plural, not singular. And to be honest, to me they both sound acceptable, although i nearly always use the british english versions...

But "I could care less" just sounds stupid:D IMHO


Actually, you're quite wrong. Canadians use the same grammar that is used in England. "Your family is nice" "The class is going on a field trip" Your reference to the band is correct, because you're referring primarily to the band members that make up the band. I suppose you have a point though if you're speaking specifically about one of the illiterate areas in Britain.

Actually, yes.

A band, like any other organization, is a singular entity in and of itself. It may be comprised of several individuals, but the organization itself is singular and so should be treated as such.

....Cream IS a great band. Correct.
....Eric Clapton, Jack Bruce and Ginger Baker are a great band. Correct.

Drop dead.

Cream is not more then one band, it is a single band...it IS a single band not it are a single band.

There are plural members, not plural of the band.


These two said it perfectly. The musicians in the band are. However, the band, being a single organization is. Much the same way that Congress is. Or a council is. In many bands, members have come and gone, but the entity they form has remained the same band.