It bothers me when peope say melk instead of milk and el-lin-oise instead of ill-in-oy for Illinois. The 's' is silent people. It happens a lot too, being from the Midwest and all.
It bothers me when peope say melk instead of milk and el-lin-oise instead of ill-in-oy for Illinois. The 's' is silent people. It happens a lot too, being from the Midwest and all.
Since when does pronunciation of words have anything to do with grammar?
Your last statement can presuppose a question such as "Are there any shoes in the display?" "No, there are no shoes in the display"
If someone had said "Is there a banana in the fridge?" You'd respond "There is no banana in the fridge"
You're referring to an absence or a zero number, but using the singular form.
However when you specifically number something 'zero' it isn't so much that it "is plural" as "is not singular" Since it is not singular, you don't use the singular, which leaves you the plural.
However when you specifically number something 'zero' it isn't so much that it "is plural" as "is not singular" Since it is not singular, you don't use the singular, which leaves you the plural.
That makes more sense than any other reason I've been given before, but unless my definition of plural is off, wouldn't it also technically be not plural as well as not singular?
At least they try. The amount of people who fear their English teacher and try to appease them by constantly inserting "'s" at the end of all plural words. It's more common than actually leaving the "'s" out.
At least they try. The amount of people who fear their English teacher and try to appease them by constantly inserting "'s" at the end of all plural words. It's more common than actually leaving the "'s" out.
number*
If it's something you can count, it's not 'amount'.
Comment