A grammar question

Here’s what I was thinking about the other day. Typically, a plural sense of a word is defined as, “meaning more than one of something.” However, I noticed when people are referring to land size (acres, for example) they might say, “point 5 (.5) acres.” Then, they can also say, “It is half of an acre.” That made me wonder, does the plural form of a word not only express more than one of something, but also less that one of something?

I came to the conclusion that it must be the case, so the singular form of a word could only reflect one (and only one) of something. But, I thought of another example and realized that must be wrong, depending on the phrasing.

Example:

It is one-quarter of a mile away. (Singular)
It is point two-five (.25) miles away. (Plural)

In this case, the same exact distance is being described, but in one case it is a plural and in another case it is singular.

I then thought it was because of the words, “of a,” which refer to describing a mile, but some people may then say, “It is a quarter-mile away.”

So, which is technically grammatically correct? Should any number other than one be a plural, or should a plural always describe more than one, or less than negative 1 of something?

Dodgy stuff. I reckon only 1 should truly be singular. People who say “0.2 miles” should really only say “0.2 of a (whatever).”

you could just say its 1320 feet away. saves you the trouble of assuming plurality.

Oh Tab, where are you? I do believe Tabula Rasa is qualified to answer this question, dig him up and direct him here.

The two different ways of expressing quantities of less than one shift the object to be pluralized.

If you’re using fractions: one tenth, two tenths of a litre (article used) fraction pluralized.

If you’re using decimals - the final measure is pluralized. Zero point one miles (no article)

Why…? Why is it like this…? Easy - It’s part of the secret Brit plan to confuse foreigners.

And finally, in formal writing never use numerals. 0.2 is Nought point two. 7 am is seven in the morning.

=D> =D> My hero, take a bow! No not the one with arrows or the one made of ribbons and put the front of that boat back down :laughing: :laughing:

The fraction bit makes sense because it applies to the fractions.

The decimals though sure are an example of English inconsistency!

1.1 acre

1.2 acres

The last pronounced number is decisive.

721 acre?

-Imp

I’m an American!!! I’m not foreign to the English language!!!

Seriously, though, thanks for clearing that up for me, it’s been bothering me for a couple of days now.

But I´m pretty sure it´s 1.1 acres too.

In this case (“seven hundred and twenty one”), the last pronounced number is twenty one, not one.

Is it? Could be, English is not my native language.

I had another explanation, based on the fact that “zero” was meant to translate the Sanskrit sunya, “void” or “empty” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0_(number)#Etymology). “Zero apples” means the collection in question is devoid of apples. Even in the case of zero point twenty five apples, the collection is still devoid of entire apples.

My initial thoughts went in this direction (“no apples”). Then I got the idea I posted, which may or may not be right. And I just found a discussion on the subject:

mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/57224.html

Cool, I´ll check it out. That zero thing is strange.

You´re Dutch right? Why is it that out of all Europeans the Dutch seem by far the best at English? When I went to Amsterdam I may as well have been in the UK language-wise.

I am so glad that I am in a station and an age in life that my grammar is accepted as correct. :smiley:

In most other European countries, most foreign (mostly English-spoken) TV-programs and films are dubbed. Not so in Holland: they are only subtitled here.

At age 6, I started watching the Transformers on British television (no subtitles there). From around age 12, I started to read British and American video game magazines. And from around age 23, I began to realise that my “English” was not very English at all (in the narrow sense of the word). I came to see that English is not a “universal” language at all (as which I had regarded it from around age 16, I guess), but a very specific language, as specific as Dutch, German, French, or any other national language. I learned this from an English nationalist, in whose honour I still write words like “honour” with a ‘u’ and “realise” with an ‘s’. I do not affect an accent when I speak English; the best English speakers of English do not have an accent. But some American influences just won’t leave my system: for, though I pronounce the ‘a’ in “castle” as an “uh” (“carstle”, as John Lennon would write), I cannot help saying “dance” (not “darnce”); likewise, I still write “center”, not “centre”.

Yeah I noticed lots of English-speaking channels and programmes when watching TV over there. It´s great that you made the most of it - bilingual peope tend to have better career prospects as a result. My mum´s German, but I never made the most of it and my German is only basic.

Accents are a weird things. One would expect one to adopt their teacher´s, but in your case there´s no particular accent. As long as you speak clearly I guess it doesn´t matter. Of the Dutch people I met it was very clear. Perhaps the sounds of Dutch are more adaptible to English than say German or French (whom I usually have slightly more difficulty understanding, particularly French).

Good to see you keeping it English-English by keeping the "u"s in words like “honour”, “favour”, “humour” etc, as well as minimising the "z"s the Americans use more. But hey it´s your choice, and I guess the only thing someone could ask for is consistency, whichever dialect you adopt.

This singular/plural issue in English has intrigued me for a long time.

An example of this is “trousers”.

We say a pair of trousers so should this mean 2 trousers?

Apparantley not as a pair of trousers is a single item

So what is a trouser?

Why do we say things like “ripped his trouser leg”

Very confusing?

a trouser is one who trouses…

-Imp