"Was" vs. "Were" in this context

[David L.]

reshana: I firmly believe that the verb doesn't agree with the closest noun.

I've never before thought of grammar as being a matter of faith!
But...believe what you will, please don't muddy the waters. The discussion was 'a number of' and its variations, which take a plural verb.

You have introduced 'a group of', where 'group' is a collective noun and DOES take a singular verb.

A quick google and I found this in an English tutorial from Bristol University, in England:

In this example, the subject is 'a small group of birds', which is singular (even though there are lots of birds) and needs a singular verb: was.

A small group of birds were flying across the midnight sea. (Incorrect)

A small group of birds was flying across the midnight sea. (Correct)

and this from Penn State University:
Nouns that are “collective” (automatically suggesting a group) take a singular verb when the group as a whole is meant; they take a plural verb when the group can be thought of as individual members. Commonly used collective nouns include “number,” “majority,” “series,” and “variety.” Note that when collective nouns refer to a singular group as a whole they are often preceded by the word “a”; when they suggest individual group members they are often preceded by the word “the.”

A number of people were affected by the tragedy.
The number of samples contaminated was two.

A series of western blots were performed to assay protein expression.
The series of western analyses was found to be inconclusive.

IF YOUR FAITH REMAINS UNSHAKEN, YOU HAVE A LOT OF INFIDELS OUT THERE TO CONVERT!

[reshana]

Alright, so my friend and I are having a little friendly bet over the use of which word, "was" or "were", in the following context. The teacher is stumped as well, so I came to you. If I were to say:

"There [was / were] a large number of people at the event," which would it be? I know "people" is plural so if the sentence was, "There were a number of people at the event," that would be correct. However the "large number" throws us off, because while "number" can be both plural and singular, doesn't the fact that "large" precedes it makes it plural? (in essence, a large number is a number greater than one) Would this not make it "were"?

Any help is greatly appreciated. :)

In response to the previous post by David L, I would say I humbly apologize but I cannot assume the blame for a reader's misinterpretations. I can, however, try to be more clear, which is what I will attempt to do.

You pointed out that I said "I firmly believe that the verb doesn't agree with the closest noun." However it is not a matter of faith... merely a response to this situation. I would like to reiterate to make myself clear, stating that I firmly believe that the rule of the verb agreeing with the closest noun does not lend itself HERE.

It would be applied in the following case:

A compound subject containing both a singular and a plural noun or pronoun joined by or or nor needs a verb that agrees with the noun (pronoun) that is nearest to the verb.

• Neither the moon nor the stars shine as brightly as the sun. (The verb shine agrees with the plural stars.)
• Neither the stars nor the moon shines as brightly as the sun. (The verb shines is closest to the singular noun moon.)

Source: Making Subjects and Verbs Agree

As for my initial response, I sought only to respond to the original post. Notice the author of the message was more concerned with the use of "number" and "large" and how they affect the subject and not with the effect the articles "the" and "a" may have.

But thank you for your response it was very insightful and I welcome your criticisms anytime.

[albertino]

"There [was / were] a large number of people at the event."

(Not a teacher)
If we put the inverted sentence back into its proper order, it will look like this:

A large number of people was/were (there) at the event.
And according to the grammar rule for "there/here +be structure", the verb must agree with its subject. The result is:
Since the subject is "people", a plural "were" should be taken.
Apart from the above analysis, IMO, the rule of proximity also applies here.

[albertino]

Note that when collective nouns refer to a singular group as a whole they are often preceded by the word “a”; when they suggest individual group members they are often preceded by the word “the.”

A number of people were affected by the tragedy.
The number of samples contaminated was two.

A series of western blots were performed to assay protein expression.
The series of western analyses was found to be inconclusive.

IF YOUR FAITH REMAINS UNSHAKEN, YOU HAVE A LOT OF INFIDELS OUT THERE TO CONVERT!

(Not a teacher)
Indeed, such a rule cited above also applies to "total and variety".