Results 1 to 7 of 7
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Hong Kong
      • Current Location:
      • Hong Kong

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 2,333
    #1

    one of the watch manufacturers that was/were

    Approximately four years ago, a new substance appeared in crystals in the watch industry, Krysterna™. Krysterna™ was born from the eyewear industry and comes from the same material used in high-end eyeglasses. Stührling Original was one of a handful of watch manufacturers that was involved in the early stages of testing and development of this new material in watch crystals. Krysterna™ actually has more strength over a spread surface area than sapphire! As a result, this still relatively new synthetic material is more “shatter-resistant” than sapphire!

    Shouldn't the underlined verb be 'were'?

    Many thanks.

  1. euncu's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Turkish
      • Home Country:
      • Turkey
      • Current Location:
      • Turkey

    • Join Date: Aug 2009
    • Posts: 1,314
    #2

    Re: one of the watch manufacturers that was/were

    Quote Originally Posted by Tan Elaine View Post
    one of a handful of watch manufacturers that was involved
    Shouldn't the underlined verb be 'were'?

    Many thanks.
    There is just one manufacturer involved

  2. bhaisahab's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Ireland

    • Join Date: Apr 2008
    • Posts: 25,627
    #3

    Re: one of the watch manufacturers that was/were

    Quote Originally Posted by Tan Elaine View Post
    Approximately four years ago, a new substance appeared in crystals in the watch industry, Krysterna™. Krysterna™ was born from the eyewear industry and comes from the same material used in high-end eyeglasses. Stührling Original was one of a handful of watch manufacturers that was involved in the early stages of testing and development of this new material in watch crystals. Krysterna™ actually has more strength over a spread surface area than sapphire! As a result, this still relatively new synthetic material is more “shatter-resistant” than sapphire!

    Shouldn't the underlined verb be 'were'?

    Many thanks.
    In BrE both was and were are correct, it depends on how you see the company, as a unit or as a collection of individuals. In AmE, I think you'll find, only "was" is correct.

  3. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 24,103
    #4

    Re: one of the watch manufacturers that was/were

    Quote Originally Posted by Tan Elaine View Post
    Approximately four years ago, a new substance appeared in crystals in the watch industry, Krysterna™. Krysterna™ was born from the eyewear industry and comes from the same material used in high-end eyeglasses. Stührling Original was one of a handful of watch manufacturers that was involved in the early stages of testing and development of this new material in watch crystals. Krysterna™ actually has more strength over a spread surface area than sapphire! As a result, this still relatively new synthetic material is more “shatter-resistant” than sapphire!

    Shouldn't the underlined verb be 'were'?

    Many thanks.
    It's the use of "handful" that makes "was" appropriate. There was only one handful of companies involved.
    If it had said: "Stührling Original was one of the watch manufacturers that .... involved", I would use "were".
    Last edited by Raymott; 22-Dec-2009 at 07:32.


    • Join Date: Nov 2009
    • Posts: 966
    #5

    Re: one of the watch manufacturers that was/were

    Quote Originally Posted by Tan Elaine View Post
    Approximately four years ago, a new substance appeared in crystals in the watch industry, Krysterna™. Krysterna™ was born from the eyewear industry and comes from the same material used in high-end eyeglasses. Stührling Original was one of a handful of watch manufacturers that was involved in the early stages of testing and development of this new material in watch crystals. Krysterna™ actually has more strength over a spread surface area than sapphire! As a result, this still relatively new synthetic material is more “shatter-resistant” than sapphire!

    Shouldn't the underlined verb be 'were'?

    Many thanks.
    X
    Last edited by Kondorosi; 22-Dec-2009 at 09:32.

  4. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 24,103
    #6

    Re: one of the watch manufacturers that was/were

    No, that's only a rule if "company" is the subject. In this case, the word used is "companies", because there was more than one them "involved in the early stages of testing and development".
    There were/was a handful involved. Stührling Original was one of these.
    It turns on whether you see 'a handful of companies' as being single or plural. The collectivity of "company" doesn't enter into it because the plurality of 'companies' is indisputable.

    PS. Or substitute the original 'watch manufacturers' for 'companies'. The point remains the same.


    • Join Date: Nov 2009
    • Posts: 966
    #7

    Re: one of the watch manufacturers that was/were

    Quote Originally Posted by Tan Elaine View Post
    Approximately four years ago, a new substance appeared in crystals in the watch industry, Krysterna™. Krysterna™ was born from the eyewear industry and comes from the same material used in high-end eyeglasses. Stührling Original was one of a handful of watch manufacturers that was involved in the early stages of testing and development of this new material in watch crystals. Krysterna™ actually has more strength over a spread surface area than sapphire! As a result, this still relatively new synthetic material is more “shatter-resistant” than sapphire!

    Shouldn't the underlined verb be 'were'?

    Many thanks.
    Allow me to have a second go at the problem, but know with a clearer, semi-sober mind.

    The phrase a handful of companies consists of a quantifying pronoun plus a prepositional complement. Quantifying pronouns can take either singular or plural concord, according to whether they have singular or plural reference. The following of-phrase signals number, singular or plural. Consequently,

    - a handful of companies are...
    - a handful of coins are...
    - A handful of patience is worth more than a bushel of brains.
    - some of it is...

    However,

    - none of us is...
    - almost none of us are...
    - neither of us is/are...

    These last three examples contain a semi-determiner each, but I have been talking about quantifying determiners.

    There is no signal here:
    We are all equal but some are more equal than others. Context helps.

    Let us go further with finding the number concord in the original sentence.

    a handful of companies are, but we have "one of a handful of companies."

    One of (a handful of companies) -- the bracketed part has plural value and so attracts plural verbs. What if I draw a parallel between these:

    one of (a handful of companies)...
    and
    one of (them)... ?

    One of them is..., so one of a handful of companies is... .

    I think it is .
    Last edited by Kondorosi; 22-Dec-2009 at 09:39.

Similar Threads

  1. Detroit's car manufacturers
    By Daruma in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 15-Sep-2009, 14:54
  2. watch
    By peter123 in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 17-Nov-2007, 03:35
  3. my watch is fast
    By ripley in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 15-Nov-2007, 21:30
  4. Use of the verb to watch
    By petronio in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 15-Feb-2005, 17:10
  5. Tornado watch etc.
    By NewHope in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 18-Sep-2004, 08:35

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •