Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. wotcha's Avatar
    Senior Member
    English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • South Korea

    • Join Date: Jun 2010
    • Posts: 735
    #1

    None of these advances was/were the result of luck alone.

    1. None of these advances was the result of luck alone.

    2. None of these advances were the result of luck alone.


    Depending on grammar books, the agreement between 'none' and verb differs.

    Which is grammatical between 1 and 2 teachers?

  2. Member
    Interested in Language
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Zhuang
      • Home Country:
      • Bangladesh
      • Current Location:
      • Japan

    • Join Date: Oct 2012
    • Posts: 196
    #2

    Re: None of these advances was/were the result of luck alone.

    Quote Originally Posted by wotcha View Post
    1. None of these advances was the result of luck alone.

    2. None of these advances were the result of luck alone.


    Depending on grammar books, the agreement between 'none' and verb differs.

    Which is grammatical between 1 and 2 teachers?
    Both verbs are correct.

    Samuel Johnson uses a plural verb for NONE and a 20-century grammarian considers it incorrect and says a singular verb should be used.

    But when you read more you will find that many famous writers use a plural verb.

  3. 5jj's Avatar
    VIP Member
    Retired English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 27,915
    #3

    Re: None of these advances was/were the result of luck alone.

    Both are fine these days.

Posting Permissions

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