# Thread: 38 inches is/are? equal to ...

1. ## 38 inches is/are? equal to ...

There are 2.54 centimetres in one inch. Therefore, 38 inches is equal to 38 x 2.54 = 96.52 centimetres.
Can I say: Therefore, 38 inches are equal to 38 x 2.54 = 96.52 centimetres?

2. ## Re: 38 inches is/are? equal to ...

It makes more sense to use is. The point is that the sentence is identifying two single quantities: 38" and 96.52cm.

We wouldn't say "Two plus two are four."

3. ## Re: 38 inches is/are? equal to ...

Originally Posted by jutfrank
It makes more sense to use is. The point is that the sentence is identifying two single quantities: 38" and 96.52cm.

We wouldn't say "Two plus two are four."
I think the singular and the plural are both pretty common. The song Inchworm uses the plural, for example.

4. ## Re: 38 inches is/are? equal to ...

Originally Posted by GoesStation
I think the singular and the plural are both pretty common. The song Inchworm uses the plural, for example.
I stand corrected! (Although it sounds pretty strange to me.)

I wonder if that's an old-fashioned way of phrasing? Or possibly a more US style? Or is it something to do with using and instead of plus?

5. ## Re: 38 inches is/are? equal to ...

You are thinking of the (singular) length which measures 38 inches long. So that length is 96.52 cm.

You are thinking of one thing, not of 38 things.

6. ## Re: 38 inches is/are? equal to ...

38 inches is equal to 38 x 2.54 = 96.52 centimetres.

If I have to read the above sentence aloud, can I read it as follows: 38 inches is equal to 38 times 2.54 equals 96.52 centimetres?

7. ## Re: 38 inches is/are? equal to ...

I say "which equals" to make the statement grammatical.

#### Posting Permissions

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