A
Anonymous
Guest
Who would please explain the difference to me? Do you say there is a lot of people or there are a lot of people?Which one is correct? Only one? Both? Why? thanks
charliese said:Who would please explain the difference to me? Do you say there is a lot of people or there are a lot of people?Which one is correct? Only one? Both? Why? thanks
charliese said:Who would please explain the difference to me? Do you say there is a lot of people or there are a lot of people?Which one is correct? Only one? Both? Why? thanks
I strongly disagree.
The subject in this sentence is lot - not two lots, but a lot. There is a lot, just like there is a bird. The confusion stems from prepositional phrase that modifies the subject. What kind of lot is it? It is a lot of people. It could also be a lot of food, of cars,of emotion or of emotions, but the subject, lot, is still singular and thus must agree with the singular verb is, not are.
It is not proper English to say, "There are a set of dishes;" rather, "There is a set of dishes". Just the same, "There is a lot of people."
That said, correct English grammar is unfortunately still defined by common usage, and so I believe the technically incorrect wording "There are a lot of people" has become accepted and even, regrettably, correct. In other words, so many people have used and continue to use it improperly that the improper has become proper.
There you have it, charliese (albeit nearly three years late): both are correct.
mafatu69: I strongly disagree.
The subject in this sentence is 'lot'. The expressions 'a lot of' and 'lots of' are used before nouns to mean ‘a large number or amount of.’ In common with other words denoting quantities, 'lot' itself does not normally function as a head noun, meaning that it does not itself determine whether the following verb is singular or plural. Thus, although 'lot' is singular in : 'a lot of people', the verb that follows is not singular. In this case, the word 'people' acts as the head noun and, being plural, ensures that the following verb is also plural: : 'a lot of people were assembled' (not : a lot of people was assembled).
There are a lot of people downstairs who were assembled outside the building earlier this morning; they are very angry.
There is a lot of people downstairs who was assembled...
The second sentence (using the singular verb) is obviously incorrect, yet the verbs must agree as they both (in spite of their locations in seperate clauses) refer to the same entity (the people).
How can these two uses be reconsiled when one clearly doesn't work?
Easily. You use "who" only for people, not for lots.
There is a lot of people downstairs which was assembled...
That is the grammatical consequence of using "is".
However, "There's a lot people who are ... " is normal in my dialect, though I say "There're a lot of people ..."
I think it's due to the inherent ambiguity of what verb to use in phrases such as this; so even after the teachers and linguists have stopped arguing over it, the masses will still use whatever sounds right on the day. And in cases like this I don't blame them for maybe getting it wrong.Point well taken.
However I, personally, sense a difference in meaning.
Is a lot of people, to me, suggests - one lot of people; a fixed amount, a set.
Are a lot of people, to me, suggests - an undetermined number of people, a large amount, a (potentially) fluctuating, unfixed quantity.
Perhaps this is due to ingrained and incorrect connotations which I myself create.
Point well taken.
However I, personally, sense a difference in meaning.
Is a lot of people, to me, suggests - one lot of people; a fixed amount, a set.
Are a lot of people, to me, suggests - an undetermined number of people, a large amount, a (potentially) fluctuating, unfixed quantity.
Perhaps this is due to ingrained and incorrect connotations which I myself create.
A lot of merchandise.
A lot of antiques etc.
But 'a lot of people' I don't think you can treat 'people' in this way.