Many a student fail because of their poor attendence.

[Rollercoaster1]

1- Many a student fail because of their poor attendence.
2- Many a students fail because of their poor attendence.

I am confused when using the phrase 'many a' in sentences. Which of the above is correct and how to be sure about choosing the correct verb form (singular/plural)?

 

[Matthew Wai]

Many a student has failed because of their poor attendance.

 

[Rover_KE]

Many a student has failed because of their poor attendance.

That's correct but does not address the OP.

 

[Rollercoaster1]

That's correct but does not address the OP.

What does 'OP' mean?

 

[Rollercoaster1]

Neither is correct.

1. Many students fail because of their poor attendance.
2. Many a student fails because of their poor attendance.
3. Many a students fail because of their poor attendance.

Although they effectively mean the same, the underlined form in #1 is plural, while the underlined form in #2 is singular.The underlined form in #3 is incorrect.

I am sorry but I disagree. 'Many a' means or refers to 'a large number of' which is/considered an adjectival phrase or an idiom. 'Student' is a singular noun, how can we take 'a large number of students from/out of one student'? By saying 'Many a student fails because of their poor attendance' it simply means 'many students from/among/out of one single student', how's it possible?

This sounds right: Many a students fail because of their poor attendance.

 

[jutfrank]

I am sorry but I disagree. 'Many a' means or refers to 'a large number of' which is/considered an adjectival phrase or an idiom. 'Student' is a singular noun, how can we take 'a large number of students from/out of one student'? By saying 'Many a student fails because of their poor attendance' it simply means 'many students from/among/out of one single student', how's it possible?

This sounds right: Many a students fail because of their poor attendance.

What Piscean told you as fact is not something that you can disagree with.

The phrase many a ____ includes an indefinite article and so can only be used with a singular noun, and needs a verb to agree. It is incorrect to say a students. Don't think about it logically—you'll just have to accept it as what people say.

 

[tedmc]

As jutfrank has reiterated, that is the way it is written, by convention, not by logic, and rightly so as logic can be subjective.

 

[Phaedrus]

'Many a' means or refers to 'a large number of'

I currently have Paul Christophersen's ancient (1939), wonderful treatise on the articles checked out of a university library (I have never once seen it for sale anywhere, and I have looked for it many a time). He observes that the many a construction is multiplicative -- not partitive -- in meaning, relating to other determiners with multiplicative meaning (e.g., any, every, each, either), which likewise take singular subject-verb agreement.

The word many may be both multiplicative and partitive. When multiplicative it is combined with an a-form : many a time and oft.

-- Christophersen, Paul. The Articles: A Study of Their Theory and Use in English, p. 47. Einar Munksgaard: Copenhagen, 1939.

Quirk et al. (1985) devote a few footnotes to the many a construction. The classify "many" as a predeterminer in this construction (Section 5.23n), stating that it is used only with singular count nouns (ibid.). Further, they state that "[g]rammatical concord is usually obeyed for . . . many a, though it may conflict with notional concord: . . . Many a member has protested against the proposal" (Section 10.35n). Lastly, they report that "[t]here is uncertainty over number where the many a construction is followed by singular heads conjoined by and: Many a boy and girl {?are/?is} left homeless" (Section 13.66n).

Full many a flow'r is born to blush unseen,

And waste its sweetness on the desert air.

-- from "Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard," by Thomas Gray (1751)

P.S. In light of the fact that this construction has an old-fashioned flavor, I recommend not only correcting the number of the verb from the plural to the singular, as everyone who has responded agrees must be done, but also changing the singular use of "their," which is rather modern, to the old-fashioned, generic his: "Many a student fails because of his poor attendance."

 

[Matthew Wai]

What does 'OP' mean?

The original post(er).

 

[Matthew Wai]

'Student' is a singular noun, how can we take 'a large number of students from/out of one student'?

I think of another example where usage overrides logic: "More than one person was injured".
"More than one" denotes at least two, but it takes a singular noun and verb.
We learners have to toe the line.

 

[Raymott]

... not by logic, and rightly so as logic can be subjective.

Any logic worth the name cannot be subjective.
It's true that people can make incorrect subjective judgements about whether something is logical or not, or whether something is true in a certain system of logic.

 

[TheParser]

NOT A TEACHER

Here is what one authority says.

"The fact is that many a, which is always followed by a singular noun, invariably takes a verb in the singular. The reason for this is what grammarians call 'attraction'; the proximity of the verb to the singular noun causes the verb to be singular."

This authority says that "attraction" is also responsible for sentences such as "It appears that more than one candidate is going to face financial difficulties."


Source: Theodore M. Bernstein, Dos, Don'ts & Maybes of English Usage ​(1977), pages 135-136. (Mr. Bernstein was an editor at the New York Times for almost fifty years.)

 

[emsr2d2]

NOT A TEACHER

Here is what one authority says.

"The fact is that many a, which is always followed by a singular verb, invariably takes a verb in the singular. The reason for this is what grammarians call 'attraction'; the proximity of the verb to the singular noun causes the verb to be singular."

This authority says that "attraction" is also responsible for sentences such as "It appears that more than one candidate is going to face financial difficulties."


Source: Theodore M. Bernstein, Dos, Don'ts & Maybes of English Usage ​(1977), pages 135-136. (Mr. Bernstein was an editor at the New York Times for almost fifty years.)

Shouldn't the "verb" above in red say "noun"?

 

[jutfrank]

Here is what one authority says ...

Source: Theodore M. Bernstein, Dos, Don'ts & Maybes of English Usage ​(1977), pages 135-136. (Mr. Bernstein was an editor at the New York Times for almost fifty years.)

I don't disagree but I personally don't believe that being Editor of the New York Times makes one an authority.

 

[TheParser]

NOT A TEACHER


I wanted to share something with interested learners.

If there is a later pronoun, it can be plural or singular.

Here are a source's two examples. (Emphases are mine.)

1. " … and misled many a good body that put their trust in me."

2. "Many a prophet who had predicted that business would slip … changed his mind."


Source: Webster's Dictionary of English Usage (1989), page 622.

*****
This is an example from my favorite grammarian (emphases mine): "But yesterday I saw many a brave warrior, in all the pomp and circumstance of war, marching to the battlefield. Where are they now?"

Source: George Oliver Curme, A Grammar of the English Language (1931), Vol. II, page 52.

 

[Phaedrus]

This is not really a case of a 'later' pronoun, but an example of the use of 'they' as a gender-neutral singular pronouns, as in:"

That's what I thought, too, at first, but the following example from Webster's, provided by TheParser, indicates that the "their" in Barbarbutt's sentence can in fact simply be considered a plural pronoun coreferent with "many a student."

1. " … and misled many a good body that put their trust in me."

In case any of you loves grammatical coincidences, as I do, I just Googled that example and discovered that it is from a letter by Thomas Gray, the poet whom I quoted in post #9. The full sentence reads: "God forgive me, I suppose I have done so myself before now, and misled many a good body that put their trust in me."

The letter was written in 1758. So, even though I can't make the point that I was hoping to make (that "their" would have to be "its" if it were singular) because Gray appears to have meant "person" by "body," I think it is implausible to suppose that Thomas Gray was using a gender-neutral singular their at that time in history. Isn't it?

 

[Phaedrus]

Thanks, Piscean. I didn't realize that singular "they" (whether used for political correctness or not) was so well established in the history of the language. I suspected it might be, however, and that's why I ended my last post with a tag question. What with all those authors having used it, it's a wonder singular they/their has been so controversial.

2." … and misled many a good body that put their trust in me."

[. . .] In #2, we simply cannot tell. If the writer is mistakenly assuming that 'many a good body' is grammatically plural, then 'their' is plural; the mistake has been repeated. If the writer is taking 'many a good body to be grammatically singular, then 'their' is singular.

It sounds like a mistake to me, I must admit; hence my recommending the change to "his" (for the sentence in the OP) in post #9. I understood TheParser to be implying that notional plurality could govern the choice of the number of the pronoun relating to "many a NP," while its grammatical singularity governed the choice of the number of the verb.

Interestingly, the Oxford English Dictionary is silent on the question of number with "many a." And ironically, in the one example it gives in which "many a NP" functions as subject, there is a plural verb! The O.E.D. is purely descriptive in its orientation, of course, and it describes the "many a" construction as "now literary." Here is the example:

For I have sene that many a page
Have become men by marriage.

-- Squyr Lowe Degre (Copland) 373, c.1560

We'd say, I believe, that it should have been: "For I have [seen] that many a page / Has become a man by marriage."

 

[Rollercoaster1]

Thanks, Piscean. I didn't realize that singular "they" (whether used for political correctness or not) was so well established in the history of the language. I suspected it might be, however, and that's why I ended my last post with a tag question. What with all those authors having used it, it's a wonder singular they/their has been so controversial.


It sounds like a mistake to me, I must admit; hence my recommending the change to "his" (for the sentence in the OP) in post #9. I understood TheParser to be implying that notional plurality could govern the choice of the number of the pronoun relating to "many a NP," while its grammatical singularity governed the choice of the number of the verb.

Interestingly, the Oxford English Dictionary is silent on the question of number with "many a." And ironically, in the one example it gives in which "many a NP" functions as subject, there is a plural verb! The O.E.D. is purely descriptive in its orientation, of course, and it describes the "many a" construction as "now literary." Here is the example:



We'd say, I believe, that it should have been: "For I have [seen] that many a page / Has become a man by marriage."

The mystery goes on.:-D

 

[Rollercoaster1]

I see no 'mystery'. The only point that is impossible to prove one way or the other is whether 'their' in " … and misled many a good body that put their trust in me." is intended to refer to one or more than one 'good body'. I have explained why I believe that it has singular reference, but I can't prove it. Quite honestly, I don't think it matters.

After seeing some of the references in recent posts, I guess, it is.

 

[Phaedrus]

After seeing some of the references in recent posts, I guess, it is.

The O.E.D. quote from circa 1560 notwithstanding, Barbarbutt, there is no mystery about the need for a singular verb here in Present Day English. Don't deceive yourself. Bryan Garner, I've just discovered, devotes a whole entry to this very issue in the latest edition of Garner's Modern English Usage. He doesn't mince his words:

many a. This idiom requires a singular verb <many a new father has fretted about whether he is helping enough in caring for the newborn>. Essentially, because the idiom is distributive rather than aggregate in sense, the verb is singular.

But as H. W. Fowler pointed out in 1926 . . . writers sometimes incorrectly make the verb plural when using an inverted construction with there. The trouble is still with us—e.g.:

* 'There are [read is] many a person I have met and worked with who simply deride themselves into taking some action' [. . .]
* 'I'm sure there are [read is] many a trader/producer who will feel relieved to see the meat futures close April 12.' [. . .]

- Garner, Bryan. Garner's Modern English Usage (4th Ed.), p. 581. Oxford University Press: New York, 2016.

The first example appeared in The Washington Post in 2002. I suppose "themselves" was used as a gender-neutral singular reflexive pronoun. Had the paper been written in the 1950s or thereabouts, the sentence might have read: "There is many a person I have met and worked with who simply derides himself into taking some action."