"There is a computer and a TV."

[emsr2d2]

Euch! I'm really surprised you'd think so.

Could other native speakers please offer their judgements?

I would never say "There are a computer and a table in my room" but I can't say it's incorrect.

 

[jutfrank]

I would never say "There are a computer and a table in my room" but I can't say it's incorrect.

Well, there is a reason that you would never say that, which I'm sure is the same reason I wouldn't.

Could you say more about why you can't say it's incorrect?

 

[jutfrank]

Quirk et al (1985. 1405 say:

There's some people in the waiting room. (informal)
occurs alongside
There are some people in the waiting room.

This is not comparable. We're talking specifically about conjunctions of two singular noun phrases used to complement there-be sentences. This example uses only one, and it's plural.

 

[GoesStation]

There are a computer and a TV in my room is fine.

I'm okay with it too.

 

[Phaedrus]

There are a computer and a TV in my room is fine.

Euch! I'm really surprised you'd think so.

Could other native speakers please offer their judgements?

What I've noticed is I instinctively dislike "There are a [count noun] . . ." and avoid using the plural verb there even when it is grammatically justifiable.

Here it is grammatically justifiable to use the plural since "There are a computer and a TV in my room" derives from "A computer and a TV are in my room."

The cases in which "There are a . . ." is unobjectionable to me and, I think, required are cases like "There are a number of . . .," "There are a lot of [pl. n.]."

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Would you two please clarify what you're saying? Do you mean to say:?

There's a computer and a TV. :tick:
There is a computer and a TV. :cross:

Really?

Right. For the reason I gave Rachel (laziness), I'd use the first but not the second. Or I'd say, "There are . . . ."

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

So how about this?:

There are a computer and a TV. :?:

Yup. That's one of the options I suggested to Rachel above. It's natural and grammatical, good for both formal and casual occasions.

 

[PeterCW]

Merriam-Webster's Pocket Guide to English Usage (p 319) says the verb may be singular or plural in the situation we are talking about, and gives these examples:

there is a lake and several small streams
there are a dog and a few cats in the house

(Lack of initial capitals and final punctuation is in the original)

As a matter of style I would either write "there is a dog and a few cats ..." or "there are a few cats and a dog ...". It may be technically correct to say "there are a dog ..." but it still feels uncomfortable to this native speaker.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Euch! I'm really surprised you'd think so.

Could other native speakers please offer their judgements?

As I originally said to Rachel:

I use:

- There's . . . .
- There are . . . .

I don't use:

- There is . . . .
- There're . . . .

However, she's interested in British English, not American. So if y'all/youse/yiz Brits give her different advice, that's the advice she should take.

 

[jutfrank]

Here it is grammatically justifiable to use the plural since "There are a computer and a TV in my room" derives from "A computer and a TV are in my room."

I'm not sure I agree with that.

The cases in which "There are a . . ." is unobjectionable to me and, I think, required are cases like "There are a number of . . .," "There are a lot of [pl. n.]."

I don't think this is quite the same thing.

Merriam-Webster's Pocket Guide to English Usage (p 319) says the verb may be singular or plural in the situation we are talking about, and gives these examples:

there is a lake and several small streams
there are a dog and a few cats in the house

I don't know what difference it makes, but both those examples include a plural NP.

I find our disagreements on this matter really quite fascinating. I've just done a poll of four native speakers in my household. Three objected strongly to using are (as in There ___ a computer and a TV in my room) and one said both are possible. The one who accepted both is an English teacher. Despite what some members have said here, I still find it very hard to believe that any native speaker would use are in such an utterance.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

. . . Despite what some members have said here, I still find it very hard to believe that any native speaker would use are in such an utterance.

I'm surprised. A computer and a table are two things, so it doesn't seem very outlandish to use a plural verb.

But if you hate the idea of saying it, by all means, don't!

 

[Rachel Adams]

I really don't see what is so hard to believe about that. It's a logical enough thing to say.

Charlie, GS and I have all said it's fine. Phaedrus says it's justifiable, and emsr2d2 can't say it's incorrect. 25% of your friends accepted it. We accepters of the plural are not exactly a fringe minority.

One more question, if you please. Just to make sure I don't misunderstand. Is "there is" grammatically wrong or just unnatural in this example: "There is some people in the waiting room." As I understand, it's wrong because "there's " can function as "there are" not "there is". So "there is" is grammatically wrong.

 

[emsr2d2]

In that context, "There is" is wrong. Native speakers will use either "There are" or "There's".

 

[jutfrank]

I really don't see what is so hard to believe about that. It's a logical enough thing to say.

My point is that, acceptability aside, I don't believe that anyone (or many) would say it.

Charlie, GS and I have all said it's fine. Phaedrus says it's justifiable, and emsr2d2 can't say it's incorrect. 25% of your friends accepted it. We accepters of the plural are not exactly a fringe minority.

Well, I agree with Pheadrus that it's justifiable. And I'm not sure why emsr2d2 can't say it's incorrect. I think it's one of those interesting cases where people are thinking about what they know about rules of grammar more than rules of usage.

My question is would you ever say it? It seems odd to accept something that a native speaker is very unlikely to say, don't you think?

 

[emsr2d2]

It seems that some people find only one of the following sentences acceptable, some to, and some all three:

a. There is a computer and a mobile phone on the table
b. There's a computer and a mobile phone on the table
c. There's a computer and a mobile phone on the table,

My purely personal view is that I do not like [a], though accept that many people use it. I use [c] and illogically, I admit, also . When I was an IELTS examiner, I would not have penalised a candidate who used any of them.

It's been a long morning at work and I might be going slightly screwy-eyed, but b and c appear to be identical (with the exception of the closing (?) comma in c). Was one of them supposed to start "There are"?

 

[jutfrank]

This post is in response to Piscean's post #48

1A. In existential there + be sentences, the number (singular or plural) of the verb shows that the notional subject is the NP that follows it:

1. There is a book on the table.
2. There are some books on the table.

1B. When the subject of an verb is [NP] and [NP], that subject takes the same verb form as a plural noun does:

3. John is in the garden.
4. Mary is in the garden.
3. John and Mary are in the garden.
5. A computer is essential these days.
6. A mobile phone is essential these days.
7. A computer and a mobile phone are essential these days

Obviously yes to all of the above.

1A + 1B.It therefore seems reasonable to accept [8] below as natural and correct:

8. There are a computer and a TV in my room.

I take issue with the reasoning here. I understand Phaedrus' grammatical argument about derivation, but I'm not sure I agree that that's the best way of thinking about this. My feeling is that the rule of proximity has some bearing on the speaker's selection, regardless of grammar rules, perhaps related to the rule of phonological economy (it being easier to pronounce there's than there are) as well as the way that the propositional content is packaged in the mind. I don't have anything more interesting to say about this just yet—I find it quite mysterious.

2A: jutfrank (post 21) says I'd analyse the logic of the sentence as a conjunction of two propositions:

P1: There is a computer

conj.: and

P2: [there is] a TV.

However, in a response to my quoting two sentences from M-W,

there is a lake and several small streams
there are a dog and a few cats in the house,

he does not state that he finds the second unacceptable.

I don't want to say anything about what I find acceptable because the idea of what counts as acceptable deserves a long discussion in itself. Suffice to say that I think there are rules of use in conflict with rules of logic, if you like. I don't strongly disagree with the logic of using are (in the sentence we've been discussing), but I do count it as unnatural.

As far as logic is concerned, I think both of the M-W sentences are fine.

If they are acceptable, and M-W suggests they are, then it is hard to see how a 'conjunction of two propositions' would work here:

There is a lake
and
[there is ] several small streams.

I would express the conjunction of propositions like this:

There is a lake
and
[there are] several small streams

The verb are is not pronounced.

I don't see a conjunction of two propositions as possible in

9. There is a computer on the desk and [there is] a TV on the shelf.

any more than I see one as possible in

10. A computer [is] and a mobile phone is essential these days.

There are two propositions going on here. The propositional content can be shown like this:

P1: A computer is essential these days
P2: A mobile phone is essential these days

(I might have misunderstood what you meant here.)

I have neither the time to the energy to research this in depth, but a brief look through several grammars and style guides has failed to unearth any helpfully definitive advice.

It seems that some people find only one of the following sentences acceptable, some to, and some all three:

a. There is a computer and a mobile phone on the table.
b. There's a computer and a mobile phone on the table.
c. There are a computer and a mobile phone on the table.

My purely personal view is that I do not like [a], though accept that many people use it. I use [c] and illogically, I admit, also . When I was an IELTS examiner, I would not have penalised a candidate who used any of them.

Okay. Thanks for the energy you have spent—it has been useful and interesting to me, at least. I find this discussion very illuminating. As I've hinted, I find c. quite a lot worse than a. As an IELTS examiner, I wouldn't penalise any of them either.

I would love to be able to do further study on native speakers' thoughts on these three variations.

 

[Phaedrus]

I understand Phaedrus' grammatical argument about derivation, but I'm not sure I agree that that's the best way of thinking about this. My feeling is that the rule of proximity has some bearing on the speaker's selection, . . . .

I found a little discussion of this topic in one of my grammar books, and was surprised to see an endorsement of the proximity principle:

"As a rule, the number of the verb following there depends on the number of the notional subject. [footnote:] However, in an informal style there's is often used instead of there are. [end of footnote]

e.g. There were a host of problems to be solved.
There are two people in there.

When the notional subject consists of two conjoined NPs there is proximal concord:

There is a hammer and a screwdriver in the car.
There is a hammer and two screwdrivers in the car.
There are two screwdrivers and a hammer in the car."

- Declerk, Renaat (1991). A Comprehensive Descriptive Grammar of English, p. 269. Kaitakusha, Japan.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Sinclair implies this principle in the words I have underlined:

I'm still trying to understand whether it's wrong to use are — and if so, why.

 

[Rachel Adams]

Merriam-Webster's Pocket Guide to English Usage (p 319) says the verb may be singular or plural in the situatioen we are talking about, and gives these examples:

there is a lake and several small streams
there are a dog and a few cats in the house

(Lack of initial capitals and final punctuation is in the original)

It says "There is" not "There's" is this an example of AmE?

 

[PaulMatthews]

It says "There is" not "There's" is this an example of AmE?

Looking back through this thread, I'd say that all your questions have already been thoroughly answered.