A small rant...
Hey all, Robin here. I'm Michael's wife and I sometimes take control of his blog. This is one of those times. I'm going over the very last of the changes to Age of Death before sending it off to the printer. First, I should mention that I'm an engineer by training (MSEE), but I spent most of my life in software. I'm a "technical gal" Math was my favorite subject, Grammar very near the bottom. So, it's ironic that these days I spend an amazing amount of time on the Internet trying to determine things like which of the following is correct:
None of them were friends. None of them was friends. As an analytic type person, there should be a singular answer to such a question. But English is a language with all kinds of issues--don't get me started on why backyard is a single compound word, but front yard is two words.
Apparently, the problem arises in the fact that "none" is not always singular. Apparently, it used to mean "not one," so was would be correct. In practice, however, it is sometimes meant to mean "not any," so were should be used.
To make matters worse, people who spend their lives contemplating such mystical matters don't always agree. Just look at this online debate on the subject.
And to make matters worse, there is the last statement. "It should be pointed out that none does not come from not any, but from nan (old English), which was used with either singular or plural verbs."
Argh!!! All I want to know is which word do I use!!
And the worst part, no matter which one I select, there will people who will treat it as a "grammar mistake." In other words, I can't win either way. For someone who deals in black and white such things are maddening. I guess I'll just insist that no book written by Michael will ever use such a sentence!
None of them were friends. None of them was friends. As an analytic type person, there should be a singular answer to such a question. But English is a language with all kinds of issues--don't get me started on why backyard is a single compound word, but front yard is two words.
Apparently, the problem arises in the fact that "none" is not always singular. Apparently, it used to mean "not one," so was would be correct. In practice, however, it is sometimes meant to mean "not any," so were should be used.
To make matters worse, people who spend their lives contemplating such mystical matters don't always agree. Just look at this online debate on the subject.
And to make matters worse, there is the last statement. "It should be pointed out that none does not come from not any, but from nan (old English), which was used with either singular or plural verbs."
Argh!!! All I want to know is which word do I use!!
And the worst part, no matter which one I select, there will people who will treat it as a "grammar mistake." In other words, I can't win either way. For someone who deals in black and white such things are maddening. I guess I'll just insist that no book written by Michael will ever use such a sentence!
date
newest »
newest »
I asked my English guru sister and she looked in her old go-to high school text book and found that "none" was indeed listed as singular or plural. She said though, that what she was taught is that your should look to the prepositions. In this case "of them". Them being plural she would go with were. Another way of looking at it would be to invert the sentence: They were friends none of them.
None of them were friends sounds right. None of them was friends sounds as if an uneducated person is saying it, this is just what it sounds like to me, ofc I could easily be wrong. :)
I don't think any of my edits were around this word choice but I definitely do the same thing with every gamma read, come across something that seems like it might be wrong and then try to find a definitive answer and there isn't one. Glad to know I'm not alone!For what it's worth I agree with the suggesion above as well.
I remember the first time I really took notice of this word choice, and it was while watching Lawrence of Arabia:"None of my friends is a murderer," says Lawrence. Not "None of my friends are murderers" as I would have said it. It made me think about word choice being based on subject/verb agreement rather than just writing things based on what sounds right. But you're absolutely right that the rules are sometimes either ambiguous or being argued over even in the present day.
I'd usually write it "none" as a replacement for "not one," so it would be singular. But now I'm thinking about it, and of course it would stand in for "not any" sometimes: "None of this candy is good" vs "None of these candies is/are good." The first is a clear "not any" use of "none" but even as I'm looking at the second, I am uncertain which one to use. Too bad I can't ask Peter O'Toole.
I understand how you feel! As a translator, I have the same problem with some grammar points! French, for all that it seems less chaotic and flexible than English, has some weird rules too. Some days I wish I hadn't thrown out my grammar book as soon as I could back then....
So I feel for you! But I think it is obvious to everyone how much thought and care Michael and you put into editing your books and we truly appreciate it.