Two apples are plural.  When I refer to a number of items only by their count, is the count singular?   For example: "Two is enough."  Is that correct?
122824
I just came across the phrase "Two are better than one", but I had always heard it in my head as "Two is better than one". This is partially due to the Boys Like Girls song. Which one of these is actually correct?
119381
and  are, respectively, nouns that have only a singular form and nouns that have only a plural form.  In English, we have a handful of pluralia tantum that are mass nouns which take the plural form (e.g. "riches" and "remains"), a whole load of pluralia tantum that refer to things that come in pairs (e.g. "trousers", "sunglasses", "knickers", or "scissors"), and at least one plurale tantum that fits into neither of the above categories ("clothes", meaning multiple items of clothing - it's clear what the hypothetical singular "clothe" would mean, yet it mysteriously isn't a word). Singularia tantum, on the other hand, seem less varied. As far as I can tell, they are all  - things like "information", "milk", and "racism".  One can imagine there being a singulare tantum that is not a mass noun. For example, we can imagine an alternate universe in which it is still correct English to talk about "a dog", but talking about "dogs" in the plural is incorrect and funny in the same way that it is incorrect and funny to talk about a "scissor". It might seem unintuitive to think that such a noun even could exist - surely, if it is not a mass noun, then people would just pluralise it with an "s" on the end like most other words? But the converse argument could just as well be made about countable pluralia tantum, and I still cannot go to a shop and buy a "clothe". Hence my question: do we have any such countable singularia tantum in the language? Have we in the past?
42479
This is best illustrated with an example:  Nikkie has 7 children. Sam has no children. Sam thinks Nikkie's kids are cute, but she thinks it would be a lot of work to raise them all together.   Sam: "Your children are so cute, but I think 7 children (1) is or (2) are too many to raise together!"  First of all, I do understand that plural nouns require plural verbs, and yes, "child/children" is a countable noun; thus "Your children are so cute." However, as I think of the meaning of the phrase "7 children" more and more, doesn't it become a sort of measurement like dollars, miles, liters, etc?   Like we say, "1,000,000 dollars is a lot of money," should't we say "7 children is too many to raise together"? Or am I over-analyzing here?
110821
Which of the following sentences is correct?        The number of apples is half the number of pears   The number of apples is half of the number of pears
71249
What is the rule for singular noun objects of plural subjects? For example I and  agree that     They gave their word.   is better than     They gave their words.   To my mind, this is because each has but a single word to give and cannot give more. However, google seems to  on     They gave their life.   vs     They gave their lives.   As you can see in the linked N-gram, the second is far more common than the first. What's going on here? People (cats excluded) only have one life and it seems passing strange that they would be able, let alone willing, to give more.   If pressed, I would claim that the object should only be plural if each of the subjects has many. For example     They called their friends   If each of the "they" in question has only one of whatever object we are talking about I would call it ungrammatical to have that object in the plural form. Am I wrong?    EDIT:  This question was prompted by a comment on  on S&amp;F.SE defending the use of consciousnesses as the plural form of consciousness by referring to . The word was used in this sentence:     Looking for a story where people download their consciousnesses into bodies   It occurred to me that whether or not consciousnesses is correct, it should not be used in that (admittedly bizarre) context since each person only has one consciousness to download. I would have therefore said     Looking for a story where people download their consciousness into bodies   This to me seems like an equivalent sentence to they gave their word or they gave their life. In all three cases I would use the singular form of the noun since each of the subjects can only give (or download as the case may be) one.
120150
I understand that &quot;hairs&quot; is plural when talking about multiple hairs, as in &quot;my hairs have split ends&quot;, and that &quot;hair&quot; is singular when talking about one's collection of hairs, such as &quot;my hair is blue&quot;. However, I'd like to know what the plural form is when I am talking about the collections of hairs of multiple people.  We must wait until our ______ dry.  Furthermore, if the answer is &quot;hair&quot;, then would it be &quot;We must wait until our hair dry.&quot; or &quot;We must wait until our hair dries.&quot;?
56038
Do native speakers of English use verbs in the plural form when speaking about one company? I've come across such use by supposed natives.   Don't you think that it is ungrammatical to use verbs in plural,mentioning one company? Maybe when you speak about one company you imply that it is a team or staff or a group of thousands people working in one place.     Fujitsu send newsletter to all subscribers once a month.    I've made up the above example. It is not a quote.
19814
Why is the sentence "Statistics is often misleading" incorrect?  I know that statistics can be singular but also plural. Should I use singular in this case?
94569
The plural of "person" is "people".  The plural of "people" is "peoples". Person-people-peoples is the only sequence like this that I know of, but I'm looking for another.  (The equivalent question is, is there another plural noun which has become a singular countable collective noun?)  EDIT  For those of you that think that people is nothing but a collective noun (and not an irregular plural, like mice), I urge you to consider:   Do you treat other collective nouns as plurals?  One person, two people, but one star, two galaxy? Do you treat other plurals as collective nouns?  You can certainly say "a galaxy of stars" but do you say "a mice of mouses"?    For those of you that think the customary plural of person is persons, try it on the next three, uh, persons you see: "Finish this sentence: 'one person, two _ ?' "
44246
Kindly, what are your thoughts on the following sentences:        The maximum number of wordbooks (%d) have been saved.   The maximum number of wordbooks (%d) has been saved.      My opinion is that (1) is more appropriate as "save" relates to wordbooks (a plural noun) and "The ... number" is some kind of determiner.  The dissenting opinion is that "The number" is obviously singular, and the "wordbooks" are subsidiary.  I agree that (2) is grammatically correct but I maintain it implies merely a single number was saved, not the wordbooks themselves.
21895
Can anyone please help and tell me if this sentence is correct?  &quot;A significant amount of zombies were detected in your city.&quot;  In my opinion it should be &quot;A significant amount of zombies was detected in your city.&quot; because &quot;amount&quot; should be in agreement with &quot;was&quot; even though amount usually refers to something plural. Are both (was and were) acceptable in this case? Edit1: Yes, &quot;number&quot; would be the correct one in this case. So allow me to ask one more thing.  &quot;A significant amount of purchases were detected...&quot;  Does the use of &quot;number&quot; apply in this case also? As purchase is not exactly a thing/person. And if no, is it correct to say &quot;A significant amount of purchases were detected...&quot;? Edit2: So, please tell me what is the correct phrasing?  &quot;A significant amount of purchases were detected...&quot; &quot;A significant amount of purchases was detected...&quot;  Or, since purchases are countable, is the use of &quot;number&quot; instead of &quot;amount&quot; correct here, as in:  &quot;A significant number of purchases were detected...&quot; &quot;A significant number of purchases was detected...&quot;  Or would amount be correct since a purchase involves money and it refers to the amount of money? Would greatly appreciate an answer, and if possible a detailed explanation.
91751
All my life, I have been confused with choosing plural or singular form to represent one-one correspondence notion.     Only those who qualify will be awarded a certificate.   or      Only those who qualify will be awarded certificates.   ?  Another example, let us consider the following:  "Each student gets one pencil". But it becomes ambiguous if I rewrite in plural form as "Students get pencils".  I hope someone can give me a general rule to overcome my confusion. :-)
78565
However, if no x satisfies the equation or more than one x does—that   is the solution is not unique—the problem is said not to be well   posed.   In the line(source: ) above it uses "more than one does", but logically and intuitively it should be "more than one do" since "more than one" means two or more, then it is plural. I have tried my best to interpret it as it is, but hardly can I convince myself to make "more than" collocate with "does" as an adv., which may only make it make sense.
98599
I've been wondering, since these example numbers end with 1, isn't it natural to use the following noun in its singular form?  From what I've been seeing around on the web this does not seem to be the case. All numbers except for 1 are followed by plural nouns.  In some languages you do need to use the singular form with the numbers ending with 1.  How is it supposed to be in English?
86064
1) "The book 'The Three Musketeers' is a wonderful example of..." Here we have a proper noun, a title that happens to end in a plural, and I have no sense that the verb should be plural. "Musketeers"/is seems proper/natural/correct, and 'are' not at all.   However, such certainty begins to wane in other examples: 2) "'The Heidi Chronicles' is a wonderful example of..." doesn't completely shake my confidence, but it moves the needle, at least a little bit. But, practically speaking, I wouldn't have a second thought about correcting a student who used 'are' instead of 'is'.  Here's the one that really bothers me: 3a) " 'The Basement Tapes' are a wonderful example of..." I don't think this sounds any less proper/natural/correct than 3b) " 'The Basement Tapes' is..." In fact, 3a seems less awkward than 3b.  Why?
80449
How do you know when to use singular or plural nouns if they're used as adjectives?  i.e.     32-bit computer vs 32-bits computer?      teacher union vs teachers union?      wedding planner vs weddings planner?      sport medicine vs sports medicine?      student council vs students council?   Which one is correct?
113830
I've been doing proofreading on a beta site and there appears to be a typo. Is there any usage of "many a times" that is correct, or is it always wrong to apply a singular "a" to a plural noun?