Plural questions

[Xinfu]

-There are many people whose English name(s) is/are John etc.

Is the plural form optional? Would there be any difference in meaning?

[Rusty]

"Whose English name is John?" is a perfectly good question that you can put out to a group of people. There's no question that this is correct grammar.

In the sentence you wrote, the antecedent is 'people', which is plural. Even so, it is still proper to use "whose English name is John."

That said, I know that several people choose to switch to the plural usage if the antecedent is plural. A Google search of 'people whose name is' followed by a search of 'people whose names are' reveals that both forms are used. The former search has a higher hit count, so it is a more popular choice.

I believe that you can use either form and not 'break any rules'.

As far as having a different meaning, some would argue that we each have a name, so you should not say names. But if your focus is on the fact that we each have a given name and a surname, and some of us a middle name, or two last names, then 'whose names are' would make a better question because you're asking about more than one name, not a person's name as a whole.

[Xinfu]

"Whose English name is John?" is a perfectly good question that you can put out to a group of people. There's no question that this is correct grammar.

In the sentence you wrote, the antecedent is 'people', which is plural. Even so, it is still proper to use "whose English name is John."

That said, I know that several people choose to switch to the plural usage if the antecedent is plural. A Google search of 'people whose name is' followed by a search of 'people whose names are' reveals that both forms are used. The former search has a higher hit count, so it is a more popular choice.

I believe that you can use either form and not 'break any rules'.

As far as having a different meaning, some would argue that we each have a name, so you should not say names. But if your focus is on the fact that we each have a given name and a surname, and some of us a middle name, or two last names, then 'whose names are' would make a better question because you're asking about more than one name, not a person's name as a whole.

Thank you~

A long time ago, my teacher, a non-native speaker, told me we must say

-There are only a few people whose names I am not sure of.

but not in the singular form. Do you agree this particular sentence is a bit different from the one I gave. (I think they are different, though similar, but I can't think of a reason that this sentence is different, which difference binds us to the use of the plural.

[Rusty]

Here I would say 'name' instead of the plural form.

"Whose name do I not know?" is a perfectly good question that you can ask to a group of people.
Earlier, I said that there are those who think that if the antecedent is plural that they should choose a plural in the other clause. I am not of that opinion in this case, or in the other case you cited earlier.
In your sentence, the subject in the main clause is plural. Since many people would choose to use a plural in the other clause because the antecedent is plural, it's OK.

[Xinfu]

Thank you~ I will find some other questions about the plural~

[Xinfu]

Is S optional?:

-We had a great party and everyone enjoyed it very much. Then we went back to our respective room(s); then at 9 an alarm was given, and we learned a murder had happened.

[Rusty]

The 's' is not optional. The wording 'respective' means that there is more than one room.

[Xinfu]

Thank you~

I think the S is optional; do you agree?;

-Judging by people's accent(s), Londoners can tell what part of London they are from.

[wrholt]

No, the S is required in this case.

[Xinfu]

Thank you~

Each person could only give ONE like, is S optional?:

-There are many people who have given their like(s) to the video.

[Rusty]

It seems that about half would agree that it is optional, but I disagree.

Even though we, as individuals, can only give one like, your antecedent is plural (people). That is why you chose 'who have' instead of 'who has'. For the same reason, we, as a group, have given our likes.


Have a look at how many hits you get on a search like "people who have given their hearts" versus "people who have given their heart." About half leave off the 's', and would probably cite the fact that we have only one heart to give.

While it is certainly true that we, as individuals, have only one heart to give, the antecedent is plural. This means that all the hearts in the group are being considered.

There is a woman who has given her heart. :good:
There are women who have given their hearts. :good:

[Xinfu]

It seems that about half would agree that it is optional, but I disagree.

Even though we, as individuals, can only give one like, your antecedent is plural (people). That is why you chose 'who have' instead of 'who has'. For the same reason, we, as a group, have given our likes.


Have a look at how many hits you get on a search like "people who have given their hearts" versus "people who have given their heart." About half leave off the 's', and would probably cite the fact that we have only one heart to give.

While it is certainly true that we, as individuals, have only one heart to give, the antecedent is plural. This means that all the hearts in the group are being considered.

There is a woman who has given her heart. :good:
There are women who have given their hearts. :good:

Thank you~

But do you not think googling is unreliable? We find many informations and furnitures and equipments there~

[Rusty]

Using Google to learn the proper way to speak is unreliable. You'll find that most English speakers slaughter the English language. That's why almost half of the population disagree with what I would say.
What I would say agrees with what is found in the grammar sites.

[Xinfu]

Is the plural form optional?:

-Their attire(s)/height(s)/weight(s)/beauty(-ies) is/are different.

[Xinfu]

Is the plural form optional?:

-The fascinating manner(s) of those girls are irresistable.

In dictionaries, I find that MANNER in this sense is said to be singular, but it doesn't have any example sentences containing a plural referent. The same difficulty is found with ATTIRE/WEIGHT, etc.

For that MANNER sentence, is it correct to say when we regard the girls as one group, we use MANNER; as separate entities, MANNERS?

[Rusty]

I have no trouble using the plural heights or weights in your previous post. The subject 'their' is plural.
'Their attire' is how I would say it.
'Their beauty', as well.

The plural manners is usually used to mean etiquette, so I would use 'the fascinating manner'. I would also say 'their manner'.

[Xinfu]

Thank you~
THEY referring to four persons:
-They struck up friendship at Orientation Camp. (the word as a general idea referring to being friends, so no THE, no plural form)
-They struck up a friendship at Orientation Camp. (one single friendship between four persons, hence the indefinite article)
-They struck up friendships at Orientation Camp.(relationships between four persons, so plural.)

Do you agree with my explanations?

[Rusty]

The first sentence doesn't sound right.
The middle sentence is great.
The last sentence is fine.

[Nomenclature]

In the sentence you wrote, the antecedent is 'people', which is plural. Even so, it is still proper to use "whose English name is John."



Getting more technical, using "is" there is correct because the subject is "name" which is singular. "whose English name is John." is a dependent clause modifying "people". "whose" is a subordinating conjunction (that's a mouthful :D) which is used to introduce the dependent clause whether the noun the clause is describing is singular or plural.

[Xinfu]

Thank you~

For

-Apparitions of a woman in white robes have been reported.

Does it mean every time this woman appears, she is wearing more than one robe?