I frequently proofread scientific papers containing statements like, fifty millilitres of [chemical] was/were poured into a flask.
Previously, I would have always used the plural form, 'were' in this context, reasoning that fifty millilitres is a plural quantity. This view was challenged recently, which led me to find out what the experts had to say on the subject. According to 'English Grammar for Dummies', 'was' should be used.
"In grammar, treat them as singular whenever we think of them as a lump."
(English Grammar for Dummies, L J Ward & G Woods)
This view is supported by American Journal Experts; similarly, the ACS (American Chemical Society) Style Guide states that, "Units of measure are treated as collective nouns that take a singular verb."
I have now stopped changing 'was' to 'were' in sentences like this.
A quick look at some online forums made it clear that there are differing views on the matter.
(e.g. Protocol Online, English Language & Usage Stack Exchange, Word Reference)
Many organisations produce style guides, although most of those I found online did not mention this issue.
The following style guides state that a singular verb should be used in the above context.
MacMillan Cancer Support
NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence)
University of Cincinnati
University of South Carolina
Wiley-Blackwell
I was only able to find one manual that required the use of a plural verb for plural units of measurement.
American Physiological Society
It appears therefore, that the consensus is that a singular verb should be used for units of measure.
Please feel free to comment if you have a view on this.
No comments:
Post a Comment