Erinja:She said something to the effect of "The team want to know...". The correct American usage would have been "the team wants to know...".

So can't you refer to a group of people using a singular noun and a plural verb in US English? We often say things like "I heard Nokia are trying to sue Google again" here. "Nokia is" is also acceptable, but sounds as if we're personifying the company subconsciously I reckon.

As for fountain pens, it now makes more sense taking into account some of you are much older than me Ah the internet, trapping us into the misconception that we're all same gender, age, race and share the same political views, and when that illusion is shattered all hell breaks loose

ceigered:So can't you refer to a group of people using a singular noun and a plural verb in US English? We often say things like "I heard Nokia are trying to sue Google again" here. "Nokia is" is also acceptable, but sounds as if we're personifying the company subconsciously I reckon.

In US English, "Nokia are" would be considered wrong. It would have to be "Nokia is".

You use the plural verb only if the noun describing the group is also plural.

Therefore if you have the sports team called the Ravens, it would be "The Ravens are". But if you have a sports team whose name is singular, like "DC United", it would have to be "DC United is"

I will go so far as to say that most Americans aren't even aware of the idea of treating a collective singular noun as a plural. So if you wrote a simple sentence like "Nokia are expecting high profits this quarter", an American would be likely to think that you are not a native speaker of English, because the grammar is so obviously "wrong".

erinja:In US English, "Nokia are" would be considered wrong. It would have to be "Nokia is".

I don't know if I completely agree with that. It's certainly much more common to say "Nokia is," but I think it has to do with what you're picturing when you say it. If I do business with a team of people from Nokia, and I'm thinking of those people in my head, I could see myself saying "Nokia are" or "The marketing team from Nokia are." And I'm sure I've heard others doing the same.

But you are right -- it's much more common to use the singular for collective nouns in the US. I remember listening to a Monty Python record when I was a kid and being fascinated by the fact that they said, "The crowd are going wild!"

There's a very funny Mitchell & Webb sketch about a couple of lazy British writers trying to write an American courtroom drama. The actors are all and the accents are ridiculous.

Video NSFW and NSFK because of language.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVa7Ni8uNvM

T0dd:

Chainy:
The word 'closet' is definitely a bit mystifying for Brits. We normally put our clothes in a wardrobe, you know an item of furniture standing in the bedroom. But over in America, seems you open the door of the closet and the delve deep into a whole separate room!

Well, maybe. I live in a row-house ("terraced" house?) built in 1930-something. It has closets, but none that you could really walk into, or move about in if you did walk in. They're mostly about 20 inches deep and three or four feet wide.

Newer houses tend to have bigger closets, because people like them. But people still have wardrobes, too.

Must be due to the fact that America's a huge country and so houses are often much bigger than in Britain. Most people simply couldn't afford the space to have a room-style closet.

I wonder if the age of the house is a factor there, too.

I also live in an older rowhouse, and there are only two closets in the whole house - and small ones! I moved here from a more recently built townhouse, which had several closets larger than my current home and one walk-in closet where I stored ALL of my clothes, and part of my library (several of the closets had shelving built in to them). My current house is a disaster, because there's nowhere to put anything...I guess I should purchase a wardrobe, or move!

Also, I have never in my life encountered the word 'biro' until now. Oh, the beauty of English(es)...

jefusan:The biggest mistake non-Americans make when they try to do an American accent is to jump from one regional accent to another within the space of a sentence. One word is Midwestern, the next is Noo Yawk.

But then, I have a thing for accents. I sometimes wish I'd studied to be a dialect coach.

Have you seen this? FASCINATING.

Oh, and speaking of Noo Yawk: Watch this. Hilarious for me since I am from NNJ...

jefusan:

erinja:In US English, "Nokia are" would be considered wrong. It would have to be "Nokia is".

I don't know if I completely agree with that. It's certainly much more common to say "Nokia is," but I think it has to do with what you're picturing when you say it. If I do business with a team of people from Nokia, and I'm thinking of those people in my head, I could see myself saying "Nokia are" or "The marketing team from Nokia are." And I'm sure I've heard others doing the same.

But you are right -- it's much more common to use the singular for collective nouns in the US. I remember listening to a Monty Python record when I was a kid and being fascinated by the fact that they said, "The crowd are going wild!"

I was taught that using a plural verb for a collective noun is "wrong" in Standard US English.

UUano:I was taught that using a plural verb for a collective noun is "wrong" in Standard US English.

What about "people"?

I have always seen "people are".

It is curious for me, as people can be translated to Spanish as "gente" or "pueblo" (depending on context), and that is always singular in Spanish (even when it refers to several persons):

El pueblo tiene derechos (the people have? rights).

La gente lo pide (the people ask? for it).

I was taught that it has to be used in plural, because it's (something like) the plural of person.

Is it ever used in plural? Or it also depends on the country?

Amike,

Daniel.

Daniel, in British English, it can depend on how the group is being seen, as to whether the group word is singular or plural.

So you might say 'a large crowd is forming outside the Palace gates' (conceiving the group as a mass).

But I wouldn't be surprised to hear 'the crowd are getting restless' (seeing the crowd as number of individuals).

I would definitely say the 'Police do' and 'People are'

henma:

UUano:I was taught that using a plural verb for a collective noun is "wrong" in Standard US English.

What about "people"?

I have always seen "people are".

Well, there are exceptions and whatnot that come up, but for the most part he's right; things like 'the team are good', or 'the band eat pizza', 'the company plan to succeed' so on, and so forth would be considered improper grammar here. People here would assume one to be a non-native speaker, or uneducated if one used a plural verb with collective nouns like that.