A problem with “news”
7
I know news doesn't have a plural, but what is correct in the following example:
We must recognize real news from fake one.
or
We must recognize real news from fake ones.
Thank you in advance
singular-vs-plural
asked Jan 30 at 16:45
kalukalu
412
|
show 1 more comment
7
I know news doesn't have a plural, but what is correct in the following example:
We must recognize real news from fake one.
or
We must recognize real news from fake ones.
Thank you in advance
singular-vs-plural
asked Jan 30 at 16:45
kalukalu
412
2
Related ell.stackexchange.com/q/68501/9161
– ColleenV♦
Jan 30 at 17:26
@ColleenV: Nicely found. It's nowhere near a "duplicate", imho, but definitely extremely relevant.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:38
@FumbleFingers Definitely not a duplicate, but I wanted to link it just in case someone with the other question found this discussion first. I wish there was a way to see the “related links” section of the sidebar in the mobile view.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 15:20
@ColleenV: Oh! I've only just noticed that Linked 4 News for plural on the sidebar (I'm on a PC desktop). I always assumed the Related list was just based on an automated search for earlier posts having many words / text sequences in common with the current one. I didn't even realise there was such a thing as Linked (which I assume arises purely because you put that link in your comment - or is it a "mod thing" that you can explicitly set the sidebar notification?).
– FumbleFingers
Jan 31 at 15:52
1
@FumbleFingers Any ELL question linked in a comment/answer/question by anyone should appear there. The Contributor’s Guide on English Language Learners Meta is a good example of a fully populated “Linked” list.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 16:10
|
show 1 more comment
7
7
7
1
I know news doesn't have a plural, but what is correct in the following example:
We must recognize real news from fake one.
or
We must recognize real news from fake ones.
Thank you in advance
singular-vs-plural
asked Jan 30 at 16:45
kalukalu
412
I know news doesn't have a plural, but what is correct in the following example:
We must recognize real news from fake one.
or
We must recognize real news from fake ones.
Thank you in advance
singular-vs-plural
singular-vs-plural
asked Jan 30 at 16:45
kalukalu
412
asked Jan 30 at 16:45
kalukalu
412
asked Jan 30 at 16:45
kalukalu
412
asked Jan 30 at 16:45
kalukalu
412
asked Jan 30 at 16:45
kalukalu
412
412
2
Related ell.stackexchange.com/q/68501/9161
– ColleenV♦
Jan 30 at 17:26
@ColleenV: Nicely found. It's nowhere near a "duplicate", imho, but definitely extremely relevant.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:38
@FumbleFingers Definitely not a duplicate, but I wanted to link it just in case someone with the other question found this discussion first. I wish there was a way to see the “related links” section of the sidebar in the mobile view.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 15:20
@ColleenV: Oh! I've only just noticed that Linked 4 News for plural on the sidebar (I'm on a PC desktop). I always assumed the Related list was just based on an automated search for earlier posts having many words / text sequences in common with the current one. I didn't even realise there was such a thing as Linked (which I assume arises purely because you put that link in your comment - or is it a "mod thing" that you can explicitly set the sidebar notification?).
– FumbleFingers
Jan 31 at 15:52
1
@FumbleFingers Any ELL question linked in a comment/answer/question by anyone should appear there. The Contributor’s Guide on English Language Learners Meta is a good example of a fully populated “Linked” list.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 16:10
|
show 1 more comment
2
Related ell.stackexchange.com/q/68501/9161
– ColleenV♦
Jan 30 at 17:26
@ColleenV: Nicely found. It's nowhere near a "duplicate", imho, but definitely extremely relevant.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:38
@FumbleFingers Definitely not a duplicate, but I wanted to link it just in case someone with the other question found this discussion first. I wish there was a way to see the “related links” section of the sidebar in the mobile view.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 15:20
@ColleenV: Oh! I've only just noticed that Linked 4 News for plural on the sidebar (I'm on a PC desktop). I always assumed the Related list was just based on an automated search for earlier posts having many words / text sequences in common with the current one. I didn't even realise there was such a thing as Linked (which I assume arises purely because you put that link in your comment - or is it a "mod thing" that you can explicitly set the sidebar notification?).
– FumbleFingers
Jan 31 at 15:52
1
@FumbleFingers Any ELL question linked in a comment/answer/question by anyone should appear there. The Contributor’s Guide on English Language Learners Meta is a good example of a fully populated “Linked” list.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 16:10
2
2
Related ell.stackexchange.com/q/68501/9161
– ColleenV♦
Jan 30 at 17:26
Related ell.stackexchange.com/q/68501/9161
– ColleenV♦
Jan 30 at 17:26
@ColleenV: Nicely found. It's nowhere near a "duplicate", imho, but definitely extremely relevant.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:38
@ColleenV: Nicely found. It's nowhere near a "duplicate", imho, but definitely extremely relevant.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:38
@FumbleFingers Definitely not a duplicate, but I wanted to link it just in case someone with the other question found this discussion first. I wish there was a way to see the “related links” section of the sidebar in the mobile view.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 15:20
@FumbleFingers Definitely not a duplicate, but I wanted to link it just in case someone with the other question found this discussion first. I wish there was a way to see the “related links” section of the sidebar in the mobile view.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 15:20
@ColleenV: Oh! I've only just noticed that Linked 4 News for plural on the sidebar (I'm on a PC desktop). I always assumed the Related list was just based on an automated search for earlier posts having many words / text sequences in common with the current one. I didn't even realise there was such a thing as Linked (which I assume arises purely because you put that link in your comment - or is it a "mod thing" that you can explicitly set the sidebar notification?).
– FumbleFingers
Jan 31 at 15:52
@ColleenV: Oh! I've only just noticed that Linked 4 News for plural on the sidebar (I'm on a PC desktop). I always assumed the Related list was just based on an automated search for earlier posts having many words / text sequences in common with the current one. I didn't even realise there was such a thing as Linked (which I assume arises purely because you put that link in your comment - or is it a "mod thing" that you can explicitly set the sidebar notification?).
– FumbleFingers
Jan 31 at 15:52
1
1
@FumbleFingers Any ELL question linked in a comment/answer/question by anyone should appear there. The Contributor’s Guide on English Language Learners Meta is a good example of a fully populated “Linked” list.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 16:10
@FumbleFingers Any ELL question linked in a comment/answer/question by anyone should appear there. The Contributor’s Guide on English Language Learners Meta is a good example of a fully populated “Linked” list.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 16:10
|
show 1 more comment
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
20
Neither; either repeat “news” or omit it entirely:
“We must distinguish real news from fake news.”
“We must distinguish real news from fake.”
answered Jan 30 at 16:49
Jeff ZeitlinJeff Zeitlin
3,5811223
1
Interestingly, although I have at least "misgivings" about the usage, I found a few dozen written instances of long trousers, not short ones in Google Books. But you're quite right that we definitely can't / don't / won't use that construction with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:23
His question is still somewhat valid, why isn't it valid to say "We must distinguish real news from fakes?"
– Bill K
Jan 30 at 21:36
1
@FumbleFingers That's simply because news doesn't have a plural. "Ones" works in any case where you can refer to the noun as "those", such as "those trousers". No reason to have misgivings about this.
– only_pro
Jan 30 at 22:34
@FumbleFingers That's because "trousers" is plural. One "trouser" is just a tube of material. During the middle-ages, people in Europe would wear a tube of material on each leg (a.k.a. "hose" - or, in Scotland, "trews" which then became "trouser") with a codpiece in the centre. Someone then re-invented the idea of stitching both tubes together with some extra material ("a pair of trousers") - which Asians had already been doing since the 10th Century BC for riding horses...
– Chronocidal
Jan 31 at 9:28
add a comment |
13
You're right. The word "news" doesn't have a plural form. That fact is a good reason to avoid using the pronoun "one".
There is a useful description for nouns that don't have plural forms. We call them strictly uncountable. As either an adjective or a pronoun, the word "one" involves counting.
Your examples are trying to count something that is strictly uncountable.
answered Jan 30 at 17:25
Gary BotnovcanGary Botnovcan
9,9411028
I found A fourth class of bipartite nouns (e.g. scissors, trousers) is generally recognised for English. Might that be as opposed to "not so strictly uncountable" nouns, that we can reference with I want the sharp scissors, not the blunt ones, or He's wearing short trousers, not long ones - whereas we can't do anything like that with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:34
1
I don't see much similarity between pluralia tantum and strictly uncountable nouns like "news" and "software". The idea of something being uncountably plural doesn't make sense to me. The lack of a singular form and the lack of a plural form have different consequences.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 17:44
1
But surely trousers and scissors are "uncountably plural", in that we have to use ones rather than one in my examples above. Whatever - Apparently the news are good (or were, back in Carlyle's day), but today the news can only take a singular verb form.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 18:04
Yes, we use the plural form "ones" to agree with the plural form "trousers". That's evidence of counting, rather than evidence of a lack of counting. We're distinguishing between one and anything other than one -- a very limited counting, but that's all that English grammar provides.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 18:18
2
@FumbleFingers Trousers and scissors aren't uncountable. They come in pairs.
– Shufflepants
Jan 30 at 19:25
|
show 2 more comments
9
When we use the word "news" as in your examples, it refers to news in general, not specific articles. Therefore, it's an uncountable noun, and you can't use a singular pronoun to refer to it.
If you want to refer to a specific piece of news, we call it an "article" or "item". So you could write:
We must recognize real news articles from fake ones.
answered Jan 30 at 21:16
BarmarBarmar
68935
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "481"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f194719%2fa-problem-with-news%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
20
Neither; either repeat “news” or omit it entirely:
“We must distinguish real news from fake news.”
“We must distinguish real news from fake.”
answered Jan 30 at 16:49
Jeff ZeitlinJeff Zeitlin
3,5811223
1
Interestingly, although I have at least "misgivings" about the usage, I found a few dozen written instances of long trousers, not short ones in Google Books. But you're quite right that we definitely can't / don't / won't use that construction with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:23
His question is still somewhat valid, why isn't it valid to say "We must distinguish real news from fakes?"
– Bill K
Jan 30 at 21:36
1
@FumbleFingers That's simply because news doesn't have a plural. "Ones" works in any case where you can refer to the noun as "those", such as "those trousers". No reason to have misgivings about this.
– only_pro
Jan 30 at 22:34
@FumbleFingers That's because "trousers" is plural. One "trouser" is just a tube of material. During the middle-ages, people in Europe would wear a tube of material on each leg (a.k.a. "hose" - or, in Scotland, "trews" which then became "trouser") with a codpiece in the centre. Someone then re-invented the idea of stitching both tubes together with some extra material ("a pair of trousers") - which Asians had already been doing since the 10th Century BC for riding horses...
– Chronocidal
Jan 31 at 9:28
add a comment |
20
Neither; either repeat “news” or omit it entirely:
“We must distinguish real news from fake news.”
“We must distinguish real news from fake.”
answered Jan 30 at 16:49
Jeff ZeitlinJeff Zeitlin
3,5811223
1
Interestingly, although I have at least "misgivings" about the usage, I found a few dozen written instances of long trousers, not short ones in Google Books. But you're quite right that we definitely can't / don't / won't use that construction with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:23
His question is still somewhat valid, why isn't it valid to say "We must distinguish real news from fakes?"
– Bill K
Jan 30 at 21:36
1
@FumbleFingers That's simply because news doesn't have a plural. "Ones" works in any case where you can refer to the noun as "those", such as "those trousers". No reason to have misgivings about this.
– only_pro
Jan 30 at 22:34
@FumbleFingers That's because "trousers" is plural. One "trouser" is just a tube of material. During the middle-ages, people in Europe would wear a tube of material on each leg (a.k.a. "hose" - or, in Scotland, "trews" which then became "trouser") with a codpiece in the centre. Someone then re-invented the idea of stitching both tubes together with some extra material ("a pair of trousers") - which Asians had already been doing since the 10th Century BC for riding horses...
– Chronocidal
Jan 31 at 9:28
add a comment |
20
20
20
Neither; either repeat “news” or omit it entirely:
“We must distinguish real news from fake news.”
“We must distinguish real news from fake.”
answered Jan 30 at 16:49
Jeff ZeitlinJeff Zeitlin
3,5811223
Neither; either repeat “news” or omit it entirely:
“We must distinguish real news from fake news.”
“We must distinguish real news from fake.”
answered Jan 30 at 16:49
Jeff ZeitlinJeff Zeitlin
3,5811223
answered Jan 30 at 16:49
Jeff ZeitlinJeff Zeitlin
3,5811223
answered Jan 30 at 16:49
Jeff ZeitlinJeff Zeitlin
3,5811223
answered Jan 30 at 16:49
Jeff ZeitlinJeff Zeitlin
3,5811223
3,5811223
1
Interestingly, although I have at least "misgivings" about the usage, I found a few dozen written instances of long trousers, not short ones in Google Books. But you're quite right that we definitely can't / don't / won't use that construction with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:23
His question is still somewhat valid, why isn't it valid to say "We must distinguish real news from fakes?"
– Bill K
Jan 30 at 21:36
1
@FumbleFingers That's simply because news doesn't have a plural. "Ones" works in any case where you can refer to the noun as "those", such as "those trousers". No reason to have misgivings about this.
– only_pro
Jan 30 at 22:34
@FumbleFingers That's because "trousers" is plural. One "trouser" is just a tube of material. During the middle-ages, people in Europe would wear a tube of material on each leg (a.k.a. "hose" - or, in Scotland, "trews" which then became "trouser") with a codpiece in the centre. Someone then re-invented the idea of stitching both tubes together with some extra material ("a pair of trousers") - which Asians had already been doing since the 10th Century BC for riding horses...
– Chronocidal
Jan 31 at 9:28
add a comment |
1
Interestingly, although I have at least "misgivings" about the usage, I found a few dozen written instances of long trousers, not short ones in Google Books. But you're quite right that we definitely can't / don't / won't use that construction with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:23
His question is still somewhat valid, why isn't it valid to say "We must distinguish real news from fakes?"
– Bill K
Jan 30 at 21:36
1
@FumbleFingers That's simply because news doesn't have a plural. "Ones" works in any case where you can refer to the noun as "those", such as "those trousers". No reason to have misgivings about this.
– only_pro
Jan 30 at 22:34
@FumbleFingers That's because "trousers" is plural. One "trouser" is just a tube of material. During the middle-ages, people in Europe would wear a tube of material on each leg (a.k.a. "hose" - or, in Scotland, "trews" which then became "trouser") with a codpiece in the centre. Someone then re-invented the idea of stitching both tubes together with some extra material ("a pair of trousers") - which Asians had already been doing since the 10th Century BC for riding horses...
– Chronocidal
Jan 31 at 9:28
1
1
Interestingly, although I have at least "misgivings" about the usage, I found a few dozen written instances of long trousers, not short ones in Google Books. But you're quite right that we definitely can't / don't / won't use that construction with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:23
Interestingly, although I have at least "misgivings" about the usage, I found a few dozen written instances of long trousers, not short ones in Google Books. But you're quite right that we definitely can't / don't / won't use that construction with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:23
His question is still somewhat valid, why isn't it valid to say "We must distinguish real news from fakes?"
– Bill K
Jan 30 at 21:36
His question is still somewhat valid, why isn't it valid to say "We must distinguish real news from fakes?"
– Bill K
Jan 30 at 21:36
1
1
@FumbleFingers That's simply because news doesn't have a plural. "Ones" works in any case where you can refer to the noun as "those", such as "those trousers". No reason to have misgivings about this.
– only_pro
Jan 30 at 22:34
@FumbleFingers That's simply because news doesn't have a plural. "Ones" works in any case where you can refer to the noun as "those", such as "those trousers". No reason to have misgivings about this.
– only_pro
Jan 30 at 22:34
@FumbleFingers That's because "trousers" is plural. One "trouser" is just a tube of material. During the middle-ages, people in Europe would wear a tube of material on each leg (a.k.a. "hose" - or, in Scotland, "trews" which then became "trouser") with a codpiece in the centre. Someone then re-invented the idea of stitching both tubes together with some extra material ("a pair of trousers") - which Asians had already been doing since the 10th Century BC for riding horses...
– Chronocidal
Jan 31 at 9:28
@FumbleFingers That's because "trousers" is plural. One "trouser" is just a tube of material. During the middle-ages, people in Europe would wear a tube of material on each leg (a.k.a. "hose" - or, in Scotland, "trews" which then became "trouser") with a codpiece in the centre. Someone then re-invented the idea of stitching both tubes together with some extra material ("a pair of trousers") - which Asians had already been doing since the 10th Century BC for riding horses...
– Chronocidal
Jan 31 at 9:28
add a comment |
13
You're right. The word "news" doesn't have a plural form. That fact is a good reason to avoid using the pronoun "one".
There is a useful description for nouns that don't have plural forms. We call them strictly uncountable. As either an adjective or a pronoun, the word "one" involves counting.
Your examples are trying to count something that is strictly uncountable.
answered Jan 30 at 17:25
Gary BotnovcanGary Botnovcan
9,9411028
I found A fourth class of bipartite nouns (e.g. scissors, trousers) is generally recognised for English. Might that be as opposed to "not so strictly uncountable" nouns, that we can reference with I want the sharp scissors, not the blunt ones, or He's wearing short trousers, not long ones - whereas we can't do anything like that with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:34
1
I don't see much similarity between pluralia tantum and strictly uncountable nouns like "news" and "software". The idea of something being uncountably plural doesn't make sense to me. The lack of a singular form and the lack of a plural form have different consequences.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 17:44
1
But surely trousers and scissors are "uncountably plural", in that we have to use ones rather than one in my examples above. Whatever - Apparently the news are good (or were, back in Carlyle's day), but today the news can only take a singular verb form.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 18:04
Yes, we use the plural form "ones" to agree with the plural form "trousers". That's evidence of counting, rather than evidence of a lack of counting. We're distinguishing between one and anything other than one -- a very limited counting, but that's all that English grammar provides.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 18:18
2
@FumbleFingers Trousers and scissors aren't uncountable. They come in pairs.
– Shufflepants
Jan 30 at 19:25
|
show 2 more comments
13
You're right. The word "news" doesn't have a plural form. That fact is a good reason to avoid using the pronoun "one".
There is a useful description for nouns that don't have plural forms. We call them strictly uncountable. As either an adjective or a pronoun, the word "one" involves counting.
Your examples are trying to count something that is strictly uncountable.
answered Jan 30 at 17:25
Gary BotnovcanGary Botnovcan
9,9411028
I found A fourth class of bipartite nouns (e.g. scissors, trousers) is generally recognised for English. Might that be as opposed to "not so strictly uncountable" nouns, that we can reference with I want the sharp scissors, not the blunt ones, or He's wearing short trousers, not long ones - whereas we can't do anything like that with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:34
1
I don't see much similarity between pluralia tantum and strictly uncountable nouns like "news" and "software". The idea of something being uncountably plural doesn't make sense to me. The lack of a singular form and the lack of a plural form have different consequences.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 17:44
1
But surely trousers and scissors are "uncountably plural", in that we have to use ones rather than one in my examples above. Whatever - Apparently the news are good (or were, back in Carlyle's day), but today the news can only take a singular verb form.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 18:04
Yes, we use the plural form "ones" to agree with the plural form "trousers". That's evidence of counting, rather than evidence of a lack of counting. We're distinguishing between one and anything other than one -- a very limited counting, but that's all that English grammar provides.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 18:18
2
@FumbleFingers Trousers and scissors aren't uncountable. They come in pairs.
– Shufflepants
Jan 30 at 19:25
|
show 2 more comments
13
13
13
You're right. The word "news" doesn't have a plural form. That fact is a good reason to avoid using the pronoun "one".
There is a useful description for nouns that don't have plural forms. We call them strictly uncountable. As either an adjective or a pronoun, the word "one" involves counting.
Your examples are trying to count something that is strictly uncountable.
answered Jan 30 at 17:25
Gary BotnovcanGary Botnovcan
9,9411028
You're right. The word "news" doesn't have a plural form. That fact is a good reason to avoid using the pronoun "one".
There is a useful description for nouns that don't have plural forms. We call them strictly uncountable. As either an adjective or a pronoun, the word "one" involves counting.
Your examples are trying to count something that is strictly uncountable.
answered Jan 30 at 17:25
Gary BotnovcanGary Botnovcan
9,9411028
answered Jan 30 at 17:25
Gary BotnovcanGary Botnovcan
9,9411028
answered Jan 30 at 17:25
Gary BotnovcanGary Botnovcan
9,9411028
answered Jan 30 at 17:25
Gary BotnovcanGary Botnovcan
9,9411028
9,9411028
I found A fourth class of bipartite nouns (e.g. scissors, trousers) is generally recognised for English. Might that be as opposed to "not so strictly uncountable" nouns, that we can reference with I want the sharp scissors, not the blunt ones, or He's wearing short trousers, not long ones - whereas we can't do anything like that with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:34
1
I don't see much similarity between pluralia tantum and strictly uncountable nouns like "news" and "software". The idea of something being uncountably plural doesn't make sense to me. The lack of a singular form and the lack of a plural form have different consequences.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 17:44
1
But surely trousers and scissors are "uncountably plural", in that we have to use ones rather than one in my examples above. Whatever - Apparently the news are good (or were, back in Carlyle's day), but today the news can only take a singular verb form.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 18:04
Yes, we use the plural form "ones" to agree with the plural form "trousers". That's evidence of counting, rather than evidence of a lack of counting. We're distinguishing between one and anything other than one -- a very limited counting, but that's all that English grammar provides.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 18:18
2
@FumbleFingers Trousers and scissors aren't uncountable. They come in pairs.
– Shufflepants
Jan 30 at 19:25
|
show 2 more comments
I found A fourth class of bipartite nouns (e.g. scissors, trousers) is generally recognised for English. Might that be as opposed to "not so strictly uncountable" nouns, that we can reference with I want the sharp scissors, not the blunt ones, or He's wearing short trousers, not long ones - whereas we can't do anything like that with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:34
1
I don't see much similarity between pluralia tantum and strictly uncountable nouns like "news" and "software". The idea of something being uncountably plural doesn't make sense to me. The lack of a singular form and the lack of a plural form have different consequences.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 17:44
1
But surely trousers and scissors are "uncountably plural", in that we have to use ones rather than one in my examples above. Whatever - Apparently the news are good (or were, back in Carlyle's day), but today the news can only take a singular verb form.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 18:04
Yes, we use the plural form "ones" to agree with the plural form "trousers". That's evidence of counting, rather than evidence of a lack of counting. We're distinguishing between one and anything other than one -- a very limited counting, but that's all that English grammar provides.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 18:18
2
@FumbleFingers Trousers and scissors aren't uncountable. They come in pairs.
– Shufflepants
Jan 30 at 19:25
I found A fourth class of bipartite nouns (e.g. scissors, trousers) is generally recognised for English. Might that be as opposed to "not so strictly uncountable" nouns, that we can reference with I want the sharp scissors, not the blunt ones, or He's wearing short trousers, not long ones - whereas we can't do anything like that with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:34
I found A fourth class of bipartite nouns (e.g. scissors, trousers) is generally recognised for English. Might that be as opposed to "not so strictly uncountable" nouns, that we can reference with I want the sharp scissors, not the blunt ones, or He's wearing short trousers, not long ones - whereas we can't do anything like that with news.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:34
1
1
I don't see much similarity between pluralia tantum and strictly uncountable nouns like "news" and "software". The idea of something being uncountably plural doesn't make sense to me. The lack of a singular form and the lack of a plural form have different consequences.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 17:44
I don't see much similarity between pluralia tantum and strictly uncountable nouns like "news" and "software". The idea of something being uncountably plural doesn't make sense to me. The lack of a singular form and the lack of a plural form have different consequences.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 17:44
1
1
But surely trousers and scissors are "uncountably plural", in that we have to use ones rather than one in my examples above. Whatever - Apparently the news are good (or were, back in Carlyle's day), but today the news can only take a singular verb form.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 18:04
But surely trousers and scissors are "uncountably plural", in that we have to use ones rather than one in my examples above. Whatever - Apparently the news are good (or were, back in Carlyle's day), but today the news can only take a singular verb form.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 18:04
Yes, we use the plural form "ones" to agree with the plural form "trousers". That's evidence of counting, rather than evidence of a lack of counting. We're distinguishing between one and anything other than one -- a very limited counting, but that's all that English grammar provides.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 18:18
Yes, we use the plural form "ones" to agree with the plural form "trousers". That's evidence of counting, rather than evidence of a lack of counting. We're distinguishing between one and anything other than one -- a very limited counting, but that's all that English grammar provides.
– Gary Botnovcan
Jan 30 at 18:18
2
2
@FumbleFingers Trousers and scissors aren't uncountable. They come in pairs.
– Shufflepants
Jan 30 at 19:25
@FumbleFingers Trousers and scissors aren't uncountable. They come in pairs.
– Shufflepants
Jan 30 at 19:25
|
show 2 more comments
9
When we use the word "news" as in your examples, it refers to news in general, not specific articles. Therefore, it's an uncountable noun, and you can't use a singular pronoun to refer to it.
If you want to refer to a specific piece of news, we call it an "article" or "item". So you could write:
We must recognize real news articles from fake ones.
answered Jan 30 at 21:16
BarmarBarmar
68935
add a comment |
9
When we use the word "news" as in your examples, it refers to news in general, not specific articles. Therefore, it's an uncountable noun, and you can't use a singular pronoun to refer to it.
If you want to refer to a specific piece of news, we call it an "article" or "item". So you could write:
We must recognize real news articles from fake ones.
answered Jan 30 at 21:16
BarmarBarmar
68935
add a comment |
9
9
9
When we use the word "news" as in your examples, it refers to news in general, not specific articles. Therefore, it's an uncountable noun, and you can't use a singular pronoun to refer to it.
If you want to refer to a specific piece of news, we call it an "article" or "item". So you could write:
We must recognize real news articles from fake ones.
answered Jan 30 at 21:16
BarmarBarmar
68935
When we use the word "news" as in your examples, it refers to news in general, not specific articles. Therefore, it's an uncountable noun, and you can't use a singular pronoun to refer to it.
If you want to refer to a specific piece of news, we call it an "article" or "item". So you could write:
We must recognize real news articles from fake ones.
answered Jan 30 at 21:16
BarmarBarmar
68935
answered Jan 30 at 21:16
BarmarBarmar
68935
answered Jan 30 at 21:16
BarmarBarmar
68935
answered Jan 30 at 21:16
BarmarBarmar
68935
68935
add a comment |
add a comment |
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f194719%2fa-problem-with-news%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
Related ell.stackexchange.com/q/68501/9161
– ColleenV♦
Jan 30 at 17:26
@ColleenV: Nicely found. It's nowhere near a "duplicate", imho, but definitely extremely relevant.
– FumbleFingers
Jan 30 at 17:38
@FumbleFingers Definitely not a duplicate, but I wanted to link it just in case someone with the other question found this discussion first. I wish there was a way to see the “related links” section of the sidebar in the mobile view.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 15:20
@ColleenV: Oh! I've only just noticed that Linked 4 News for plural on the sidebar (I'm on a PC desktop). I always assumed the Related list was just based on an automated search for earlier posts having many words / text sequences in common with the current one. I didn't even realise there was such a thing as Linked (which I assume arises purely because you put that link in your comment - or is it a "mod thing" that you can explicitly set the sidebar notification?).
– FumbleFingers
Jan 31 at 15:52
1
@FumbleFingers Any ELL question linked in a comment/answer/question by anyone should appear there. The Contributor’s Guide on English Language Learners Meta is a good example of a fully populated “Linked” list.
– ColleenV♦
Jan 31 at 16:10