Re: there's vs there are
- From: Robert Lieblich <r_s_lieblich@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:36:52 -0500
tysteel wrote:
Hi everyone,
I have a question I'd like to ask. Is the usage of "there's" in a
sentence, which precedes a plural subject, becoming acceptable in the
lexicon?
I've been noticing that a lot of people are using "there's" (due to
laziness perhaps), when they should be using 'there are' instead. For
instance, I was watching a news program the other day and one of the
broadcasters said:
-------
There's families out there losing their homes in the mortgage crisis.
---
I know that instead of "there's", it should be "there are" because of
the plural, 'families". I also frequently notice similar mistakes of
this kind. It seems many speakers seemingly forget that "there's" is
a contraction for "there is". This error seems to becoming very
common place and acceptable in informal speaking.
I was just wondering if using "there's" in front of a plural subject
is now becoming acceptable in formal writing and speaking? How about
in informal writing? And, do any of you sometimes catch yourself
saying "there's" quite often when "there are" is appropriate?
It seems to be a very common error.
When does an error become so common that it ceases to become an error?
That aside, there's no firm consensus on the use of "there's" with a
plural, but I think you'll find many AUEers adhering to the principle
that it's okay in informal speech and very casual writing but
otherwise to be avoided. I'm one such adherent.
--
Bob Lieblich (AmEclectic)
Trying to remember to sig
.
- References:
- there's vs there are
- From: tysteel
- there's vs there are
- Prev by Date: Re: They get us bayed up out here ...
- Next by Date: Re: Iowa Primary
- Previous by thread: Re: there's vs there are
- Next by thread: Re: there's vs there are
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|