Thread: Она или они?

2 kt_81
Если Вы не знаете чего-то наверняка, помечайте это чем-нибудь типа "Имхо", "По-моему" и т.д.
Нормы русского языка требуют, чтобы мы использовали "Она ..." но ни как не "Они ..."

Originally Posted by Mihail_K

2 kt_81
Если Вы не знаете чего-то наверняка, помечайте это чем-нибудь типа "Имхо", "По-моему" и т.д.
Нормы русского языка требуют, чтобы мы использовали "Она ..." но ни как не "Они ..."

1) Язык - не математика, и это хорошо.
2) Как точно оформлять то, что я пишу, решаю я и только я. Ну и модераторы в какой-то степени.

Может быть, вы не внимательно прочитали первое сообщение? Охотно процитирую

Как обычно отвечают на вопрос: «Где живёт Ваша семья?»

Естественный вариант: "В Москве".
Если ответ должен содержать "моя семья": "Моя семья живёт в Москве"
Если "она" или "они": Тогда (ВНИМАНИЕ!!!) обычно отвечают: "Они живут в Москве".

Слово "обычно" подразумевает, как правило, вероятность больше 0.5, намного больше. Естественно, тут у каждого будет свой опыт, не зря автор темы создал опрос. Я не слыхал вариант с "она", для меня это звучит страно. Опрос как раз для того и сделан - спросить МНЕНИЕ (вот оно где, ваше "ИМХО"), кто что как слыхал, у кого какой опыт. Писать допольнительно "ИМХО" абсолютно избыточно. Естественно я буду говорить только за себя, хотя носителей языка несколько десятков милионов.

2 kt_81
Я так думаю, мы просто по-разному понимаем вопрос.
Я глубоко убежден, что русский язык - не статистическая механика. И это хорошо. Он имеет свои правила (быть может не такие строгие, как в математике, но тем не менее). И правильность того или иного выражения не может определяться тем, как часто его употребляют массы (к слову сказать, "массы" в наше время в большинстве своем довольно неграмотные).

Правило в студию! А до тех пор, пока оно не появится, я буду считать правильными оба варианта (с оговорками, которые я уже приводила).

Originally Posted by Mihail_K

И правильность того или иного выражения не может определяться тем, как часто его употребляют массы (к слову сказать, "массы" в наше время в большинстве своем довольно неграмотные).

ВОТ ЭТО уже очень интересная и обширная (можно сказать, бесконечная) тема, где ИМХО заранее не может быть "победителей", и которая как минимум один раз поднимается на каждом боле-менее серьёзном языковом форуме.

Краткая версия: я по этому вопросу не так категоричен как вы. Но я и не лингвист, не знаю, как вы.

Originally Posted by Lauratuli

In English, "family" requires a plural verb .

No, that is an overgeneralization. I am an educated (Ph.D.) native speaker of American English, so I speak with a native-speaker's insight. In American English the normal verb form to use when 'family' is subject of a sentence is a third person singular verb. If you say "My family are..." in the US, that will sound wrong to the majority of native speakers. In Britain it is common to have plural verbs with singular nouns when the singular noun refers to more than one person, but, not being a Brit, I cannot judge whether that is the more common form there, although I suspect it is. Similarly:

Britain: The Parliament are in session.
America: Congress is in session.

Britain: My family are on holiday in Greece.
America: My family is on vacation in Greece.

D.

О русском языке:
При подлежащем, имеющем в своем составе собирательное существительное с количественным значением (большинство, меньшинство, ряд, часть и др.), сказуемое может стоять в единственном числе (г р а м м а т и ч е с-
к о е согласование) и во множественном числе (согласование п о с м ы с л у).
http://www.spelling.spb.ru/rosenthal/alpha/r183.htm

About English:
Some nouns, like committee, clergy, enemy, group, family, and team, refer to a group but are singular in form. These nouns are called collective nouns. In American usage, a collective noun takes a singular verb when it refers to the collection considered as a whole, as in The family was united on this question or The enemy is suing for peace. It takes a plural verb when it refers to the members of the group considered as individuals, as in My family are always fighting among themselves or The enemy were showing up in groups of three or four to turn in their weapons. In British usage, collective nouns are more often treated as plurals: The government have not announced a new policy. The team are playing in the test matches next week. 1
Be careful not to treat a collective noun as both singular and plural in the same construction. Thus you should say The family is determined to press its (not their) claim. 2
Collective nouns always refer to living creatures. Similar inanimate nouns, such as furniture and luggage, differ in that they cannot be counted individually. That is why you cannot buy a furniture or a luggage. These nouns are usually called mass nouns or noncount nouns. They always take a singular verb: The bedroom furniture was on sale. \

The American Heritage® Book of English Usage.
A Practical and Authoritative Guide to Contemporary English. 1996.

IMHO. При слове "семья" сказуемое стоит в единственном числе, но совершенно не могу себе представить подстановку местоимения "она" вместо существительного "семья".

Originally Posted by doninphxaz

Britain: The Parliament are in session.

I won't argue with the rest of your general assertions, but this example is incorrect. The word "parliament" is very definitely singular, unless you are talking about a true plural.

Parliament is in session.

but

Both Houses of Parliament are in session.

Originally Posted by Milanya

О руссом языке:
При подлежащем, имеющем в своем составе собирательное существительное с количественным значением (большинство, меньшинство, ряд, часть и др.), сказуемое может стоять в единственном числе (г р а м м а т и ч е с-
к о е согласование) и во множественном числе (согласование п о с м ы с л у).
http://www.spelling.spb.ru/rosenthal/alpha/r183.htm

Мне это кажется правильно и логично. Особенно в том, что смысл должен править, даже когда приводится единственное слово как "кто", но смысл множественный. Например:

Большинство людей, кто любят кушать в Макдоналдсе -- полные.

А не:

Большинство людей, кто любит кушать в Макдоналдсе -- полное.

Правильно понял?

Originally Posted by scotcher

Originally Posted by doninphxaz

Britain: The Parliament are in session.

I won't argue with the rest of your general assertions, but this example is incorrect. The word "parliament" is very definitely singular, unless you are talking about a true plural.

Parliament is in session.

but

Both Houses of Parliament are in session.

Thanks for the correction! I'm a Yank, so my statements about British English can certainly be erroneous.

I believe I have heard people on BBC World Today say, "Parliament have taken a decision..." when I would have expected (from the American point of view) "Parliament has taken a decision..." Perhaps the presence of the "the" or the "in session" phrase makes the singular more likely?

It seems you can't agree.

Originally Posted by Milanya

...IMHO. При слове "семья" сказуемое стоит в единственном числе, но совершенно не могу себе представить подстановку местоимения "она" вместо существительного "семья".

Я отметила первый вариант с "она". Мне кажется, что ответив на этот вопрос "Они живут в Москве", ты хочешь дать дополнительную информацию, подчеркнуть, что уже не живёшь со своей семьей.

Originally Posted by doninphxaz

Originally Posted by scotcher

Originally Posted by doninphxaz

Britain: The Parliament are in session.

I won't argue with the rest of your general assertions, but this example is incorrect. The word "parliament" is very definitely singular, unless you are talking about a true plural.

Parliament is in session.

but

Both Houses of Parliament are in session.

Thanks for the correction! I'm a Yank, so my statements about British English can certainly be erroneous.

I believe I have heard people on BBC World Today say, "Parliament have taken a decision..." when I would have expected (from the American point of view) "Parliament has taken a decision..." Perhaps the presence of the "the" or the "in session" phrase makes the singular more likely?

I don't think it's the "the" which makes difference, necessarily. I think you have to "feel" the difference. Remember, in my example of "England" it could be done both ways depending on the context.

Parliament is both a single political entity, and a group of people. If you talk about actions being taken, well, obviously it's not the building doing it, but the people who make up Parliament. Therefore, it seems perfectly logical to say, "Parliament have decided..." Because it's "they" who are doing it.

OTOH, "Parliament has been blown up" seems correct to me because now you are talking about an "it". That's how it sits in my mind, anyway, your mileage may vary. I could be an (Edited out. L.) :P

Originally Posted by Matroskin Kot

Originally Posted by doninphxaz

Originally Posted by scotcher

Originally Posted by doninphxaz

Britain: The Parliament are in session.

I won't argue with the rest of your general assertions, but this example is incorrect. The word "parliament" is very definitely singular, unless you are talking about a true plural.

Parliament is in session.

but

Both Houses of Parliament are in session.

Thanks for the correction! I'm a Yank, so my statements about British English can certainly be erroneous.

I believe I have heard people on BBC World Today say, "Parliament have taken a decision..." when I would have expected (from the American point of view) "Parliament has taken a decision..." Perhaps the presence of the "the" or the "in session" phrase makes the singular more likely?

I don't think it's the "the" which makes difference, necessarily. I think you have to "feel" the difference. Remember, in my example of "England" it could be done both ways depending on the context.

Parliament is both a single political entity, and a group of people. If you talk about actions being taken, well, obviously it's not the building doing it, but the people who make up Parliament. Therefore, it seems perfectly logical to say, "Parliament have decided..." Because it's "they" who are doing it.

Excellent explanation.

Additionally, it would be misleading to suggest that BrE strictly uses plural agreement with groups of people. That may have been the case once, but these days you are probably equally likely to hear either (e.g.) "the crew is unhappy" as "the crew are unhappy", and neither of them sound wrong in any way. It's true that sniffy English Lit proffessors might take massive offense, but pretty much no-one else would even notice.

And besides, English Lit proffessors aren't the arbiters of the English language these days. The media are.*

*and just to contradict myself a little, "the media is..." wouldn't work here, because it would no longer agree with the plural in "abriters", and would make the comparison with "English Lit proffessors aren't..." less elegant. So how would AmE deal with this?

Originally Posted by scotcher

And besides, English Lit professors aren't the arbiters of the English language these days. The media are.*

*and just to contradict myself a little, "the media is..." wouldn't work here, because it would no longer agree with the plural in "arbiters", and would make the comparison with "English Lit professors aren't..." less elegant. So how would AmE deal with this?

Thanks m8!

Well, it's not really an issue because "media" is a plural noun -- you have no choice but to treat it as such. The singular is "medium".

I seem to be noticing more and more, though, that colloquial speech often forgets that "media" is plural. The same could be said about the word "data" (sing. "datum"), which is often treated as a singular, uncountable noun. For example:

"This data proves nothing!" Incorrect, but somehow sounds more natural than:

"These data prove nothing!" Technically correct, but sounds awkward.


Regarding the BrE and AmE treatment of collective nouns, I just thought I'd mention that listening to ESPN sports radio this morning, I heard Mike Golic twice say, "If Florida lose at LSU...". So, I think this is something you will also hear Americans say, just not as often, I think.

Hehe

Blimey.

You know, I got so sick of reminding people that "media" was plural, that I eventually gave up, and subsequently seem to have forgotten that I ever knew it!

Originally Posted by scotcher

Hehe

Blimey.

You know, I got so sick of reminding people that "media" was plural, that I eventually gave up, and subsequently seem to have forgotten that I ever knew it!

I hate it when that happens!

I knew you knew it, but were just having a "moment". Cheers!

Originally Posted by scotcher

Hehe

Blimey.

You know, I got so sick of reminding people that "media" was plural, that I eventually gave up, and subsequently seem to have forgotten that I ever knew it!

And now the Publishers will fleece us all for a new and "updated" dictionary!

You are right, the British tend to use collective nouns as plurals whereas Americans use them as singular nouns.

The important thing is to be consistent.

The family wants its home back.
The family want their home back.

NEVER SAY:
The family wants their home back.
The family want its home back. (Which sounds completely ridiculous to me)

Technically, when you refer to the individuals in the group, you are supposed to use the plural:

The family are always arguing.

Honestly, I have never heard that in my life. It would be better to say, "The family members are always arguing."

Originally Posted by scotcher

Originally Posted by doninphxaz

Britain: The Parliament are in session.

I won't argue with the rest of your general assertions, but this example is incorrect. The word "parliament" is very definitely singular, unless you are talking about a true plural.

Parliament is in session.

but

Both Houses of Parliament are in session.

Yes. Parliament doesn't refer people. It's a noun derived from the French word "parler", "to talk", it basically means "a talk / discussion", therefore it is singular.

The reason why family, team etc., can take a plural is because they are collective nouns referring specifically to a group of people. If you specifically want to refer to the people in parliament, you can use a plural, I think, but it still sounds a bit strange.