Cunard Grammar Question

[MarkBearSF]

(one of those things I've been wondering about for a while....)

 

I notice that Hattie and some others use the plural verb conjugation with "Cunard" as the subject, as in "Cunard are..."

 

I'm curious as to the origin of this. Is it related to "Cunarders," a traditional quirk, a reflection that the organization contains many individuals, a "Britishism?" Would P&O be treated similarly?

 

It's always interesting to me how these things develop. For instance, I follow Broadway - and when talking about the leading power there, it's always "the Shuberts" instead of the organization name, although the last of the Shubert brothers is long dead. But one only talks of "the Nederlanders" if referring directly to members of the theater owning family.

 

And, by the way, let me add my voice to the thanks for your diligent work, Hattie.

[Host Hattie]

Pass, can I phone a friend ?

 

Thanks for the kind words but I have no idea, I'm an Engineer, we're not known for our knowledge of grammar !

[Wiltonian]

I think you have highlighted a difference in American vs British grammatical norms. I _think_ that most Brits would write, "Cunard are annoying people with their new dress terminology", while I think that most Americans would write, "Cunard is . . . .". There are always exceptions, of course, and cross-Atlantic influences in both directions.

[BigMac1953]

A company, like Cunard, is always singular, so to be absolutely correct, it should always be "is" when discussing the organisation.

 

Curiously, you can use the pronoun "they" which can be singular or plural.

 

Stewart

[bluemarble]

Interesting question. In the US, we almost invariably treat collective nouns as being singular. I thought it was just the opposite in the UK, thinking collective nouns were almost invariably treated as plural in the UK. But research into this issue leads me to results stating that in the UK, a collective noun can treated as either singular or plural (singular if the group is being thought of as a single entity or plural it is being thought of as a group of individuals).

 

If that analysis is anywhere close to the mark, then using Wiltonian's example, the phrase "Cunard are annoying people with their new dress terminology" would seem to be appropriate UK usage, since any number of individuals within the Cunard organization seem to be involved in that endeavour.

 

On the other hand, I note the Booking Conditions found on Cunard's UK web site include phrases such as "Cunard is not responsible for ...". In this case, I suppose Cunard considers itself to be a single corporate entity within that context, hence the singular verb form.

 

Anyway, that's my two cents/pence worth.

[MarkBearSF]

You never know what fascinating replies a post will spur.

 

Yes, coming from the US, I was always told to treat collective nouns as singular. (Good point about the newly-approved singular "they," BigMac!)

 

One day, I had an Englishman take offense when I mentioned how a different person used a term I find particularly grating, but which turned out to be the standard in his country, "orientated" - in the US, "oriented" is usually preferred. And I got into an argument here with a Welsh editor for a newsletter when I insisted on apostrophe-free "its" for the possessive pronoun, which I'm told is a more flexible rule in the UK.

 

- Mark

[john watson]

Interesting question. In the US, we almost invariably treat collective nouns as being singular.

 

Grammar is often very loose in the UK quite deliberately, people write in the vernacular often to introduce a double entendre element. If one wanted to eliminate any ambiguity whatsoever when using a collective noun for example we would say a flock of tits. Americans would use a singular collective noun, bunch introducing bewilderment of what the subject of the sentence is.

 

Regards John

[kentchris]

And I got into an argument here with a Welsh editor for a newsletter when I insisted on apostrophe-free "its" for the possessive pronoun, which I'm told is a more flexible rule in the UK.

Someone's been having you on, it's simply a rule which is broken rather too often. Have you read "Eats shoots and leaves" by Lynne Truss? A very amusing polemic against bad punctuation.

[dfwguy]

Hi Mark- interesting question. Which leads into my question..In UK , they say; "Joe went to Hospital" or "Joe went to University ". As American, we always add 'the' ..except when discussing church.. It is "Joe went to Church" ..not "Joe went to the church" .

btw- I believe we were on same crossing as you @ April 2017 westbound...maybe met a FOD?

Cheers !

Mark

[MarkBearSF]

Hi Mark- interesting question. Which leads into my question..In UK , they say; "Joe went to Hospital" or "Joe went to University ". As American, we always add 'the' ..except when discussing church.. It is "Joe went to Church" ..not "Joe went to the church" .

btw- I believe we were on same crossing as you @ April 2017 westbound...maybe met a FOD?

Cheers !

Mark

 

I believe we did (we did a May RT last year and a May Westbound the year before).

There's one exception that comes to mind, we would say "Donald goes to jail."

 

- Mark

[bluemarble]

Hi Mark- interesting question. Which leads into my question..In UK , they say; "Joe went to Hospital" or "Joe went to University ". As American, we always add 'the' ..except when discussing church.. It is "Joe went to Church" ..not "Joe went to the church" .

btw- I believe we were on same crossing as you @ April 2017 westbound...maybe met a FOD?

Cheers !

Mark

 

I can't really explain why we Americans insist on saying someone is in "the hospital" when we mean that person has a condition requiring admission to some unspecified medical facility. The use of the definite article would seem to imply we mean some specific hospital. But of course that is indeed how we say it in the US.

 

Regarding your other example, I believe that's because we Americans prefer the term "college" rather than "university" when referring generically to an institution of higher education. That is, in the US we will say someone went "to college" rather than "to university". Also, more generically we Americans say someone went "to school".

[MarkBearSF]

In my experience prepositions are frequently the most idiomatic and problem-prone for non-native speakers. I should add regional differences as well. (As seen in the East-coast "standing on line" variation to the more common "in line")

 

- Mark

[john watson]

Hi Mark- interesting question. Which leads into my question..In UK , they say; "Joe went to Hospital" or "Joe went to University ". As American, we always add 'the' ..except when discussing church.. It is "Joe went to Church" ..not "Joe went to the church" .

btw- I believe we were on same crossing as you @ April 2017 westbound...maybe met a FOD?

Cheers !

Mark

 

If one said "Joe went to the hospital" or "Joe went to the university" it would mean he or she travelled to the building whereas "Joe went to University" or "Joe went to hospital" would imply that Joe went to the establishment to become involved in its activities. The suggestion that Americans say "Joe went to Church" would be consistent with this as they would presumably only go there to participate in church activities. In time American churches will assume historical and architectural interest and people will go and see the church, remember that the church can also be the collective term for some or all the people involved in it.

 

It is also different when a building or establishment has a name. You would say I went to Buckingham Palace. You might say I went to the Palace but if you were royal you would say I went to the house.

 

Regards John

Edited April 2, 2018 by john watson