Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
There were you vs there was you
1,640 views
Skip to first unread message
Tom P
Jun 11, 2012, 7:13:18 AM6/11/12
to
A German friend asked me which is correct in the following snippet of verse-
A:
Then one day, there was you,
a good friend to depend on.
B:
Then one day, there were you,
a good friend to depend on.
or alternatively C:
Then one day, there you were,
a good friend to depend on.
Intuitively I would say A and C are correct and B is wrong, but why?
A:
Then one day, there was you,
a good friend to depend on.
B:
Then one day, there were you,
a good friend to depend on.
or alternatively C:
Then one day, there you were,
a good friend to depend on.
Intuitively I would say A and C are correct and B is wrong, but why?
GordonD
Jun 11, 2012, 8:33:55 AM6/11/12
to
"Tom P" <wero...@freent.dd> wrote in message
news:a3m26f...@mid.individual.net...
There's a song from the film and play "The Music Man" called "Till There Was
You". Aside from that, I find the first example slightly awkward - I'd say
the third example is the best. The second one feels wrong but I can't
explain why.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland
"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."
news:a3m26f...@mid.individual.net...
You". Aside from that, I find the first example slightly awkward - I'd say
the third example is the best. The second one feels wrong but I can't
explain why.
--
Gordon Davie
Edinburgh, Scotland
"Slipped the surly bonds of Earth...to touch the face of God."
Don Phillipson
Jun 11, 2012, 8:26:52 AM6/11/12
to
"Tom P" <wero...@freent.dd> wrote in message
news:a3m26f...@mid.individual.net...
news:a3m26f...@mid.individual.net...
but the language rules changed in the 18th century to standardize
conjugation of the (irregular) verb TO BE including
was = singular number
were = plural number
or subjunctive mood if singular
making item A unacceptable nowadays.
However it is generally accepted that verse may plead immunity
from several of the standard rules for good writing. (Most verse
aims to be memorable: and breach of a standard rule is one
simple path to memorability.) So Case C is the most idiomatic
and (thus) the least poetic.
--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
Tom P
Jun 11, 2012, 9:10:59 AM6/11/12
to
On 06/11/2012 02:33 PM, GordonD wrote:
> "Tom P" <wero...@freent.dd> wrote in message
> news:a3m26f...@mid.individual.net...
>> A German friend asked me which is correct in the following snippet of
>> verse-
>>
>> A:
>> Then one day, there was you,
>> a good friend to depend on.
>>
>> B:
>> Then one day, there were you,
>> a good friend to depend on.
>>
>> or alternatively C:
>> Then one day, there you were,
>> a good friend to depend on.
>>
>> Intuitively I would say A and C are correct and B is wrong, but why?
>
>
> There's a song from the film and play "The Music Man" called "Till There
> Was You". Aside from that, I find the first example slightly awkward -
> I'd say the third example is the best. The second one feels wrong but I
> can't explain why.
I think a version D would be even clearer -
> "Tom P" <wero...@freent.dd> wrote in message
> news:a3m26f...@mid.individual.net...
>> A German friend asked me which is correct in the following snippet of
>> verse-
>>
>> A:
>> Then one day, there was you,
>> a good friend to depend on.
>>
>> B:
>> Then one day, there were you,
>> a good friend to depend on.
>>
>> or alternatively C:
>> Then one day, there you were,
>> a good friend to depend on.
>>
>> Intuitively I would say A and C are correct and B is wrong, but why?
>
>
> There's a song from the film and play "The Music Man" called "Till There
> Was You". Aside from that, I find the first example slightly awkward -
> I'd say the third example is the best. The second one feels wrong but I
> can't explain why.
Then one day, you were there,
a good friend to depend on.
Obviously the version A is using "there was" as an impersonal
construction, whereas in B, C and D "there" is an adverb of place -
which explains why B is wrong - word order.
Tom P
Jun 11, 2012, 5:57:42 PM6/11/12
to
Even hits for "then there were us".
Eric Walker
Jun 12, 2012, 9:26:41 PM6/12/12
to
appearing farther down-sentence (that is, an "expletive"), or a simple
word meaning "in that place".
No one (one hopes) would write "In that place were Alice." Likewise,
then, one would not write "In that place were you." The wrong form only
occurs if the writer is mistakenly assuming that the sentence is merely a
rearrangement of "You were in that place," which it is not. That is why
sentence B is erroneous and Sentence A proper.
Consider also, as a parallel, "Then one day, there was a girl, you, [who
was] a good friend to depend on." In that, "you" is appositive to "a
girl", meaning the two could be exchanged or either dropped with no
change in sense; but you cannot write "there were a girl".
Sentence C actually is, however, a different statement, to the effect
"You were in that place."
--
Cordially,
Eric Walker
Tom P
Jun 14, 2012, 4:17:07 AM6/14/12
to
correct. The reason why "there were you" could be considered to be
acceptable but "there were a girl" is definitely wrong is that in B,
"were" agrees with "you", but in statements like "in that place were
Alice" or "there were a girl", "were" does not agree with anything.
I beg to disagree with another point - in B the phrase "there were
you" could be a rearrangement of "there you were". As this is a piece of
verse, the writer may have chosen this word order for aesthetic reasons.
> Sentence C actually is, however, a different statement, to the effect
> "You were in that place."
>
Then one day, there were you,
good friends to depend on.
Since "friends" is now plural, "were" has to be correct which ever way
you parse it.
Tom P
Jun 14, 2012, 4:29:27 AM6/14/12
to
grammar crumbles. Try some colloquial English -
Q: How many people were down the pub last night?
A: Well, there was me and a few of my mates.
Q: Was Andy there?
A: No, he wasn't, it was just us lot.
Bill McCray
Jun 14, 2012, 8:29:55 AM6/14/12
to
> Since "friends" is now plural, "were" has to be correct which ever way
> you parse it.
Don Phillipson
Jun 14, 2012, 1:23:25 PM6/14/12
to
"Tom P" <wero...@freent.dd> wrote in message
news:a3tln7...@mid.individual.net...
> The more I think about different examples, the more the edifice of grammar
> crumbles. Try some colloquial English -
>
> Q: How many people were down the pub last night?
> A: Well, there was me and a few of my mates.
> Q: Was Andy there?
> A: No, he wasn't, it was just us lot.
have suggested good spoken English and good written
English are different in ways clear enough to support
examination and study. Only in the late 20th century
did this difference begin to fade from public recognition
(e.g. by politicians, news editors, professional writers)
-- more probably because of indifference rather than
disagreement with the earlier guidelines for good written
English.
Eric Walker
Jun 14, 2012, 8:02:31 PM6/14/12
to
On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 10:17:07 +0200, Tom P wrote:
[...]
> I agree with your statement, but think that your argument is not
> correct. The reason why "there were you" could be considered to be
> acceptable but "there were a girl" is definitely wrong is that in B,
> "were" agrees with "you", but in statements like "in that place were
> Alice" or "there were a girl", "were" does not agree with anything.
I am unclear how, in that particular casting, "were" and "you" can be
said to "agree". If "you" were the subject, then the verb would have to
be "were", as in the original Sentence C; but that is not the structure
of Sentence B. "You" has the annoying habit of being numerically
ambivalent (hence constructions such as "youse" or "y'all"), but, when
"you" is used with copulative verbs as the predicate complement, the
number of the linking verb is determined by the perceived number of the
complement when that is a noun or pronoun:
I looked out the window, and there was James.
I looked out the window, and there were the Jones brothers.
> I beg to disagree with another point - in B the phrase "there were
> you" could be a rearrangement of "there you were". As this is a piece of
> verse, the writer may have chosen this word order for aesthetic reasons.
And I in turn disagree: you cannot arbitrarily rearrange words and assume
that nothing else changes in the clause: "The man bit the dog" and "The
dog bit the man" are very different; to preserve meaning, the second has
to be recast as "The dog was bitten by the man." (Making it news.)
>> Sentence C actually is, however, a different statement, to the effect
>> "You were in that place."
>
> We could consider analyzing yet another hypothetical case - D: Then one
> day, there were you, good friends to depend on.
>
> Since "friends" is now plural, "were" has to be correct which ever way
> you parse it.
Profoundly infelicitous, but probably true. That sort of ugly thing is
why people have been striving for centuries to do something about the
number of "you", or provide an alternative. Normally, one would provide
an extra word, something like "Then one day, there were you folks, good
friends to depend on." Or "people" or some such.
--
Cordially,
Eric Walker
[...]
> I agree with your statement, but think that your argument is not
> correct. The reason why "there were you" could be considered to be
> acceptable but "there were a girl" is definitely wrong is that in B,
> "were" agrees with "you", but in statements like "in that place were
> Alice" or "there were a girl", "were" does not agree with anything.
said to "agree". If "you" were the subject, then the verb would have to
be "were", as in the original Sentence C; but that is not the structure
of Sentence B. "You" has the annoying habit of being numerically
ambivalent (hence constructions such as "youse" or "y'all"), but, when
"you" is used with copulative verbs as the predicate complement, the
number of the linking verb is determined by the perceived number of the
complement when that is a noun or pronoun:
I looked out the window, and there was James.
I looked out the window, and there were the Jones brothers.
> I beg to disagree with another point - in B the phrase "there were
> you" could be a rearrangement of "there you were". As this is a piece of
> verse, the writer may have chosen this word order for aesthetic reasons.
that nothing else changes in the clause: "The man bit the dog" and "The
dog bit the man" are very different; to preserve meaning, the second has
to be recast as "The dog was bitten by the man." (Making it news.)
>> Sentence C actually is, however, a different statement, to the effect
>> "You were in that place."
>
> We could consider analyzing yet another hypothetical case - D: Then one
> day, there were you, good friends to depend on.
>
> Since "friends" is now plural, "were" has to be correct which ever way
> you parse it.
why people have been striving for centuries to do something about the
number of "you", or provide an alternative. Normally, one would provide
an extra word, something like "Then one day, there were you folks, good
friends to depend on." Or "people" or some such.
--
Cordially,
Eric Walker
Joel Olson
Jul 4, 2012, 1:48:14 PM7/4/12
to
"Tom P" <wero...@freent.dd> wrote in message
news:a3m26f...@mid.individual.net...
and the rest should read "good friends to depend on."
0 new messages