Getting into the language rules of singular and plural nouns has never been an easy feat, and it can make learning the language much harder for anyone interested. There doesn’t seem to be one strict set of rules. Sometimes you add an “s” to the end of a word; other times, you have to change the word completely. Then there’s the final case, where the word stays the same, both singular and plural. It’s a nightmare.
The correct version is “people are” if you’re referring to the plural noun of “people.” You’ll almost always refer to “people” as a plural noun, so “people are” is the usual way to say it. However, there is sometimes a case where saying “people” is used in a singular sense. In these cases, “people are” is still the correct way to say the phrase. “People is” is incorrect.
People As The Plural Of “Person”
The relationship between “people” and “person” is one of those tricky plural rules we talked about. Whereas sometimes you can add an “s” to the end of a word, like “frog” and “frogs,” sometimes you have to change the way the word sounds completely. The singular noun “person” becomes “people” when there are multiple people present. If it sounds confusing, that’s generally because it is.
There aren’t really any rules or tips that we can give you that might help you understand the pluralization of “person” better. We can only say that you need to practice speaking in the singular noun “person” and the plural noun “people” until it’s embedded into your brain!
People As A Singular Noun
So, in what sense can “people” be a singular noun? Since we’ve already explained the “people” is a plural word, it surely can’t be singular, too. Well, that’s where you’re wrong, and the English language strikes again with yet another head-scratcher! When we use “people” as a singular noun, we often refer to all the people inside a civilization or a tribe. That includes all the men, women, children, and everything in between.
- They are a great people.
If you’re talking about all the people in a tribe or nation being “great,” then the sentence above makes complete grammatical sense. However, it’s not common to come across “people” as a singular noun. In fact, you’ll probably never need to use it yourself, so if you don’t fully understand it, don’t worry too much!
Examples Of How To Use People Are
Now that we’ve covered both the singular and plural form, it’s time to take us back to when we’re using the more common plural. When we use a plural, the word “are” typically has to follow for the rest of the clause to make sense. That’s why “people are” is the only acceptable way to say this phrase. Therefore, any use of “is” is incorrect and won’t be effective if you’re trying to convey a solid grasp of the English language.
- These people are driving me crazy.
- The people are stronger than they look.
- Japanese people are really good at that event.
- Friendly people are the best people to be around.
- People are hopeless when left to their own devices.
As you can see, in each of these cases, “people” is used in the plural form. There is no way that saying “people is” would make sense in any of these sentences, which is why we can’t use it.
Examples Of How To Use People Is
As we’ve mentioned throughout this article, saying “people is” is a grammatically incorrect version of “people are.” It’s just a common mixup between the plural form “people,” and the singular verb “is.” If you’ve found yourself using “people is” in any context, changing the “is” to an “are” will make it correct.
Which Other Words Are Both A Plural Noun And A Singular Noun?
There are plenty of other English words that follow a similar trend as “people” do. You’re able to refer to them in both the singular and plural for different reasons. If you refer to them in the singular form, they are followed by “is.” If you refer to them in plural form, they are followed by “are.” Most of the time, you’ll be talking about groups of collectives that can be both singular and plural.
Some examples include the United States, where the country is a collection of fifty states. You can refer to it in the singular sense, where the United States is a country:
- The United States is my home.
Or in the plural sense, where you’re referring to the states themselves:
- The United States are all governed differently.
The same can be said for other collectives, like band names:
- The Bee Gees is my favorite band.
- The Bee Gees are all good friends.
How To Remember If I Should Use People Is Or Are
Luckily, the tip for remembering this one is fairly easy. Since saying “people is” is completely incorrect and you’ll never need to use the singular form of “people” followed by the word “is,” you can disregard it. Even if you do happen to come across the singular form of “people” sometimes, you’ll notice that it’s never followed by “is.” It’s instead said like “a great people” or “a good people.”
So, our tip to you is simple. Erase “people is” from your memory. It’ll never work for you. “People” is a plural noun, even if you’re referring to a country group (“American people”). You’ll only ever need to use “people are.”
Quiz: Have You Mastered People Are Or Is?
Let’s finish up with a quick quiz to see what you’ve learned. This one should be a breeze if you’ve been paying attention!
- These (A. people are / B. people is) not my friends.
- When (A. people are / B. people is) unkind, I ignore them.
- British (A. people are / B. people is) fun.
- French (A. people are / B. people is) really proud of their heritage.
- Mean (A. people are / B. people is) not worth your time.
Quiz Answers
- A
- A
- A
- A
- A
Martin holds a Master’s degree in Finance and International Business. He has six years of experience in professional communication with clients, executives, and colleagues. Furthermore, he has teaching experience from Aarhus University. Martin has been featured as an expert in communication and teaching on Forbes and Shopify. Read more about Martin here.
-
EM
-
Articles
-
Usage
-
Commonly confused
Summary
None may be either singular or plural, depending on whether you mean “not one” or “not any.” To negate a reference for individual people or things, use a singular verb; for an entire group, use a plural verb.
Examples
- Singular: None of them is ready.
to refer to each of them
Plural: None of them are ready.
to refer to all of them
- Singular: None of us has the answer.
to emphasize that not one of them has the answer
Plural: None of us have the answer.
to emphasize that the entire group doesn’t have the answer
- Singular: This action requires a network key; none is available.
not a single one available
Plural: We need four specialists. None are available.
not any available
When none means “no part of,” it is singular.
Example
- None of the food is/
areready.
None: Singular or plural?
The pronoun none may be either singular or plural, depending on the meaning and emphasis you wish to convey. It can mean “not one,” “not any,” or “no part of.”
Examples
- Singular: None of us is interested in watching this movie.
“not one” of us
- Plural: None of the scientists know what happened.
“not any” of the group
- Singular: None of the report is written.
“no part of” the report
- Singular: None is above the law.
“no one”
- Plural: I just checked the status of these orders. None have been shipped yet.
“not any”
It is sometimes thought that the word none, because it means “no one,” must be treated as singular. But as we have seen, none does not just mean “no one,” but also “not any.” In this second meaning, it can be used with plural verbs like are and have.
None as singular
When none means “not one,” “no one,” or “no person,” it takes singular verbs like is and has.
Examples
- None of us is perfect.
no one among us
- None of the answers is correct.
not one of the answers
- You need to speak with one of our specialists. Unfortunately, none is available until May.
not a single one
- None of them has the answer.
- None of the solutions we offered works.
- None of these shirts fits me.
- None of my friends is here.
None can also be used with singular nouns to mean “no part of.”
Examples
- None of my work is finished.
no part of my work
- None of what he says is true.
no part of what he says
- None of the packing is done.
None as plural
None is used with plural verbs like are and have when it means “not any.” It then conveys a sense of the plural and refers to the group as a whole.
Examples
- None of the actors are ready for the performance.
not any of the actors
- I put all my old books up for auction: none have sold.
- None of us have our lines.
Note
Some people believe that the only meaning of none is “no one” and that the word cannot be used with plural verbs. This understanding is incorrect. In fact, when followed by a plural noun, none is often used with a plural verb (None of us are ready).
Differences in meaning
When none is followed by a plural form (e.g., none of the students, none of us, none of them), plural verbs like are and have are the more natural choice. Use a plural verb to mark plurality and refer to more than one person.
Examples
- None of us are at work yet.
“Not any” of us, referring to the entire team. We could also say, “None of us
is
at work.” This would emphasize that “no single person” is at work yet.
- None of her stories are true.
- None of them know how to use this application.
But when you want to emphasize the individuals in the group, use singular verbs like is and has.
Examples
- None of us is wrong.
nobody among us
- None of the hotels is open.
not one of the hotels
- None of them knows how to use this application.
no one knows
Note
Using a singular verb like is when none is followed by a plural form (none of the students is . . .) can sound overly formal in everyday speech, where the plural verb (none of the students are . . .) is more common.
To mean “no part of,” always use the singular verb.
Examples
- None of this is/
arereal. - None of the ceiling is/
arepainted yet, but the walls are done.
Examples from literature
Here are some examples from literature of none used with singular and plural verbs. Note how none can mean “not one” or “not any,” depending on context.
Examples
- Plural:
Some books are undeservedly forgotten; none are undeservedly remembered.
— W.H. Auden, “Reading,” The Dyer’s Hand and Other Essays (1962)
- Plural:
None of our beliefs are quite true; all have at least a penumbra of vagueness and error.
- Plural:
Where’s your common sense? None of those books agree with each other.
- Singular:
If one State may secede, so may another; and when all shall have seceded none is left to pay the debts.
- Singular:
Later he told me other versions of it as though trying them for use in a novel, but none was as sad as this first one . . .
- Singular:
None of us lives in the light . . .
— John Updike, In The Beauty of The Lilies (1996)
- Singular:
None of us is exempt from sin.
-
#1
Which one is grammatically correct?
1. There is such a wide variety of clubs to join and fields to read about.
2. There are such a wide variety of clubs to join and fields to read about.
Is the subject of this sentence «variety»?
If two sentences above are both correct, then which one is more natural?
I wonder the difference between «a number of,» «a lot of» and «a variety of.» (I think they are very similar..^^)
-
#2
Welcome to the forum, neung. Forum rules require that you provide input into your question and that you ask just one question per thread.
Please tell us which question you would like to discuss and what you think the answer might be and why.
-
#3
Oh, thank you for informing me of the forum rule.
I basically wonder which senctence is grammatically correct.
Someone said two of them are correct, but the first one (with singular verb) is more natural.
He said «a variety» modified with adjective «wide» is the subject of this sentece.
I’m very confused because I think the phrase «a variety of» is similar to «a lot of» or «a number of,» so plural verb are more natural in this case.
-
#5
We have a lot of rules that you may wish to take a look at.
The answer lies in the first part of the sentence… «There is such a wide variety…» The use of «wide» doesn’t mean that there is more than one variety.
The very nature and meaning of the word «variety» accomodates the adjective «wide». Think of the meaning of «variety» as «a number of different types of things»
The fact is that «variety» is being used singularly in your sentence and, therefore, the correct word is «is».
-
#6
Thank you for answering me, Dimcl and Thomas Tompion.
I thought clubs to join and fields to read about are the subject of the sentence
and «a wide variety of» modifies them. So I thought the subject is plural and therefore the verb should be plural.
If «a wide variety» is the subject of this sentence, then the verb should be singular.
However, I’m still a little confused. Is «a variety of» the similar expression like «a lot of/a number of» and so on, or not??? They have similar form, so they make me think like that.
-
#7
I think to your question is yes, Neung: a variety is a singular collective noun, like a lot of and a number of.
I think that the plural force of what follows these collective nouns makes most BE speakers say:
There are a number of people not there is a number of people
There are a lot of people not there is a lot of people
There is a variety of choice but there are a variety of choices.
For me the plural force of what follows these collective nouns makes it hard for the ear to justify a there is.
Add to this the fact that many people are careless with there is/are, partly because there’re, the common contraction for there are, is a bit hard to say and clumsy on the ear, so people say horrors like there’s lots of things to see at …, and you have a recipe for confusion.
-
#8
Personally, while I accept it’s incorrect, I don’t find there’s lots of things to see… particularly grating in spoken English. As well as the difficulty in saying ‘there’re’ I think it’s also partially because the verb’s at the beginning of the sentence before the subject, which is contrary to normal English sentence structure, so people’s brains don’t automatically conjugate it to match the anticipated noun (you might not even know exactly what you’re going to say as well). That’s just my theory though.
-
#9
there are lots of flowers.
-
#10
Language changes with time. When I was in school, I learned «a lot is…» and «lots are…» It was simple to explain. «Lot» is the subject of the sentence and a plural noun is the object of a preposition, thus part of a prepositional phrase and could not influence the number for subject-verb agreement.
So I checked around a bit and found the American Heritage Book of English Usage endorses considering «A lot of» to be a sort of modifier of the subject:
http://www.bartleby.com/64/C003/0200.html
I’m wrong; the world is right.
Albert53
-
#11
Thank you for replying me, Thomas Tompion, Gwan, ashamaurya, Albert53. (and useful informtion^^)
Then, «a variety of» is a sort of a modifier like «a lot of» or «a deal of,» according to the American Heritage Book of English Usage, right?
I think it’s a little controversial thing
-
#12
Yes, «a variety of» is like «a number of»:
There are a number of clubs in this area.
There are a variety of clubs in this area.
There are a wide variety of clubs in this area.But with certain modifiers the number or variety becomes the real subject and is singular:
There is such a large number of clubs in this area that one cannot attend all the meetings.
The number of clubs in this area is astonishingly large.
There is quite a variety of clubs in this area.
There is such a wide variety of clubs in this area that everyone’s taste can be accommodated.
By the way, «a deal of» doesn’t work without something like «great» or «good» between «a» and «deal».
-
#13
Two points in reaction to Forero’s interesting post:
1. I agree with what he says about ‘a deal of’, in modern use, but am aware that ‘a deal of’, without a modifying adjective, was common until quite recently in the language — examples from literature suggest in both AE and BE. Here are a few, of many I could produce:
Bleak House by Charles Dickens: Chapter 2: … oversleeping Rip Van Winkles, who have played at strange games through a deal of thundery weather;
Military Memoirs of Capt. George Carleton by Daniel Defoe: Chapter 7: Notwithstanding all which the Earl persever’d; and after a deal of Labour, first got the Penalty suspended;
Life on the Mississippi by Mark Twain: Chapter 7: A deal of this ‘looking at the river’ was done by poor fellows who seldom
Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare: Act 2. Scene III: Jesu Maria, what a deal of brine. Hath wash’d thy sallow cheeks for Rosaline! How much salt water thrown away in waste,
2. The point at which the switch from there are to there is takes place occurs earlier for me than for him. He would say:
There are a number of clubs in this area.
There are a variety of clubs in this area.
There are a wide variety of clubs in this area.
For me it would have to be:
There are a number of clubs in this area.
There are a variety of clubs in this area.
There is a wide variety of clubs in this area.
Lesson Thirty-one
In the last lesson, you learned about singular nouns and verbs. In this lesson, you will learn to identify plural nouns and verbs.
Plural Verbs
The most important thing to remember about plural verbs is that they don’t end in an “s.” The plural verb matches the plural subject, which is a noun, but don’t add an “s” to the verb. Look at these examples:
-
The books belong on the shelf. (belong = plural verb)
-
When do the students start school? (do = plural helping verb)
-
What do they need for class? (do = plural helping verb)
In the first sentence, “belong” matches the subject, “books.” There is no “s” at the end of “belong,” but it’s a plural verb. Both “belong” and “books” are plural. In the next two sentences, the helping verb “do” is also plural, while the main verbs, “start” and “need” remain in the simple form.
Plural Helping Verbs
When making a question or making a verb negative, you use a plural helping verb: Here are some examples of plural helping verbs: do, are, have.
Plural Nouns
Plural nouns are easier to identify than the plural verbs. Plural nouns have an “s” at the end of the word, or there is some other way of forming the plural. In some cases, it’s hard to identify the plural noun because it has an irregular form.
Here are some examples of regular nouns in the plural form:
-
The desks all have computers . (subject: desks)
-
Apples are good for you. (subject: Apples)
-
The tags show the wrong prices. (subject: tags)
Here are some examples of irregular nouns in the plural form:
-
Several referenda are on the ballot. (subject: referenda)
-
The deer like to eat the bark on this tree. (subject: deer)
-
Children learn things in school. (subject: children)
Fortunately, there aren’t that many nouns that take an irregular, plural form. Most are for certain animals such as deer, mice, geese, and fish–among others. Some words from Latin are plural: bacteria, criteria, and fungi are a few examples. Then there are the common plural forms for men, women, and children.
Now try this exercise. Find and correct the errors in the following sentences and questions. The error will be the subject or the verb. Make sure they remain plural.
1. Orange are my favorite fruit.
2. The fishes is in the water.
3. Fruit from around the world are available at that store.
4. The mens need to get their uniforms cleaned.
5. The stimulus have an interesting affect on the nervous system.
How well did you do? The answers are below:
1. Oranges are my favorite fruit.
2. The fish are in the water.
3. Fruits from around the world are available at that store. (Sometimes it’s okay to use a noncount noun in the form of a count noun. The word “fruit” is an example of this.)
4. The men need to get their uniforms cleaned.
5. The stimuli have an interesting affect on the nervous system.
Next: Blue Level Review
or
The Red Level
Disclaimer: I’m not a native English speaker; I’m a native French speaker and English to French translator. Therefore, I had to study the grammar of both languages a bit more than if I had a different occupation. What follows is a strictly personal take on the question.
Summary
The answer below considers the question from a grammar and style point of view. More specifically, the gist of my contribution here is that a correct usage of commas reveals the answer to the question without difficulty.
I believe that commas are missing in the OP’s sentence. When removed, commas have the peculiarity to cause ambiguity, which then creates confusion, which in turn leads to the false impression that otherwise simple questions are complex or difficult questions. The question wouldn’t have arisen had commas been placed correctly in the first place.
Let’s put commas where I (and I’m by no means a grammar authority) think they should have been put:
Why drug abuse in general, and cannabis consumption in particular, is/are dangerous for your health.
“is” would be my answer. The details explain why.
Details
The various roles of commas
I remember reading somewhere what an English writer said about commas: they shouldn’t be peppered all over the place. Although that may be fine and even sometimes true, commas have (or should I say had) a role that modern English tends to forget. First, they denote a pause when the sentence is read out loud (“when in doubt, read it out loud” would be my advice). Second, they surround and delimit secondary clauses. Third, they may separate the main clause from a subsequent secondary clause. Fourth, a single comma may separate independent clauses in the same sentence. I can’t think off the top of my head of other roles/functions with respect to sentences.
[1] To me, and this is only personal experience from being a native French speaker, the commas also separate the main clause of the sentence from the rest, which adds context and superfluous but useful content.
Let’s rewrite my sentence [1] above and keep only the main clause. We get:
The commas also separate the main clause of the sentence from the rest.
If you were to look for the main clause of the sentence in the question, you would end up with:
Why drug abuse in general is/are dangerous for your health.
Does anyone really think that “are” would be a valid option here?
A standard construct
Moreover, «in general» and «in particular» often go hand in hand. (It’s what I would call a standard construct; the correct English wording is probably different.) And in that case, «and» is a conjunction often used in that construct but this does not mean that the subject of the sentence is a plural subject. Actually, I’d wager that “and […] in particular” is a parenthetical element of the sentence (see the usage note of and at dictionary.com). Try removing and in the in general, and […] in particular construct and see how it feels weird:
The nature of change in general, of motion in particular, is not a novel issue.
When trimmed to the main clause, the sentence retains its “main” meaning:
The nature of change in general is not a novel issue.
Add the “superfluous but useful” (i.e. the parenthetical element) in there and you get the original sentence:
The nature of change in general, and of motion in particular, is not a novel issue.
Why would to be suddenly change forms then?
Commas matter
Last point, with respect to example sentences in another answer: those tiny punctuation signs (commas) may not seem like much but they matter. They usually come in pairs, except when placed at the beginning of a sentence after a time phrase, a purpose phrase or phrases of similar grammatical function, and after a main clause. They don’t come in one single occurrence like in:
Lack of exercise, and eating fatty foods are bad for your health.
In my eyes, and according to the English grammar that I learnt at school, that’s not correct. You either have two commas or you have no commas at all:
Lack of exercise, and eating fatty foods, are bad for your health.
Lack of exercise and eating fatty foods are bad for your health.
In the first case (two commas), you are stating that fatty foods are an instance or consequence of «lack of exercise». Are they?
In the second case (no commas), you are explicitly stating that the subject is plural. are is then the required form of to be.
I’ve learnt that there shouldn’t be a comma between the subject and the verb. Does the following feel right?
Joe, went to a party last night.
A plural subject shouldn’t be separated by a comma either except when an enumeration of more than two elements is involved:
Joe, and Lucy went to a party last night.
But these are valid because of the enumeration:
Joe, Martin and Lucy went to a party last night.
Joe, Martin, and Lucy went to a party last night.
Each time I read sentences such as the one below, I think of that English writer about commas not being to be peppered all over the place (like they are in Latin languages such as French) and of the current tendency of modern English to forgo commas completely:
Life in general and human life in particular is a phenomenon whose existence is restricted to an infinitesimally small part of the universe known to us.
Because that feels so much more right in speech, I would always add two commas in there and write:
Life in general, and human life in particular, is a phenomenon whose existence is restricted to an infinitesimally small part of the universe known to us.
To sum up, my answer is “is” because those tiny things called commas matter. Unfortunately, they seem (personal opinion again) to be disappearing from current usage, both in writing and in speech.