Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but
if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.

To what degree do Spelling and Grammar matter? ;-)

Mike

---------------------------------------------------------------
www.rneba.org.uk




"David Hill" wrote in message ...

Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but
if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.

On 16/10/13 11:30, David Hill wrote:
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.

IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit,
therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds"
more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000
worth of notes" then "were" would be correct.

GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate
and understand each other Beyond that it is a question of
style and elegance.

And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement.

"Tom Gardner" wrote in message
...
On 16/10/13 11:30, David Hill wrote:
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but
if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.

IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit,
therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds"
more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000
worth of notes" then "were" would be correct.

GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate
and understand each other Beyond that it is a question of
style and elegance.

And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement.

You don't need to. It is self-evident.

Steve

On 16/10/2013 11:30, David Hill wrote:
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but
if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.



If you read it as the full sentence it *should* be (instead of
contracting the sentence by beginning with the modern and inelegant
'around'), it would read:
"A sum of around £10,000 *was* stolen from a house".

That's how I was always taught to read it, anyway. The sum is singular.
Only one sum of money was stolen. You wouldn't think twice if it was
10 pence (that) was stolen ... It is only because we say "ten thousand
poundS that we (wrongly read it as a plural).

--
Spider.
On high ground in SE London
gardening on heavy clay

"shazzbat" wrote


"Tom Gardner"wrote
David Hill wrote:
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but
if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.

IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit,
therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds"
more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000
worth of notes" then "were" would be correct.

GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate
and understand each other Beyond that it is a question of
style and elegance.

And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement.

You don't need to. It is self-evident.

While we are on this thread when did it become "Bored of this...." instead
of "bored with this....". I've even seen it written in adverts lately.

Now for a discussion, should it be "Can I help you" or "May I help you" when
you answer the phone etc? :-)
--
Regards. Bob Hobden.
Posted to this Newsgroup from the W of London, UK

On 16/10/2013 12:29, Bob Hobden wrote:
"shazzbat" wrote


"Tom Gardner"wrote
David Hill wrote:
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen
but if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.

IMNSHO the sentence is referring to a single unit,
therefore "was" is correct. Besides, it "sounds"
more elegant. If, OTOH, you had written "£10,000
worth of notes" then "were" would be correct.

GrammAr and spulling are they're to help people communicate
and understand each other Beyond that it is a question of
style and elegance.

And no, I'm not prepared to defend that statement.

You don't need to. It is self-evident.

While we are on this thread when did it become "Bored of this...."
instead of "bored with this....". I've even seen it written in adverts
lately.

Now for a discussion, should it be "Can I help you" or "May I help you"
when you answer the phone etc? :-)

Can I help you is asking the question "Am I able to help you"
whilst
May I help you is asking "Do you wish me to help you"

My present bug bear is "For Free"
Free means "for nothing" so for for nothing makes no sense.

David Hill wrote in news:bc785rF4rhaU1
@mid.individual.net:

Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but
if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.


Yes thats a poser. I think you are right.
I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen.
Thats not the case, £10,000 WAS stolen.

12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the theives could put IT on their
chips.
A case of 12 bottles of vinegar WAS stolen so the theives could put THEM on
their chips. If it was IT, and not THEM, surely the theives would be
putting the case, not the bottle onto their chips.
WAS it stolen, or WERE they stolen, was it THEM (or those) or IT that was
stolen?

Even more confusing. For me at least. That is my stumbling block.

Baz

On 16/10/2013 13:00, Baz wrote:
David Hill wrote in news:bc785rF4rhaU1
@mid.individual.net:

Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but
if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.


Yes thats a poser. I think you are right.
I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen.
Thats not the case, £10,000 WAS stolen.

12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the theives could put IT on their
chips.
A case of 12 bottles of vinegar WAS stolen so the theives could put THEM on
their chips. If it was IT, and not THEM, surely the theives would be
putting the case, not the bottle onto their chips.
WAS it stolen, or WERE they stolen, was it THEM (or those) or IT that was
stolen?

Even more confusing. For me at least. That is my stumbling block.

Baz

None of those Baz, they were just put in the wrong part of the store room.
But I'd have said "A case of 12 bottles of vinegar was stolen so that
the thieves could USE it on their chips".

"I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen."

I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen.

I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it doesn't
matter because the pound note is obsolete .

---------------------------------------------------------------
www.rneba.org.uk



"Baz" wrote in message ...

David Hill wrote in news:bc785rF4rhaU1
@mid.individual.net:

Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but
if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.


Yes thats a poser. I think you are right.
I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen.
Thats not the case, £10,000 WAS stolen.

12 bottles of vinegar were stolen so the theives could put IT on their
chips.
A case of 12 bottles of vinegar WAS stolen so the theives could put THEM on
their chips. If it was IT, and not THEM, surely the theives would be
putting the case, not the bottle onto their chips.
WAS it stolen, or WERE they stolen, was it THEM (or those) or IT that was
stolen?

Even more confusing. For me at least. That is my stumbling block.

Baz

Spider wrote in :

On 16/10/2013 11:30, David Hill wrote:
Around £10,000 were stolen from a house
Or should it be
Around £10,000 was stolen from a house.

If you regard the money as individual notes then they "were" stolen but
if you regard it as a single unit of money then it "was" stolen.
It's niggling me.



If you read it as the full sentence it *should* be (instead of
contracting the sentence by beginning with the modern and inelegant
'around'), it would read:
"A sum of around £10,000 *was* stolen from a house".

That's how I was always taught to read it, anyway. The sum is singular.
Only one sum of money was stolen. You wouldn't think twice if it was
10 pence (that) was stolen ... It is only because we say "ten thousand
poundS that we (wrongly read it as a plural).


Absolutely right.
Please see my post on vinegar and chips within this thread.

Baz

On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote:
"I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen."

I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen.

I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it
doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete .

Stop blathering
No one said £1.00 notes, you can have £10,000 in notes be they £5.00
£10.00 or what ever denomination.
But you could have a numismatists or a notaphilist whose collection had
10,000 £1.00 notes

Malcolm, the very first posting in the thread ....

To what degree do Spelling and Grammar matter? ;-)

Mike

---------------------------------------------------------------
www.rneba.org.uk



"Malcolm" wrote in message ...


In article , David Hill
writes
On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote:
"I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen."

I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen.

I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it
doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete .

Stop blathering
No one said £1.00 notes, you can have £10,000 in notes be they £5.00
£10.00 or what ever denomination.
But you could have a numismatists or a notaphilist whose collection had
10,000 £1.00 notes

In the spirit of being helpful, I fear I can't resist pointing out,
which no-one else seems to have done, that your subject line contains a
spelling error :-)

--
Malcolm

On 16/10/2013 13:52, Malcolm wrote:

In article , David Hill
writes
On 16/10/2013 13:16, 'Mike' wrote:
"I think that its 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen."

I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen.

I think that it's 10,000 one pound notes notes WERE stolen but it
doesn't matter because the pound note is obsolete .

Stop blathering
No one said £1.00 notes, you can have £10,000 in notes be they £5.00
£10.00 or what ever denomination.
But you could have a numismatists or a notaphilist whose collection
had 10,000 £1.00 notes

In the spirit of being helpful, I fear I can't resist pointing out,
which no-one else seems to have done, that your subject line contains a
spelling error :-)

Wow!
Me make a spelling mistake.
I've been doing that all my life, why change now?
I have a habit of using double letters when single are required and
single when it should be double.
I remember in school having essays back with "Good composition, must
learn to spell" nothing has changed.
David

On 16/10/2013 12:24, Spider wrote:

You wouldn't think twice if it was
10 pence (that) was stolen ... It is only because we say "ten thousand
poundS that we (wrongly read it as a plural).


Not sure about that - pence is an implicit plural, I think. Plural
(along with pennies) of penny.

Just as in times gone by you would say tuppence or two pennies, but not
one pence.

Although I agree with the rest of your reasoning and the fact that it is
'was' and not 'were'.

--
regards
andy