Skip to main content

nouns - Debris "is" or "are" called toxins



"Debris are called toxins."


In this sentence, should I use "is" or "are"? I understand "debris" is an uncountable noun, so normally I would use "is". But I am referring to different kinds of debris. Toxins are referring to a collection of debris. So is "are" the correct way?


Or should I reformat this sentence?



Answer



I have only heard "debris is/was" and if there are many, use "pieces/piles of debris are/were".


From ncsu.edu (styling mine)



Debris doesn't have a grammatical plural in English. If you want to talk about a lot of debris—or if you want to pick it up—you have to gather it into plural piles.


You may be wondering how a grammarian can tell that debris is singular instead of plural. There are two clear signs:


First, debris always takes a singular verb: "Debris is knee deep in the backyard."
Second, we always refer to it by a singular pronoun: "The debris is knee deep. I don't know what to do with it."


Debris is not the only noun in English without a plural. Collective nouns that define a set of inanimate objects (luggage, dinnerware) are also regularly singular, as are nouns that refer to noncountable masses of substances (bacon, lox).


As Hurricane Fran has taught us, however, debris would be easier to pluralize than to carry to the curb.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more