Skip to main content

grammaticality - "Both the first and the last [plural]" vs. "both the first and the last [singular]"



There is a recorded announcement I hear several times a day on the trains I catch to and from work. Here is part of the announcement:



This train contains quiet carriages. Both the first and the last carriages are quiet carriages.



To me, this always sounds wrong. It feels like it should be



This train contains quiet carriages. Both the first and the last carriage are quiet carriages.



This feels more apt, since each of the carriages being mentioned are singular. You would say for instance



First and second place both get a medal



rather than places. Once you go to three or more things, then it is pluralised



The first three places get medals.



Is this all correct? It's been bugging me for a while.



Answer



I believe that the announcement - while it could certainly be rephrased to be more pleasing - is grammatically correct. Try this: leave out "the first and the last", leaving "both carriages are quiet carriages". Adding "the first and the last" does not change the sense or the structure; it merely specifies which the carriages are meant by "both".


Your second example:



First and second place both get a medal



is not correct. If you wish to keep "both", then perhaps you could say



The runners in first and second place both get medals



otherwise, it should be



First and second place each get a medal.



Both implies a plural; each is singular.


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