Grammar Moses: Is 'couple' a collective noun? Depends

Hello!

For the first 27 or so years of my journalism career, I subscribed to the notion that a "couple" - as in a married couple - is a collective noun that should take a singular verb.

The couple is getting married.

I still find it unnatural to do so, but more often than not I pair it with a plural verb.

Kim Young of Vernon Hills takes issue with this.

"Would you say, 'The audience are appreciative of the musician" or "The crowd are rowdy"?

The rule is that if a couple is acting as a unit, then it takes a singular verb.

For example: Each couple is going to chip in $50 for dinner.

However, a couple also can act individually.

The couple have ordered steak and fish for dinner.

Kim had a laundry list of points to make. Here is another good one.

"I often see on social media the word 'alot.' One word instead of two. As a grammarian noted, you don't say 'alittle,' 'abunch' or 'abanana.'"

That is a very good point, Kim. Alot is not a word.

I promised I would allot a portion of a column to the topic.

You send me

Reader Philip Pick of Arlington Heights wrote to decry the use of the "we will send you" construction that long has been a staple in advertising.

We will send you three widgets for the price of two.

"They definitely are not sending "YOU,'" Phil wrote.

The descriptivist in me feels that the example - in which "you" is an abbreviation for "to you" - is further evidence of the rapid collapse of the English language into instant messages, texts and emojis.

That was the essence of my response to Phil.

But I've softened a bit in the couple of weeks since he wrote to me (notice I didn't write simply "me.")

Those to whom you are writing or speaking know full well what you're getting at. So while Phil and I share a preference, I won't wag a finger at anyone who employs that construction.

In closing

Here is something that stopped me in my tracks this week as I was heading out to work.

The attorney representing the family of a race car driver killed when Tony Stewart's car struck him on a track in upstate New York a year ago was on the TV news discussing his wrongful death lawsuit.

He talked about how he had done a lot of digging and found many "incredible eyewitnesses."

That's not what I want to hear if I've hired him to represent me in court.

In common parlance, "incredible" might be synonymous with "awesome" or "amazing" or "totally cool," but its true meaning is "lacking credibility" or "not to be believed."

And the last thing I want to broadcast to the world is that the eyewitnesses who will make or break my case have no credibility.

If you think that I parse words to death in this column, you should see what lawyers do to them in court.

Write carefully!

• Jim Baumann is assistant vice president/managing editor of the Daily Herald. Write him at jbaumann@dailyherald.com. Put Grammar Moses in the subject line. You also can follow or friend Jim on social media at facebook.com/baumannjim.