I agree, it is grammatically incorrect and a correction would be welcome. The tone of Polycarp’s correction struck me as being insensitive to those who are not first-language English speakers.
I agree to your second sentence, Anahita. The reason for my sarcastic tone is that Power_Station has been posting in quite clean idiomatic English in quite a number of threads, so “Where did you learn English?” was not a snide remark at English-as-second-language folks but at his deciding to use the plural verb – which I suspect was intended as a subtle bit of sarcasm, not lack of fluency.
If I have misinterpreted Power_Station’s origins or fluency, or have offended any other users-of-English-as-a-second-language, I do apologize.
Polycarp, I wasn’t aware of Power_Stations posting record.
The OP was worded poorly, and was definately not clearly worded.
The topic is a debatable one, for those interested in the US Foreign policy agenda with regards to Iran. Obviously, though, as Jodi has spoken for all Americans, it’s apparently not worth the discussion, since Americans don’t ‘give a shit’ about Iran.
maybe that’s the reason - that you are pissed at them!
let’s not turn this into a debate about grammar and languages, but I must tell that learning languages was never my strong side in school. Grammar is even a weaker side.
I have learned most of the english on my own and my English skills will probably never be as good as those who have English as their first language.
I said:
To which ANAHITA replies:
I apologize if I have offended you. Nevertheless, I stand by my statement. The average American doesn’t care anything about Iran, good or bad, because Iran does not impact the average American’s life in the slightest. To me, it’s like asking what the average American thinks about Angola. The truth is: He or she doesn’t. At all. That is not to say that Iran (or Angola) is intrinsically beneath notice or somehow unimportant, but rather that the average American doesn’t give the nation any thought, because they have no reason to.
I would say the average American gives Iran about the same amount of thought that he or she gave Afghanistan pre-September 11th. I don’t think this reflects American arrogance so much as it reflects the fundamental self-centeredness of any individual (of any country) to only spend time considering things that matter to him or her. Take that as an insult if you must, but there it is.
But once you climb down off that high horse (if you do), you might note the difference between someone stating her personal take on the feelings of “the average American” and someone asserting that she speaks for all Americans. Those are not the same things, and I am guilty of only the former.
If you are supprised that the U. S. government is still pissed at Iran, just look at Cuba now that’s holding a grudge.
Well, it’s a two way street, ya see. So long as Khamenei is the real power in Iran (Khatami, while the elected president, is second to the Ayatollah), and he doesn’t want to be friends with the US, what use is there in trying to suck up to him? Denunciation of the US is a daily thing for him and he has his own version of the “2 minute hate” going on with the people, so why can’t the US do that? Sure, labeling Iran as a member of the Axis O’ Evil is probably counterproductive, but tell me why it is always the US that must change, why the US must be the one kissing ass? Doors have been opened in the past on both sides to improve relations, but you don’t see the US government staging burnings of the Iraninan flag every so often.
And tell me this, if the US hates Iran so much, why did the Clinton administration and then the Bush II administration both stop the collection of default judgments against the Iraninan government by families of people killed by terrorists supported by the Iranian government? There are still frozen assets left from the revolution just sitting there, and the US government has been protecting the money in hopes of returning it when relations normalize. But if we hated them, why not just start handing it out to the litigants? Would Iran have done the same?
Fair enough, Power_Station. I regret having given any insult or offense to you. But let me say that, far from deserving critique, you post in English well enough crafted that I was under the impression that it was your first language – hence my thinking that you were being somehow ironic in saying “Are the United States…” (which was a common usage only during the 1780s and '90s).
Actually, you all probably owe Power_Station an apology on this one.
**
is correct English. It’s just British English. Note that Power_Station consistently treats USA as a plural collective noun. This is quite common in the UK where, for example, one says “The Government are calling an election.” rather than “The Government is calling an election.”
Kudos, though, for a very novel application of Gaudere’s law.
If it is shari’a that is the reason for Iran’s actions, then shari’a is indeed evil.
I suspect that whether use the collective plural or not when referring to the US depends on how British their origins. I certainly use it, just as I use other terms spellings, syntax and grammar which reflect the British orgin of Australian English.
Jodi, why was it necessary to use the terminology that you used? It’s not as if using that terminology contributed to this discussion in any way. Did you simply join this discussion to say something disparaging about Iranians? From your one comment, it is the only logical assumption I can make.
To ‘not give a shit’ is different than ‘not really care about’. It is insulting and if someone said that about you, your family, your social group or your countrymen in an discussion such as this one, you’d possibly find it more offensive.
You were merely agreeing with SuaSponte, so it wasn’t the point you were making that I found offensive, it was the words you used, particularly here in Great Debates. I stand behind the statement that it is offensive and rude.
You said, "…you might note the difference between someone stating her personal take on the feelings of ‘the average American.’ " I’m sure you’ve not met even a small sampling of “Average Americans”, so I don’t understand how you can speak about their thoughts in this issue.
In addition, did you know that there are approximately one million people of Iranian descent or birth living in the United States, almost all of whom are citizens and have been here for upwards of twenty years? Many of them live in southern California, and I’m sure as any Doper from that area can confirm, they do care about US/Iran relations.
You may not work, travel, or socialize in circles where you come in contact with people of Iranian, Angolan or Afghani descent, but I’m sure many citizens of your country, including myself, are interested in US/Iranian-Angolan-Afghani relations.
You are correct in that the ‘average American’ (whoever that may be) wasn’t well-informed about Afghanistan before September 11th. I wish it hadn’t taken a tragedy like the one that happened on September 11th to make people interested in area. During the Iran Hostage Crisis, the same type of interest was taken in Iran. I know that it is impossible for a citizen of a country to know a lot about other countries, but why say so in terms of “not giving a shit?” Why not just say, “I agree with SuaSponte.” and leave it at that?
I don’t think I was acting as if I was on my high horse in this case. I was merely pointing out what I found offensive, as is often done here in this forum.
Offensive or not, I think it is true. Many Americans would be hard pressed to find Iran on a map.
We’ve been an isolationist country for over a century. Part of being isolationist is ignoring the existence of anything different.
Babe, were your horse any higher, it would take an airplane to get on top of it.
You seem to be offended. Fine.
Dragging it out and hijacking a thread because you want an apology or different language used is ludicrous.
Just deal and move ON.
Jebus… BWM.
HasturI’ve moved on. Stating that I didn’t ask for a different language to be used. Please reread my posts.
My guess is that he learned English in Great Britain, or from someone from the UK. In British English, collective nouns take plural verbs, whereas in US English, they take singular verbs.
One hears this usage quite often on the BBC, which most English speakers outside the Americas consider to be something of an authority with regard to the spoken language.
Power has implied that English was not his first language, I’ve apologized for having slammed him on the basis that I thought it was and that he was trying some sort of cutesy ploy with the term, and we’ve moved on. With regard to whether “The United States are…” would be acceptable in British English, it would be on a par with one of us referring to QE2 as “that Liz broad who thinks she runs your country.” The U.S. (a singular nation with a name implying plurality) sends ambassadors to The Gambia and Ukraine, not to Gambia and the Ukraine? Why? Because that’s how those countries wish to be addressed in English. And the United States of America is a singular noun, even in the “United Kingdoms of Formerly-Great Britain and (Most of) Ulster” (which we don’t call them because it would be insulting). We deserve the same respect as regards usage as we extend them.
Polycarp
It’s not about respect, it’s about proper grammar.
In British English, certain categories of nouns are deemed to be plural, just as in some languages, certain nouns are deemed to be masculine or feminine. It’s got nothing whatsoever to do with the name of the country or what it wishes to be called. In British English, entities made up of a collection of people are often treated as a “they” rather than as an “it.” Just as British English would find “The United States are” proper, it would find “North Dakota are” proper.
Consider this quote from Jack Straw,
**
I think we can safely assume that Jack Straw has an adequate command of English and that he is not evincing a lack of respect for the United States.
http://www.fco.gov.uk/news/newstext.asp?5433
Very good. Let’s do. I know that Ford are cutting back their production in the UK and that this is of some concern to the government. The Guardian reports that Alistair Campell has said,
**
On the other hand, General Motors have their own problems. The BBC reports they recently closed a plant in Luton amid much controversy
**
The United States is pissed at Iran because the Intelligence Community, which holds a lot of sway over foreign policy, is pissed at Iran for taking away some of their assets. In the 1970’s, when the U.S. had its puppet the Shah in power, NSA had two listening posts in Iran, the CIA was able to gather HUMINT from within one more Middle-East country, and there was some oil involved, which always brings the U.S.'s interest. After the Islamic revolution, the IC lost all this, and the IC tends to hold grudges for a long time.
That said, America’s policy against Iran ignores its own culpability in the Islamic revolution. The revolution was a truly populist movement, and it sought only to end foreign mastery of the government though the US-installed Shah and his SAVAK secret police (whom Amnesty International called the greatest human rights violators on Earth in 1976). If the US hadn’t deposed the democratically-elected Mossadeq in the 50’s, so much bitterness wouldn’t have built up. This is, however, no excuse for the brutal regime now in power. Even the multitudes in favour of the revolution found disillusionment in the years right after Islamic law took over.
Back to the issue of what the average American thinks: I’m American, and unfortunately I’ve seen that most Americans are of the impression that not only the Iranian government, but the Iranian people, are savage murderers, much like the usual portrayal of Serbians during the NATO bombings. This is unfortunate, as Iranians are some of the nicest people on Earth, their culture dictates that they must be so (towards individuals, mind you). Since moving to Europe, I’ve met many Iranians, lately here for meetings in the central office of an international non-governmental organization in the Netherlands in which I work. They are always kind and express that I’m always welcome to visit Iran (that I’m American doesn’t seem to bother Iranians, it’s the government they have a beef with).
The USA is indeed pissed at Iran, but I’d hope that the people of the US become more understanding of other peoples (and not identify them expressly with their governments), and that the government of the US becomes more compassionate and ceases to seek to manipulate third-world countries (like it has not only in Iran, but Guatemala and Chile, too). Hopefully Iran will soon have moderates in power, that’ll help change people’s feelings on the country.
UnuMondo