We (a co-worker and I) have been reviewing a document (a marketing bulletin) written by a British person and there is a little grammar point which has come up for discussion. The question deals with noun and verb agreement.
If I am referring to a company, Company X for instance, would you say ‘Company X is committed to providing …’ or ‘Company X are committed to providing …’
I told her I could get the definitive answer here!
If it is for consumption on both sides of the Atlantic and either set is pedantic, I would put
“Company X will provide”
But maybe that is just me.
i’ve heard both used equally, and i’m by no means an expert, but;
it is my understanding that you would use “is” for a singular noun, and “are” for the plural., ie: the leaf IS green/ the leaves ARE green.
since the company is singular, i think u’d use “is.”
come to think of it, i most often hear “are” when it is a spokesperson, saying something along the lines of “we at company X are committed …” which fits in with my previous statement.
I am British and both are acceptable, but ‘are’ sounds slighly better to my ears.
You see in the UK a company name can be treated as both a singular and collective noun.
Just for a comparisionI’ve typed “Royal Mail are” and “Royal Mail is” (Royal Mail are known as Consignia abroad, so the sites should only be UK)
I picked out these two (both co-incidentaly from the same site) which show in the UK both are acceptable:
Same for sports teams–
US: Manchester United is going to be hurting without Beckham.
UK: Manchester United are going to be hurting without Beckham.
I agree - both sound fine, but “are” sounds better. I’m from the UK too.
You could argue company is a singular noun, and a plural, so both would be applicable.
You can argue this only if you are from the UK. If you are from the US, however, you can write “the compary is” and be correct or you can write “the compary are” and be wrong.