Grammar question - have vs. has

[Mosier]

A friend and I are in disagreement about how the following sentence should be worded.

“20 years of false imprisonment (has/have) made him irate.”

One argument is that there is only one, singular subject, which is “20 years of false imprisonment.” This would lead to “has” being the only correct word choice.

Another argument is that the subject could be plural or singular (“20 years” or “false imprisonment”), and either “has” or “have” could be correct.

A third option (that neither of us argued for) is that the subject is plural, and “have” is the only correct word choice.

Could someone please help us hammer out this argument before we have to resort to violence?

[wolfpup]

“Has”

“20 years of false imprisonment” is – or effectively is – a noun clause. “20 years” didn’t make him irate, that whole thing in the singular noun clause did.

[Mosier]

@wolfpup

“Has”

“20 years of false imprisonment” is – or effectively is – a noun clause. “20 years” didn’t make him irate, that whole thing in the singular noun clause did.

Would it be the same for every sentence of that type? Consider the following sentences:

“A thousand gallons of crude oil (has/have) spilled as a result of the accident.”

“Two liters of snot (has/have) leaked from my face today.”

I’ll be honest; using “has” feels wrong in the above sentences, even though intellectually I’m pretty sure it’s correct.

[gigi]

You would say “Twenty years is too long to wait”, so you don’t even need the rest of the phrase to prove it’s singular.

It’s like the period of time is one period, and singular.

[pulykamell]

Rule 62 here states:

Some nouns in a plural form express quantity rather than number. When quantity is plainly intended the singular verb should be used. Examine the following sentences; each is correct:

Three drops of medicine is a dose, Ten thousand tons of coal was purchased by the firm, Two hundred dollars was the amount of the collection, Two hundred silver dollars were in the collection.

from Practical Grammar and Composition, by Thomas Wood, 2007.

[pulykamell]

This University of Toronto guide states a different rule, with the same results:

Expressions of time, money and distance usually take a singular verb:

*Ten dollars is a great deal of money to a child.

Ten kilometres is too far to walk.

Six weeks is not long enough.*

[newme]

Google hits for “years has made” : 22 million.
Google hits for “years have made” : 25 million.

I think it is idiomatic, and either is acceptable. I would personally use “have”, but might not bat an eye at “has”.

[bob_2]

No contest for me:

*“20 years of false imprisonment **have **made him irate.” *

20 years of hard living **has **made him old.

[CurtC]

@bob_2

No contest for me:

*“20 years of false imprisonment **have **made him irate.” *

20 years of hard living **has **made him old.

Not sure what you’re saying - so which one is it you prefer?

[Exapno_Mapcase]

The prepositional phrase makes all the difference, just as it does when deciding whether none takes a singular or plural verb.

When the sense is plural (as indicated by a plural noun or pronoun in the following prepositional phrase – “none of [plural entity]”), none is plural; when the sense is singular (as indicated by a singular noun or pronoun in the following prepositional phrase – “none of [singular entity]”), none is singular.

Futhermore, we may have some instances in which either is correct. The American Heritage Dictionary notes: “The choice between a singular or plural verb depends on the desired effect. Both options are acceptable in this sentence: None of the conspirators has (or have) been brought to trial.” And that is true because the sense of none may be construed here as either “not one” or “not any.”

The writer uses the verb that corresponds to the intention of the phrase. Is each and every one of those twenty years being emphasized or it is the twenty years as a whole? The state of the verb makes that intention clear to the reader.

[wolfpup]

@Mosier

Would it be the same for every sentence of that type? Consider the following sentences:

“A thousand gallons of crude oil (has/have) spilled as a result of the accident.”

“Two liters of snot (has/have) leaked from my face today.”

I’ll be honest; using “has” feels wrong in the above sentences, even though intellectually I’m pretty sure it’s correct.

Whether you use the “noun phrase” idea, or the “amount vs. number” rule, or the “meaning and intent” idea, the answer is the same – the subject is effectively singular; the way I rationalize it is that the (original) sentence is effectively saying “the long period of false imprisonment has made him irate”. It doesn’t much matter if it was 19, 20, or 21 years – we’re not counting. It’s the same with the oil, etc. As Exapno implies, the singular best reflects the sense and intended effect.

Perhaps the most convincing proof of the singular meaning of that phrase would be in the sentence “20 years is a long time”. I doubt anyone would ever say “20 years are a long time”.

Conversely, if we were talking, say, about oil quality control samples taken at random, then it’s a tally where numbers matter, and we might say “almost one thousand [individual] gallons of oil have been sampled so far”. The meaning and emphasis here is not on the amount of oil, but on the sample count.

@newme

Google hits for “years has made” : 22 million.
Google hits for “years have made” : 25 million.

I think it is idiomatic, and either is acceptable. I would personally use “have”, but might not bat an eye at “has”.

I reject the idea that the unwashed masses of Teh Internets should be considered authoritative arbiters of correct English usage!

More seriously, “years has/have made” can’t be judged out of context; either may be correct depending on what precedes and what follows.

[Exapno_Mapcase]

@wolfpup

I doubt anyone would ever say “20 years are a long time”.

It could work:

20 years are a long time. Each one weighed heavily on my mind.

Not the best phrasing, but the simplest of a large number of possible ways of saying that sentiment.

I agree with you that nothing can be judged out of context. Language is wonderful is direct proportion to how malleable is it.

[Hari_Seldon]

FWIW, I would say “has”. But I have no strong feeling on it (huh?)