# "there\[b\]'s\[/b\] instead of "there are" **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [October 7, 2004, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098 "2004-10-07T21:32:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/1 "2004-10-07T21:32:25Z")
why do otherwise intelligent, articulate people keep making the mistake of saying “there’s” when they are using the plural? Doesn’t everybody know that “Is” is the singular, and “Are” is the plural form of the verb “to be”? Take an example–(from our very own moderator TubaDiva): the sticky announcement on this forum reminds us to be careful not to post sensitive info because “as long as **there’s** search engines, stuff on this board will never die” Come on now-admit it.That sentence sounds better to you if you write “as long as there **are** search engines,…” You’re talking about a plural subject (engines), so you have to use a plural verb. I suppose it is easier to pronounce “there’s” than “there are”. But it’s just plain WRONG!!! You won’t see many Dopers saying “we is discussing…” instead of “we are discussing…”. Matching singular and plural forms of speech is fundamental to the English language.It’s not a minor issue( like, say, slang, or American vs. British terminolgy). It’s a critical aspect of holding an intelligent conversation. So let’s all start acting intelligently, okay? Please. [/rant] ---
**Author:** ![Lobsang](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobsang/32/4067_2.png) [@Lobsang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobsang)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/2 "2004-10-07T21:34:15Z")
Is “there’re” valid? ---
**Author:** ![chappachula](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/d2c977/32.png) [@chappachula](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chappachula)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/3 "2004-10-07T21:42:45Z")
> [@Lobsang](#): > > Is “there’re” valid? It’s just as valid as “we’re” . You could say “we are going to work…”, but it’s easier to say “we’re going to work…”. And nobody says “we’s going to work…” ---
**Author:** ![Casey1505](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dc4da7/32.png) [@Casey1505](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Casey1505)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/4 "2004-10-07T21:48:11Z")
> [@Lobsang](#): > > Is “there’re” valid? I think I almost swallowed my tongue saying that. ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/5 "2004-10-07T22:15:09Z")
There’re more than one way to skin a cats? ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/6 "2004-10-07T22:46:11Z")
Cuz it’s easy to say. ---
**Author:** ![Kythereia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e8c25b/32.png) [@Kythereia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kythereia)\ **Post date:** [October 7, 2004, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/7 "2004-10-07T23:58:31Z")
Seconded **Aeschines**. Grammatists will tell you it’s wrong and you shouldn’t say it. Linguists will look at it and note that it’s easier to say, and the brain–being lazy and often too much in a rush to focus on proper grammar–will go for the popular contraction rather than the correct form. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![Ephemera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8baadc/32.png) [@Ephemera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ephemera)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/8 "2004-10-08T00:02:12Z")
> [@Lobsang](#): > > Is “there’re” valid? Yes 'cause it’s fun to say and use. I love contractions… especially those that combine three words though, like couldn’t’ve even though I’m sure I’d get some of the grammar nazis, like **vivalostwages** , marking my posts all in red (or purple) for using them. I’m not in high school though and it’s perfectly intelligible so I say nyah. Or something. ---
**Author:** ![Lobsang](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobsang/32/4067_2.png) [@Lobsang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobsang)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/9 "2004-10-08T00:06:02Z")
I like them too (I particularly like “there’re” and “couldn’t’ve”) “there’re” is easier to say than you think. I use it often. It comes out as “therer” (a verbal quickening of “there are”) ---
**Author:** ![Cardboard\_BOX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c68b51/32.png) [@Cardboard\_BOX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardboard_BOX)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/10 "2004-10-08T00:29:25Z")
I don’t think people naturally say there’s instead of there are. Maybe they type it. Maybe they do. I’ll have to pay more attention. ---
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/11 "2004-10-08T01:52:03Z")
Reminds me of when a friend busted on me for saying “I’ve finally seen that movie.” One of the problems with that sentence is that when it’s spoken, it sounds remarkably similar to “I finally seen”, which is much more incorrect than the intended sentence. ---
**Author:** ![Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troy_mcclure_sf/32/4150_2.png) [@Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troy_McClure_SF)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/12 "2004-10-08T02:03:14Z")
> [@Aesiron](#): > > I love contractions… especially those that combine three words though… > [@Cecil Adams in "Is there a gender-neutral substitute for 'his or her'?"](#): > > Then you get comedians like the guy in Forbes magazine who blended “he or she, it” to produce h’orsh’it. Ignore below, it’s s test, link within {QUOTE} source > [@Cecil Adams \[here](#): > > ([http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3\_245b.html](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_245b.html))]ignore this, it’s a test ---
**Author:** ![Cunctator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cunctator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cunctator)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/13 "2004-10-08T02:12:00Z")
I like the French solution to this problem, where the phrase _il y a_ means either \*there is \* or _there are_, depending on the context. ---
**Author:** ![iampunha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/74df32/32.png) [@iampunha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iampunha)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/14 "2004-10-08T04:24:33Z")
My parents, whose education level is fairly high (father has two BAs and a BS, mother has two BAs and is working on her master’s), taught me “there’s” for almost everything, and I think without having plural subjects in mind. I try to catch myself saying it but after 20-odd years it’s just so damn difficult. I _will_ catch it in writing I edit, though. ---
**Author:** ![Colophon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f05b48/32.png) [@Colophon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colophon)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 10:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/15 "2004-10-08T10:39:46Z")
> [@ShibbOleth](#): > > There’re more than one way to skin a cats? I _hope_ you’re joking, right? Those is horrible grammar. ---
**Author:** ![Napier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ce73a5/32.png) [@Napier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Napier)\ **Post date:** [October 8, 2004, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/16 "2004-10-08T16:39:29Z")
Language isn’t designed, it just kind of happens as a mean of our individual actions. There is some truth in the idea that logical rules that clarify how to express what we mean help us understand each other. But it is also true that the rules certainly have to follow what we tend to do in language, not the other way around. Except the word “nukular”, which is plain old stupid when the President says it. And there’s the truth, in a tidy little nukulus. ---
**Author:** ![Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e19adc/32.png) [@Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/17 "2004-10-10T13:24:36Z")
One of my danish relatives pointed out that speech habit of mine a couple years back-- because he only ever heard North Americans using it. I chalk it up to a regional, not terribly horrible dialectical differerence. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2004, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/there-b-s-b-instead-of-there-are/268098/18 "2004-10-10T16:20:01Z")
> [@](#): > > I don’t think people naturally say there’s instead of there are. Actually, I noticed that people used _only_ the “there’s” construction in speech over 35 years ago. And, just as the French phrase noted above, that can be plural or singular by context, Spanish uses _hay_ to indicate both plural and singular. (I have no idea whether the Brits or antipodeans say “there’re” instead of “there’s,” but I cannot recall ever having heard anyone from North America use “there’re” in normal speech.) I suspect that the “there is” or “there are” construction (as evidenced in three languages, here) fullfills a particular need that is more usefully rendered in a single expression, regardless of number. In fact, I rarely hear “there is” or “there are”; it seems that (in North America, at least) “there’s” has become the default expression for nearly all uses, much as _hay_ is the only way to express that thought in Spanish. Given its prevalence, I will also note that I have never heard a purist grammarian rail against it, so I suspect that most grammarians have already accepted it as a legitimate spoken construction. I think this thread is the only objection I have _ever_ seen lodged against “there’s”.