Comment

Comment on Minnesota burglars are using Wi-Fi jammers to disable home security systems

givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

“So are all”

Eh, depends.

All precautions you can take are just visual deterrents

Is correct, but so is

All precautions you can take is just a visual deterrent.

Because it’s talking about a singular group of things, whether you use “deterrents” or “deterrent” is what determines if an “is” or “are” is used.

The singular/plural is about if your talking about a bunch of visual deterrents or everything adding up into a singular visual deterrent.

So talking about “locks” as a group gets a singular deterrent and “is”. Logically it’s that all the locks are one singular visual deterrent rather than each lock being it’s own.

Doesn’t really matter tho, English is a pretty stupid language.

source

Sort:hotnew top

bluespin@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
‘All precautions’ is plural, so you have to use ‘are’. Using ‘is’ is in no way correct there; the ‘deterrents’ bit has nothing to do with it

source
- givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  By your rational all the first person should have said:
  
  If they are running over Wi-Fi they aren’t really security, they are just toys. At the very best they are visual deterrents for opportunistic people
  
  But they didn’t, they said:
  
  If it is running over Wi-Fi it isn’t really security, it is a toy. At the very best a visual deterrent for opportunistic people
  
  Even though they were talking about security systems which have more than one component even if only one camera.
  
  The “visual deterrent” made the whole sentence singular. Just like when I referenced a group of locks.
  
  Like
  
  His baseball card collection is his most important possession.
  
  That collection is a lot of individual things, but the group is singular.
  
  Theres multiple locks, but we’re talking about them as a group being a singular visual deterrent.
  
  source
  - bluespin@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Don’t have the time to get into a grammar debate. Just letting you know why you’re being downvoted since no one else told you why your statement is incorrect
    
    source
    givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Oh ok…
    
    Thanks for replying to say you’re not replying I guess
    
    Doesn’t seem like a good use of time tho.
    
    source
theskyisfalling@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
The fact you used your possessive instead of you’re in “if your talking about” pretty much discredits anything you had to say there.

source
- givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
  Oh yeah, for sure.
  
  A phone typo immediately let’s you know that person doesn’t know grammar.
  
  source
  - theskyisfalling@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Whilst usually I would agree if you are attempting to be a pedant about grammar you should probably use correct grammar…
    
    source
    givesomefucks@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago
    Not really being a pedant.
    
    Someone corrected me, and I clarified that whether it’s singular or plural is kind of ambiguous which make both correct.
    
    Because like I said, English is stupid. And even native speakers who follow all of its rules can’t explain them.
    
    Think about that for a second, we all get over a decade of learning the language, and we’re mostly going off gut feeling when we use it. We may know a few rules, but not all the excepttions and rare cases the rule is wrong.
    
    Since someone cared enough to point out the general rule, I explained the rare exception. Because I thought they’d care.
    
    source