Which is grammatically correct?

[fuzz]

1) Apple are opening up stores.

2) Apple is opening up stores.


I'm not a stickler on grammar, but I'm baffled why others write "Apple are ..." Apple is a single entity so it should be "Apple is ..." Right?

 

[Giaguara]

hm.. I think no one would use "Sony are.." or "Dell are..." so I vote for "Apple is..."

 

[Mikuro]

Corporations are (sometimes) considered collective nouns, like the word "jury". You can say "the jury ARE split", even though the jury can be considered a single unit.

Personally, I think using the plural form is almost always inappropriate in reference to corporations.

Certainly, it is often accurate to use singular verbs with collective nouns. A lot depends on context. I'm sure the rules on this vary from country to country, publisher to publisher, etc. I'm no expert.

A little googling turns up some useful pages, such as http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/collectivenoun.htm . This should not be treated as law, but it presents good rules of thumb, which support the sentence "Apple is opening up stores" rather than "Apple are..."

 

[Qion]

I believe the more tech or business-savvy of us like using the plural verb because it relates that Apple is not a single entity, but a conglomeration of many individuals.

 

[symphonix]

I'd read it as Apple is because in my mind Apple is the name of one entity. For comparison, try out "China is investing millions on new energy projects this year" and then substitute "China are" and see how wrong it sounds. In this case, "China" is the name of *a* country. Apple, likewise, is the name of *a* company.

 

[Qion]

I'd read it as Apple is because in my mind Apple is the name of one entity. For comparison, try out "China is investing millions on new energy projects this year" and then substitute "China are" and see how wrong it sounds. In this case, "China" is the name of *a* country. Apple, likewise, is the name of *a* company.

I've never liked the sound of it either. I was just trying to get across my reasoning of the pronunciation.

 

[pds]

The Chicago Bulls are, but Chicago is. The Heat is in town to play the Knicks but the Knicks are in town to play the Heat. - The verb should match the noun.

Only Brits D) do that pluralizing thing for companies or clubs.


I would not say the jury are split, it is the jurors who *are* split, but the jury is split.

 

[Rhisiart]

The Chicago Bulls are, but Chicago is. The Heat is in town to play the Knicks but the Knicks are in town to play the Heat. - The verb should match the noun. ..... I could not say the jury are split, it is the jurors who *are* split, but the jury is split.

This sounds entirely right to me, pds.

Only Brits D) do that pluralizing thing for companies or clubs.

The Golden Rule of English grammer as spoken in 'Great Britland' is that there are no golden rules.

 

[Natobasso]

Here's the rules according to grammar book:
http://www.grammarbook.com/grammar/subjectVerbAgree.asp

Apple is opening up stores.

 

[fuzz]

thanks! good to know that I still know this much of grammar rules haha ...

 

[CincyJim]

In this case the subject, Apple Corp., is singular therefore the verb "is" is correct. The verb "are" indicates more than one.

 

[sgould]

If my Grandma was still alive she would say "Apple be opening another shop..."

 

[DeltaMac]

The example of Chicago sports team names is not a good one.
The Bulls are playing at home - and, similarly - The Heat are playing at home. Using a singular form to refer to a plural group does not change the usage, and the usage here should be that both 'Bulls' and 'Heat' be treated in the same fashion, as they are both team names, and plural by usage, not by spelling. Unusual, as most sports teams do not use a singular form for the team name.
And, I agree,

there are no golden rules