25

For example:

There's two options here

or

There are two options here

I hear a lot of people say the first line (or something similar), but isn't that incorrect? Isn't it plural and therefore you should use "there are"?

Nathan Tuggy
  • 9,513
  • 20
  • 40
  • 56
Vic
  • 653
  • 3
  • 7
  • 11
  • I catch myself fixing this in emails rather often. I'll start composing it the way I might say it: "There's two ways we can handle this..." However, if I proofread before I click send, I'll often revise the sentence: "There are two ways we can handle this..." I think this gets uttered often partly because there's is so much easier to pronounce than there're (even my spellchecker doesn't like the latter). – J.R. Nov 11 '14 at 23:12
  • 1
    @J.R. I think it's also because of the natural tendency to start sentences without having the whole sentence planned out before you start. I do the same thing. (Also with phrases like "How's things?") – starsplusplus Nov 12 '14 at 10:04

4 Answers4

22

Here's an edited version of a post I did for ELU on a similar question (which got closed):

The existential construction takes there as a subject. There has no meaning, and often the verb takes its agreement from the complement of the verb BE. So if the Noun Phrase after BE is plural, the verb will usually be in a plural form. If the Noun Phrase is singular it will usually be singular:

  • There is an antelope over there.
  • There are some antelopes over there.

Notice, however, that in the examples above, the subject and the verb BE are not contracted. In normal speech these will nearly always be contracted. We will use there's instead of there is. It is also quite common nowadays to see them contracted in writing, normally in informal texts, although you can find instances in prestigious newspapers like the Times, for example.

Now when the subject there and BE are contracted like this, the verb doesn't need to agree in any way with the following Noun Phrase. Therefore with regard to the Original Poster's example, if they had said:

*There is two options here.

... this sentence would be regarded as ungrammatical by most, if not all speakers. However because they did contract there and BE, it is grammatical:

There's two options here.

This makes this sentence similar to a famous lyric from one of John Lennon's songs:

Imagine there's no countries.

Or usages such as:

There's times when I've wanted to box his ears

Having said this, despite the fact that this is a well documented aspect of the grammar, some prescriptivists are bound to take offense at this. They will insist that it's ungrammatical to use a plural noun after there's. This will be despite the fact that they quite subconsciously actually use plural nouns after there's themselves quite frequently. They will appear about five minutes after I post this answer. They do make life fun though!

There are some other special situations where we might use there is with a plural noun phrase, even though it is not contracted. For example How many people live in your house? Well, there is me, my grandad, my mum and my aunt. If you'd like to read about these exceptions, there's some good posts here!.

Araucaria - Not here any more.
  • 27,144
  • 4
  • 53
  • 117
  • Is this just American usage or something? Here I've only heard "there're", as far as I recall. Aside from artistic things that may use bad grammar on purpose. – AlbeyAmakiir Nov 11 '14 at 22:47
  • 1
    @AlbeyAmakiir No, it isn't. The Times, for example is a British newspaper. John Lennon was British too. I've used one in my post btw, did you notice? – Araucaria - Not here any more. Nov 11 '14 at 22:55
  • @Araucaria Yeah, I just thought, as songs often fudge grammar for art, that it's not a great example. Similarly with old sayings, actually, now that I think of it. And then the last example and your sneaky usage in the edit just sounded wrong to me. That said, the example in the edit sounds perfectly fine. That's what made me think it's location-based. (I'm Australian, by the way.) – AlbeyAmakiir Nov 11 '14 at 23:06
  • 2
    @AlbeyAmakiir They're there for fun and general interest. It's a well documented phenomenon, you'll find it discussed in CaGEL and other well-known works. Have a look here for examples in print. I don't know about it's pervasiveness in Australia though! :) – Araucaria - Not here any more. Nov 11 '14 at 23:26
  • 1
    So let me guess this straight. The word "there's" is actually gramatically incorrect, but since society uses it so much it is mostly accepted? Similar how we attribute weight and mass together, although scientifically they are widely different? – Ahkam Nihardeen Nov 12 '14 at 03:54
  • 2
    @AhkamNihardeen No, the study of physics aims to describe how things actually are. So if some people think that things work differently from how they actually work, and want to believe that things work in the way that they think they should work- well they're very, very wrong. Now the study of linguistics/language/grammar/syntax aims to describe what people actually do - but if some people want to think that it's about how they think things should work ... well they've got things very wrong! – Araucaria - Not here any more. Nov 12 '14 at 04:38
  • Thats what I mean @Araucaria. Sorry if I sounded like that weight and mass are the same things. I meant that most ORDINARY people attribute those things at the same, while you and I know they are different. I am saying that this could be the same issue with the idea of there's. – Ahkam Nihardeen Nov 12 '14 at 10:54
  • 3
    @AhkamNihardeen Yes, but it's the other way round here. Most people think there's + plural noun is *ungrammatical, but when we test it empirically, we can see that in reality it is* grammatical! :) – Araucaria - Not here any more. Nov 12 '14 at 11:16
  • 1
    @Araucaria, OOOHHHH. NOW it makes sense :D. Thought it was the issue where people thought weight and mass were the same. I was wondering why There's sounder more normal in that sentence than There Are ;) – Ahkam Nihardeen Nov 12 '14 at 11:43
  • Citation needed for "when we test it empirically." "There's two options here" is sloppy, ungrammatical, and grates on the ears of this native (American) English speaker. – Adrian McCarthy Mar 31 '17 at 18:57
  • 1
    @AdrianMcCarthy Are you saying that the American English ear is sloppy and ungrammatical? Or are you saying that what you think you say is grammatical and what other speakers (and possibly you) do isn't? For a citation, you could read the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, Huddleston & Pullum, 2002 (p. 238-9). I'm afraid that "ungrammatical" most certainly doesn't mean what you think it means. You should refrain from using the term. – Araucaria - Not here any more. Mar 31 '17 at 20:57
  • @Araucaria: No, I'm saying that I disagree with the assertion that this construction widely used by native English speakers. The claim seems far-fetched to me, so I'd like to see the data that supports your claim. – Adrian McCarthy Mar 31 '17 at 21:00
  • 2
    @AdrianMcCarthy Well, when you disagree with world-renowned award-winning grammars that are based on usage, well-documented matters of fact and vast amounts of research in the field you have several options: open your ears, search out the evidence for yourself, read those grammars. However, in this case , the facts are extraordinarily well-known and well-documented. Just pick up any modern peer-reviewed academic grammar of English. – Araucaria - Not here any more. Mar 31 '17 at 21:05
  • I suspect this is a regional difference. The citations supporting this construction appear to be British. Every search I've tried on Google n-grams suggests that it's far more common to use the plural forms when the "antecedent" is plural regardless of contraction. If this were a site for discussing the finer details of the language (such as english.stackexchange.com), I'd have less of a problem with this answer. Given that this is a site for people learning English, I think it's a disservice to flatly bless a construction that most native speakers would consider incorrect or non-standard. – Adrian McCarthy Mar 31 '17 at 21:53
  • 3
    @AdrianMcCarthy When used in real life, they don't. Which is exactly the point. And if you tell learners that something's ungrammatical when it isn't then they get very confused when they see it in the Times the next day! And in this particular case, the OP is specifically asking because they are hearing native speakers using this language. – Araucaria - Not here any more. Mar 31 '17 at 22:21
  • @AdrianMcCarthy Here's several thousand examples of "There's various" + plural noun phrase. Google search – Araucaria - Not here any more. Apr 01 '17 at 10:16
10

In formal speech and writing, only there are is standard English in such cases. However, in an informal style, here's, there's and where's are common with plural nouns (Michael Swan, 2005.532, Practical English Usage).

tunny
  • 5,587
  • 14
  • 32
2

I remember this one from English classes in school many years ago.
It was explained to me by my English teacher as follows:

As several people already mentioned are is the grammatically correct word to use.

The reason that in colloquial speech is is often used in such a phrase has mainly to do with the fact that the speaker is dealing with 2 concepts (one plural and once singular) at the same time.

Example: "There's 2 answers to the question"
"Answers" is obviously plural, but there is one question. The speaker ties the verb to "question" and is inclined to use is.
This even happens if "to the question" isn't really spoken. The speaker is still thinking about it.

Another example: Where's the cattle?
The speaker probably has a place (singular) in mind, which (unconsciously) affects his/her use of the verb.

Tonny
  • 552
  • 1
  • 4
  • 11
  • 1
    "but their is one question", shouldn't that be "there"? – Zack Nov 11 '14 at 17:47
  • @Zack Nice catch. Corrected. – Tonny Nov 11 '14 at 21:15
  • I'm not sure how much it has to do with a mixture of singular and plural. Saying "there's" is just easier than saying "there're" or "there are". When I say "there's ", I'm usually aware that it's "wrong", but I don't care, because it is smoother to say. – Chris Nov 11 '14 at 22:12
-1

Yes, "There's two ..." is incorrect. The subject and verb should agree in number.

And yes, in informal speech you will hear people say this. But that doesn't make it correct. People say lots of grammatically incorrect things in informal speech, because when you're talking, you don't necessarily have the sentence planned out when you start, or you're just not paying careful attention to your word choice.

Jay
  • 65,313
  • 1
  • 69
  • 142