3

As I understand another = an + other, which has turned into a single word through the history of English. As a consequence, it refers to a single object (another car = one car, another bite = one bite). But I wasn't sure about the expression "Another four chickens". The expression sounds good to my ears, but bad to my (little) grammar knowledge.

My two questions are:

  1. Is it correct?
  2. If so, when can another be used for plural?
Dinesh Kumar Garg
  • 2,440
Patrick
  • 1,538
  • 6
  • 23
  • 39
  • 5
    Here's my initial thought. You can't say "Another dogs" but you can say "Another group of dogs" or "Another four dogs." Here, "four dogs" acts like a collective noun, much like "group" and "group of dogs", which has both singular and plural properties. To see that "Another four dogs" is at least quasi-singular, just consider the acceptability of "Another four dogs is too many" (contrast this with the unacceptability of "Another four dogs are too many"). – DyingIsFun Aug 02 '16 at 15:55
  • 2
    Right. So, to answer the question, yes, it's correct, and another can't be used for plural. It's ok in this case because four dogs is a singular numbered group. I.e, the four is important; you can't use just any word -- another red dogs or another dying dogs are impossible. – John Lawler Aug 02 '16 at 15:59
  • But "Another four dogs" is also semi-plural, as evinced by the acceptability of "Another four dogs run up" versus * "Another four dogs runs up." – DyingIsFun Aug 02 '16 at 16:02
  • 1
    Compare 'an extra three sessions' / 'a further three weeks' for the article usage (though here, the 'one more' etymology doesn't intrude). – Edwin Ashworth Aug 02 '16 at 16:02
  • @JohnLawler Not impossible. "I've heard John won't be playing tonight. Isn't he playing for the Red Dogs anymore?" - "He is, but what we are going to see tonight is another Red Dogs. From Seattle. – Centaurus Aug 02 '16 at 16:56
  • Proper names are, as usual, reified and don't work like normal compounds. New English boiled dinner, Toronto Maple Leaves. – John Lawler Aug 02 '16 at 17:26
  • @Centaurus I can't see anything wrong with your ...what we are going to see tonight is another Red Dogs. "Another" is, after all, an alternative-additive determinative, and you are using it in its 'alternative' sense where the meaning is "a different Red Dogs" – BillJ Aug 02 '16 at 18:03

1 Answers1

1

Please see the dicitonary entry here: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/another

Consider the first definition

Used to refer to an additional person or thing of the same type as one already mentioned or known about; one more; a further

I would say that another should not be used in the plural, unless we are talking about a set or a group similar to the one already described or known about.

We bought another four chickens.

...implies that we already had a set of four chickens, and we bought another set of four. This is similar to

Put on another pair.

If I were to say,

Have another three drinks.

...this would imply and call attention to the proposition that the person being addressed has already had (a set of) three drinks.

Wino Rhino
  • 359
  • I don't have a problem with the substance of your answer. But the logic of it doesn't hold up. There's no reason to say that quantitatively matching sets are implied in any way. Even if you want to rigidly apply a "set" rule, each set is itself singular composite of plurals. A practical demonstration of this is using the synonym in your linked definition. "We have 1 chicken at home and a further 4 chickens will be delivered tomorrow". Either usage is semantically and syntactically equal. – H.R.Rambler Aug 02 '16 at 19:45