"a nation who has ..."?

Sat Oct 27 00:24:15 UTC 2007

Joel S. Berson wrote:
> At 10/26/2007 02:28 PM, Arnold M. Zwicky wrote:
>
>> [...]
>> i find the usage jarring enough that i'm inclined to notice it when
>> it goes past me, but i haven't been collecting examples
>> systematically.  and i don't know anything about the history or the
>> spead of the usage.  (so i tend to think of it as a recent
>> development, or a recently spreading one, but i'm probably wrong.)
>>
>> not in MWDEU, apparently.
>>
>>
>>> Has vs. have?
>>>
>> only "has".
>>
>
> Well, with "nation who" I somehow wanted "have".  Interesting, to me
> -- subconscious association of "who" with people, and thus plural?
>
>
Here are a few cites from Project Gutenberg.

================
Sir, I place myself upon the Constitution, in the presence of a nation
who have the Declaration of Independence read to them every Fourth of
July, and profess to believe it.
SPEECH OF JOHN HOSSACK, CONVICTED OF A VIOLATION OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE
LAW, BEFORE JUDGE DRUMMOND, OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT,
CHICAGO, ILL.
NEW YORK: PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY SOCIETY. 1860.
http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/ftp.ibiblio.org/pub/docs/books/gutenberg/1/3/9/8/13987/13987-h/13987-h.htm
================
He tried raising sums of money on national credit, and also devised a
company who were to lend money to found a great settlement on the
Mississippi, the returns from which were to be enormous.
HISTORY OF FRANCE. BY CHARLOTTE M. YONGE. NEW YORK: D. APPLETON AND
COMPANY 1, 3, AND 5 BOND STREET. 1882.
http://mirror.pacific.net.au/gutenberg/1/7/2/8/17287/17287-h/17287-h.htm
================
They have been received with rapture by a nation who know how to
appreciate every testimony which the United States have given to them of
their affection.
/The Representatives of the French People composing the Committee of
Public Safety of the National Convention, charged by the law of the 7th
Fructidor with the direction of foreign relations, to the
Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled/.
/(October 21, 1794)/ in: James D. Richardson, A Compilation of the
Messages and Papers of the Presidents Section 1 (of 3) of Volume 10.
1902 [unclear where the translation comes from, if the original was sent
in French]
http://snowy.arsc.alaska.edu/gutenberg/1/4/5/8/14584/14584-h/14584-h.htm
=================

  There is a bondage which is worse to bear
  Than his who breathes, by roof, and floor, and wall,
  Pent in, a Tyrant's solitary Thrall:
  'Tis his who walks about in the open air,
  One of a Nation who, henceforth, must wear
  Their fetters in their Souls. For who could be,
  Who, even the best, in such condition, free
  From self-reproach, reproach which he must share
  With Human Nature? Never be it ours
  To see the Sun how brightly it will shine,
  And know that noble Feelings, manly Powers,
  Instead of gathering strength must droop and pine,
  And Earth with all her pleasant fruits and flowers
  Fade, and participate in Man's decline.
(October, 1803)
Poems in Two Volumes, Volume 1 / Wordsworth, William, 1770-1850
http://infomotions.com/etexts/gutenberg/dirs/etext05/pwdw110.htm
============================

> And, I assume, not "has" but "have" in Britain?
>

My gut feeling is that this is not correct for contemporary British
English for nations -- they take singular agreement, and so does the
noun _nation_. Except if you're really talking about sports teams
("England have fired manager after failing to qualify for cup" and the
like).

Companies are a different matter: they are usually referred to with
plural verbs, though, so I'm less sure about what would happen with "a
company who". Well let's look ... from the Guardian Unlimited archives

================
In line with this, as a director of a company who received funding from
the Arts Council, I was initially asked to be on a consultation panel
about arts council funding and told I would received a phone call to
discuss this.
[This is about a theatre company]
Theatre blog reader comment
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/theatre/2007/06/the_olympics_killed_my_theatre.html#comment-549350
================
Highly specialised IT and Technology company who specialise in data and
networking and hosting solutions have a new role for a marketing manager
to join them.
[Job ad. Doesn't shock me at all for BrE. There are more in the jobs
section.]
http://jobs.guardian.co.uk/job/298318/marketing-manager-it-experts
================
Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services
Union, said: " Not only has the voluntary sector been used as Trojan
horse by the private sector, but the government has handed a large chunk
of work to a firm which is failing and mired in controversy in
Australia. The government is giving a green light to a company who we
fear will try and circumvent TUPE regulations."
[Article, business section]
http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,2175500,00.html
================
"Waterstone's is, after all, a bookseller, whose stock in trade is the
purveying of opinion, not all of it palatable to those concerned. The
action that has been taken so far bears more resemblance to the
behaviour of an American fast-food chain than a company who deal in
intellectual freedoms and the concerns of a pluralist liberal society."
[Article, technology section]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2005/jan/12/books.newmedia
================

Still, rare in normal journalistic writing -- none of the above examples
falls into that category.

So let's look for contemporary BrE examples of "nation who":

===============
Yet despite all this, New Zealand remain a magnificent rugby nation who
are bound to win the World Cup again soon.
[Sports blog comment -- this is the nation = team situation. Always
plural in BrE. BTW, they did.]
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/sport/2007/09/15/its_now_or_never_for_new_zeala.html
===============
While the strategy may differ, Moore's overarching political take on
America remains the same and can be summarised thus: the American people
are a decent and basically fair-minded nation who are either
ill-informed or misinformed and certainly misled into behaving otherwise.
[Article, film section -- plural agreement because of "people"]
http://film.guardian.co.uk/interview/interviewpages/0,,1055562,00.html
===============
As a nation who has destroyed more languages than any other, and along
with them so many cultural nuances and aspirations, we have no right to
judge the catalan wish for lingual self determination.
[CIF reader comment]
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/giles_tremlett/2006/06/small_earthquake_in_catalonia.html#comment-92241
===============
I didn't say that I agreed, merely that that is the likely response from
a nation who is intent on gaining the technology and who won't
acknowledge even a large reduction as being in good spirit
[CIF reader comment]
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/kate_hudson/2006/06/neither_independent_nor_a_dete.html#comment-96374
===============
etc.

Also, note all the plurals above from American sources.

Cheers,

Chris Waigl

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org