- 1,748
- 52
Main Question or Discussion Point
Why is zero plural?
(eg. I have zero items on my agenda.)
(eg. I have zero items on my agenda.)
Is that a proper usage of the word "zero"?Why is zero plural?
(eg. I have zero items on my agenda.)
Yes, we have no bananasIs that a proper usage of the word "zero"?
There are two-thirds of an apple,"there is two-thirds of an apple", or maybe "there are two-thirds of an apple", but you almost surely couldn't bring yourself to say "there are two-thirds apples" or "there is two-thirds apple".
Didn't you just make my point? Would we say that we have zero bananas?Yes, we have no bananas
we have no bananas today!
We could say, we have bananas....NOT.Would we say that we have zero bananas?
Because if you had no (zero) item on your adjenda, you could still have several items on your adjenda.Why is zero plural?
(eg. I have zero items on my agenda.)
No, because you could still have a bananna.We could say, we have bananas....NOT.
This makes sense: everything that is not singular is by default plural.Taking a wild guess.....
A single object is singular.
A plural object is non-singular.
Zero, under this definition, will be a plural quantity.
Apparently, the real problem here is that we are speaking English:consisting of, containing, or pertaining to more than one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PluralPlural is a grammatical number....Languages having only a singular and plural form may still differ in their treatment of zero. For example, in English, German, Dutch, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese, the plural form is used for zero or more than one, and the singular for one thing only. By contrast, in French, the singular form is used for zero.
So the answer is: it's a convention.Simple and satisfying, but according to the dictionary, wrong: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plural
Apparently, the real problem here is that we are speaking English:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural
Zero in the above example is an adjective, not a noun. In English, unlike other languages, adjectives do not change with declension or pleurality of noun.Why is zero plural?
(eg. I have zero items on my agenda.)
By your logic "1 trillion" is an adjective here?How many zeros does 1 trillion dollars have?
isn't it?By your logic "1 trillion" is an adjective here?
I'm checking to find out.isn't it?
It appears so. If you look up the definition of a number it gives the definition when refering to a number of things as an adjective. Makes sense.By your logic "1 trillion" is an adjective here?
By your logic "1 trillion" is an adjective here?
It is modifying the noun. Dollars being the noun it is describing the number of them.Wouldn't "1trillion" be the object? It isn't modifying the noun and I believe thats what adjectives do.
Duh, got ya. I was confusing subject with noun hehe. Think I did that in English class alot too.It is modifying the noun. Dollars being the noun it is describing the number of them.
I only tally me bananas.How do you tally no bananas?
I think the strict answer is that zero should always be a noun, not an adjective …Zero in the above example is an adjective, not a noun. In English, unlike other languages, adjectives do not change with declension or pleurality of noun.
zero alumni, zero alumnae, etc.
A pleural use of zero as a noun is: How many zeros does 1 trillion dollars have?
Okay, not so much. In a similar fashion, there was some debate about what to call the first decade of this new millennium (in the same fashion as, say, the 20s and the 90s), and some suggested calling it the zeros. Never really caught on, so in the future, this decade might be the one that nobody ever talks about!The Kamikaze Zeros are to starboard!