13

Why is their in the following sentence wrong?

The modern American family differs in many significant ways from their nineteenth-century counterpart.

RegDwigнt
  • 97,231
Dawn
  • 131
  • 13
    Who said it's wrong? – cornbread ninja 麵包忍者 Sep 11 '12 at 16:06
  • 10
    Change it to it either "family differs ... from ... its" or "families differ ... from ... their" – prash Sep 11 '12 at 16:14
  • 1
    I was going to add an answer, but @prash has already answered it above (+1). As an answer below has said, "family" can be either singular or plural, depending on usage and intended meaning. However, in the example sentence above, the word is being used in both senses (family differs... from their....). Fix the sentence to use one or the other, and you're good to go. – narx Sep 11 '12 at 16:31
  • Well there you go. Two diametrically opposed answers and they're both right. – Andrew Leach Sep 11 '12 at 16:49
  • 2
    In Diana Hacker's 7th edition of Writer Reference there is a pre-grammar test to give students, and every single one of my students got it wrong. I thought it had something to do with family being singular or plural - but was not sure and did not want to give them the wrong direction. Thank you all for your help! – Dawn Sep 11 '12 at 18:58
  • @Dawn: 'In Diana Hacker's 7th edition of Writer Reference there is a pre-grammar test to give students, and every single one of my students got it wrong.' There is another possible explanation of the data. Grammars often disagree amongst themselves. – Edwin Ashworth Sep 27 '13 at 09:16
  • @narx: One has to be careful with one's wording here. 'Collection' is a singular noun but almost always refers to a set of more than one referents. (I've opted for plural concord with 'more than one'.) 'Family' is likewise grammatically a singular noun (ie is formally singular and can take singular agreement) but can be considered as referring to the group as a whole (unitary) or the individual members (usually non-unitary). Grammarians allowing logical agreement would consider '... family is ...' and '... family are ...' necessary in different contexts. – Edwin Ashworth Sep 27 '13 at 10:33

6 Answers6

16

It's wrong because family is singular and their should be used for plurals (apart from singular their, which can't be the case here).

For singular you use its, therefore:

The modern American family differs in many significant ways from its nineteenth-century counterpart.

Or you make the subject plural, thus having:

Modern American families differ in many significant ways from their nineteenth-century counterparts.

Hannele
  • 922
Frantisek
  • 21,938
  • "Family" can be treated as a singular noun, or plural implicitly as "the members of the family". Related question: http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/3288/is-staff-plural – tenfour Sep 11 '12 at 16:20
  • 4
    @tenfour It depends on how rigid about prescriptivist grammar the person judging the sentence is. And, which prescriptivist grammar they adhere to. – SevenSidedDie Sep 11 '12 at 16:22
  • 4
    Personally, I would drop the definite article in the plural sentence and pluralize counterparts: "Modern American families differ in many significant ways from their nineteenth-century counterparts." Otherwise, I agree. – Kit Z. Fox Sep 11 '12 at 16:35
  • 10
    Total nonsense. Singular and Plural are not strictly lexical categories. Plus singular they as an indefinite pronoun has been in use for centuries in English. – John Lawler Sep 11 '12 at 20:46
  • 4
    @tenfour Yes, people sometimes sometimes use a plural with a collective noun when referring to the individual members, more in Britain than the US, but that's not applicable here. This sentence is almost surely not saying that the individual members of a family are different from members of 19th century families, but that families as a collective whole are different from 19th century families. We're talking about a family as a unit. – Jay Sep 11 '12 at 21:16
  • @František: Sorry, but I just reversed my upvote after noticing the final word in your answer. It's an ugly sentence in the first place, but that final singular "counterpart" is a definite no-no. – FumbleFingers Sep 11 '12 at 23:46
  • 5
    Even if "family" can be treated as either singular or plural, that does not mean that it can be treated as both at the same time. – sawa Sep 12 '12 at 02:08
  • @JohnLawler: The singular they is unrelated, because it's used for people, not inanimate / abstract entities like 'family'. – Mechanical snail Sep 12 '12 at 02:20
  • 2
    The plural example is wrong. The original sentence talks about the concept of 'the modern American family'. The modified example "The modern American families..." can only refer deictically to a particular group of families previously discussed. – Mechanical snail Sep 12 '12 at 02:25
  • @Mechanical snail: It's definitely "singular they" in "the family keeps their". I'll admit "the family keeps its" is much more common, but obviously "the family" is always considered singular in those examples, since no-one would get the verb form "wrong". – FumbleFingers Sep 12 '12 at 02:59
  • 3
    Verb agreement isn't quite as simple as many people think it is. Try figuring out tag questions like His whole family is coming, ______? – John Lawler Sep 12 '12 at 03:12
  • Actually, the plural example would be fine without the initial "the", and a corresponding plural counterparts. – Mechanical snail Sep 12 '12 at 04:27
  • 1
    In Google Books, "the family left their" outnumbers "the family left its" by about 10:1. Perhaps because singular "they" is very popular, but more likely "the family are considered" plural by many people in many contexts. – FumbleFingers Sep 12 '12 at 16:59
9

OP's sentence is wrong for most Americans because they normally, esp. in recent decades, treat "the family" as singular, so they would expect "its counterpart", not "their counterpart".

It's wrong for Brits because although it's true we often treat "the family" as plural, if we did that in this particular case we'd obviously expect "The ... family differ", not "differs".

But it's worth pointing out that Brits don't always treat these "group nouns" (family, Parliament, the government, company names, etc.) as plural. In this specific case I think most of us would use the singular anyway, because the family is referenced as a single entity being compared to another single entity (its "collective" counterpart).

It's also worth pointing out that I doubt many native speakers would be happy with...

?*The family took its places at the table.

...which just goes to show that there's no single "logical" approach anyway. I put that example up because you can fix it using singular "they", or simply by saying "the family" is plural anyway (in which case you can legitimately use "plural 'they'"). But if you insist "the family" is singular, and you don't endorse "singular 'they'", you're stuck with the very ungainly form above!

FumbleFingers
  • 140,184
  • 45
  • 294
  • 517
3

It's not wrong, but I would have worded it like so:

The modern American family differs ... from its nineteenth-century counterpart.

Here everything is singular: family / differs / its / counterpart.

If you substitute the singular they in that sentence, it's equally valid and becomes what you had originally written:

The modern American family differs ... from their nineteenth-century counterpart.

Another way to word it is to make everything plural:

Modern American families differ ... from their nineteenth-century counterparts.

Lynn
  • 17,801
  • Singular they is not valid here because "family" is an abstract entity, not a person. – Mechanical snail Sep 12 '12 at 05:04
  • @Mechanicalsnail - I don't believe that's correct. Singular they can be used for words of indeterminate number or gender, and abstract entities like "family" and "staff" fall into that category. For a reference, see here (scroll down to the part about "My family stops by") – Lynn Sep 12 '12 at 20:26
  • I disagree, and would take that example as related to the usual "implicit unpacking" of collective entities. If it were truly a singular they, “My family stops by regularly and it always brings pizzas” would be equally valid (modulo whether it can be used for animates). The source continues, "The key point here is that it’s not the syntactic number, but rather the semantic number that matters.", which supports my interpretation. – Mechanical snail Sep 12 '12 at 23:19
  • Also, that's really a different usage. In the "brings pizza" example, unpacking makes sense, because it's the members of the family that are physically bringing the pizzas. In the poster's example, it's the family itself, as a concept, that differs from its 19th-century counterpart. – Mechanical snail Sep 12 '12 at 23:21
  • @Mechanicalsnail: "My family stops by and it always brings pizzas" does sound equally valid to my ear, because you could be talking about "family" as the abstract entity. It sounds like we'll just have to agree to disagree. – Lynn Sep 13 '12 at 11:23
1

From what I understand, 'their' is also a sign of ownership. From what I further understand, it is part of what you're implying when you say it is THEIR counterpart.

The modern American family differs in many significant ways from their nineteenth-century counterpart.

If we were to completely take away the middle part, we'd get this...

The modern American family differs from their nineteenth-century counterpart.

Now, you can use 'its', but while it is still an unresolved issue with ALL of the English language, it is one of those accepted things. Singular 'they' does exist and it CAN BE used here. (My earlier argument, for this case just is another piece of evidence for the pro-singular 'they'.)

I'd further like to say that you have listed the noun, it is not nondescript. You refer to a family as a person or as (a) people. That is another reason why 'their' is correct. 'Family', in this case, is being viewed as people, as in plural. (And this last bit was for everyone who thought the sentence was wrong.)

Case closed.

Souta
  • 1,269
  • I've only ever heard singular they used for animate referents. It cannot be used here because the original sentence is clearly referring to 'family' as a concept, not to any particular person, nor to the various members of the family. – Mechanical snail Sep 12 '12 at 02:29
  • @Mechanicalsnail As I had clearly said in my answer, you don't define family as something inanimate. One would think that if something were NOT inanimate, that it would then be animate. Thus, what you should have said was 'Concepts can't be animate', and you'd be wrong there too. Family, if used as a concept, is a moving one. Therefore, animate. I'd hate to think of 'family' as "stagnant". – Souta Sep 12 '12 at 09:10
  • I don't know why you guys think singular "they" is only valid with "inanimate" objects. If "someone gave their" (life, attention, whatever) to something, would you say that must be incorrect, and that the only valid form is "someone gave his..."? Everyone has their own opinion about singular "they", but I never heard of this "inanimate" constraint before. – FumbleFingers Sep 12 '12 at 15:36
  • @FumbleFingers Where did I say that singular 'they' is only valid with inanimate objects? I didn't. Instead, I had said that 'family' is NOT an inanimate object. If anything, you were mistaken. – Souta Sep 12 '12 at 15:52
  • @Souta: Perhaps I'm erroneously conflating your position with Mechanical snail's. But I can't see what animate/inanimate has to do with anything here, so why mention it in the first place? – FumbleFingers Sep 12 '12 at 16:00
  • @FumbleFingers I honestly believe that was bad wording, originally, on my end. My apologies. And when Mechanical snail had put in his/her comment, I was moved to debate a rather pointless argument; has since been removed. – Souta Sep 12 '12 at 16:18
  • 1
    Per @sawa's comment on tchrist's answer, whilst you can make an argument for "family" being people, plural, it's irrelevant to OP's example. People my have different opinions about the "plurality" of "family" - but everyone knows the verb form differs must indicate a singular subject, so it can't be a plural "they" in this case. – FumbleFingers Sep 12 '12 at 16:49
  • That can easily be fixed by taking out one letter, 's'. Then the problem would be solved and there need not be further debate about 'their'. Whoo, problem solved, yeah? – Souta Sep 12 '12 at 21:21
0

Using their in that sentence is not wrong. It is right for either of two different paths:

  1. It is right if you construe family to be a plural, as such things frequently are, especially in British English.

    • Have the family from Iowa checked out of their room yet? They seem to have left their dog behind!

  2. It is right if you construct their as here referring to a non-specific or non-sexed singular antecedent.

    • Any member of the family is fully covered as soon as their individual deductible has been met.

Either way, the usage is correct.

Of course, correctness has never stopped people from complaining about things; people will always complain.

FumbleFingers
  • 140,184
  • 45
  • 294
  • 517
tchrist
  • 134,759
  • Here's someone who will complain! The original example sounds like a fairly formal use of language, and in such a case family should be treated as singular, so its should be used. – DavidR Sep 11 '12 at 16:31
  • 3
    But if family is construed as plural, the verb should likewise be cast in the plural. – StoneyB on hiatus Sep 11 '12 at 16:36
  • 2
    @tchrist - Your suggestion (1) is informal, and could be taken to refer to individual members of a specific family, and your (2) is referring to a person, and should be his/hers (pending some new non-sexed pronoun). The family in the original post refers to the structure, not to individual members. – DavidR Sep 11 '12 at 16:41
  • @DavidR Um, no: it is not "informal"! There are plenty of uses of family as a plural historically and currently alike. Americans always think everything has to be singular, and this is not true. – tchrist Sep 11 '12 at 16:47
  • 2
    I'm not arguing with your #2, but with your #1: if your justification for using their is that you construe family as a plural, you must say The family differ, just as Brits say "Parliament are in recess". If you say here The family differs, then it is the use of they/their for a "non-specific ... antecedent" which is in play here ("non-sexed" being in that case hors de concours). – StoneyB on hiatus Sep 11 '12 at 18:37
  • Reading your responses makes me realize that this was not a fair pre-test question! To much is open for discussion - or maybe it will provide a good tool for my students to see opposing views. – Dawn Sep 11 '12 at 19:05
  • 1
    @StoneyB: You're misrepresenting British usage there. We *never* say Parliament are in recess. 10 of the 11 results in that link are bog-standard things like "law courts and Parliament are in recess". The other one is some misinformed person using that (fictitious) example to make the same claim as you. And here are 3200 examples of "Parliament is* in recess"*, which is what we say. – FumbleFingers Sep 11 '12 at 21:01
  • 3
    Explanation for #2 does not work. You're talking about Any member, which is singular. OP's statement was quite different. – prash Sep 11 '12 at 21:13
  • @FumbleFingers I stand corrected, and humbly withdraw the phrase and its attribution. Will you accept the argument if I, citing Oxford Dictionaries, substitute – which is acceptable British usage? – StoneyB on hiatus Sep 11 '12 at 22:14
  • 1
    @StoneyB: I never disputed the substance of your argument. But OP's example is inherently "awkward" to my British ear. Many Americans seem happy to just say "family is always* singular, so there's no issue involved". But Brits have more subtle issues to deal with, because we use both singular and plural according to context. In this case, I'd either fix OP's original by changing the verb to differ*, or more likely completely recast the thing (as per Lynn's suggestions, for example). – FumbleFingers Sep 11 '12 at 22:33
  • 1
    @FumbleFingers We are then in agreement. – StoneyB on hiatus Sep 11 '12 at 22:40
  • 1
    Even if "family" can be treated as either singular or plural, that does not mean that it can be treated as both at the same time. – sawa Sep 12 '12 at 02:11
  • 1
    @sawa: Quite so. One person says they don't mind "singular they", while another says he can't abide it. But they're never going to disagree on the correct verb form! They both *says* what they say! In short, OP's family must be singular, because it has a singular verb form (although as a Brit I'd happily say because they have* a singular verb form* :) – FumbleFingers Sep 12 '12 at 03:10
-1

It's wrong because their is plural and counterpart, to which their belongs, is singular. That simple. Whether family is singular, plural or both, and whether they can be singular if paired with a non-specific referent (both fruitful sources of disagreement, obviously) have no bearing on the case.

Tim Lymington
  • 35,168