was or were?

miles · Mar 13, 2009

Which of these is correct? Thanks!

1: The image of insects gnawing at his legs was still in his mind, as was the worms and frogs and snakes.

or:

2: The image of insects gnawing at his legs was still in his mind, as were the worms and frogs and snakes.

TrickyFiction · Mar 13, 2009

I think the sentence itself is awkward because the image of the insects is in his mind, and the frogs and snakes are in his mind too. That's what it sounds like to me anyway: the guy has reptiles for brains. I would rearrange it altogether.

Example: Still in his mind were the images of frogs, snakes, and those insects that gnawed at his legs.

miles · Mar 13, 2009

TrickyFiction said:
I think the sentence itself is awkward because the image of the insects is in his mind, and the frogs and snakes are in his mind too. That's what it sounds like to me anyway: the guy has reptiles for brains. I would rearrange it altogether.

Example: Still in his mind were the images of frogs, snakes, and those insects that gnawed at his legs.

Yes, that's better. Thanks.

maestrowork · Mar 14, 2009

miles said:
Which of these is correct? Thanks!

1: The image of insects gnawing at his legs was still in his mind, as was the worms and frogs and snakes.

or:

2: The image of insects gnawing at his legs was still in his mind, as were the worms and frogs and snakes.

Technically it's "were."

But this is poorly done -- the parallels are not really parallels. You're comparing an image of something with worms and frogs.

Here's the proper construct:

The image of insects gnawing at his legs was still in his mind, as was that of the worms and frogs and snakes.

Even that is clunky. How about getting rid of "image" and be more direct.

In his mind, the insects were still gnawing at his legs, as were the worms and frogs and snakes.

But that's wrong as well, since the frogs and snakes and worms are not gnawing at his legs.

So:

The insects gnawing at his legs were still in his mind, as were the worms and frogs and snakes.

Anna Magdalena · Mar 14, 2009

Sorry to disagree, maestrowork, but it should be was because the subject of the sentence is image, which is singular and so takes the singular third person verb.

It also needs an extra clause.

So to make it clear grammatically, the sentence should read:

The image of insects gnawing at his legs was still in his mind, as was that of the worms and frogs and snakes.

But I agree it's awkward and wordy. It's a powerful image, more of a feeling than a visual one so I'd make it more powerful, more active. Something like:

He still felt insects gnawing his legs; the wet slime of the worms, frogs and snakes.

miles · Mar 14, 2009

Thanks Ray and Anna. I like your suggestion Anna. I've tweaked it a bit to fit the context of the rest of the paragraph and it's much better than what I originally had.

ideagirl · Mar 14, 2009

Anna Magdalena said:
Sorry to disagree, maestrowork, but it should be was because the subject of the sentence is image, which is singular and so takes the singular third person verb.

The subject of the first clause is image; the subject of the second is worms and frogs. So, "was" and then "were," but I agree the sentence is clunky and the parallels inexact (he doesn't have worms and frogs in his cranium!), and I like your second suggestion:

Anna Magdalena said:
He still felt insects gnawing his legs; the wet slime of the worms, frogs and snakes.

...though I would swap out the semicolon for a comma.

As for what the subject of the original sentence's second clause is, imagine another example: "Susan was still on the couch, as [was/were] Harry and David." It's "were," obviously.

Anna Magdalena · Mar 14, 2009

Ideagirl. Thanks. You're right about using a semicolon rather than a comma.

maestrowork · Mar 14, 2009

Anna Magdalena said:
Sorry to disagree, maestrowork, but it should be was because the subject of the sentence is image, which is singular and so takes the singular third person verb.

It also needs an extra clause.

So to make it clear grammatically, the sentence should read:

The image of insects gnawing at his legs was still in his mind, as was that of the worms and frogs and snakes.

Wasn't that what I posted?

The OP's sentence isn't "the image of worms, frogs and snakes" -- it was just "worms, frogs and snakes," so grammatically it should be "were worms, frogs and snakes." Only if you add "and that of" would it becomes "image of." And was exactly my first point. The question isn't about the first "was," but about the second "was/were."

Read my post again.

FennelGiraffe · Mar 14, 2009

The OP's sentence can be interpreted two ways. There could be one image of worms, frogs, and snakes together:

as was that of the worms and frogs and snakes.
(what maestro said)

or three individual images:

as were those of the worms and frogs and snakes.

Charlie Horse · Apr 2, 2009

This just proves the English language is an inexact science.

Dollywagon · Apr 7, 2009

... I'm struggling with something similar and have swapped it round about a hundred times:

"The first thing she saw was/were her shabby shoes"

Shoes are the image, they are plural, so I plumped for 'were,' - am I right?

Ludka · Apr 7, 2009

Charlie Horse said:
This just proves the English language is an inexact science.

I disagree. The rules are quite clear, it's the speaker's sentence that's murky. Those who are posting are all agreeing on the was/were usage, they are just unclear about the sentence.

I've said it before, but it bears repeating. Grammar is like math for language people. The rules are there, clearly defined, and once you're familiar with them, they give some nice, clear cut guidelines for writing.

Ludka · Apr 7, 2009

Dollywagon said:
... I'm struggling with something similar and have swapped it round about a hundred times:

"The first thing she saw was/were her shabby shoes"

Shoes are the image, they are plural, so I plumped for 'were,' - am I right?

Yes, but your "thing" should then be "things." It sounds off to your ear because you're saying, "The first (singular) thing she saw (plural)were her (plural) shoes."

It should go, "The first things she saw were her shoes." Of course, in speaking, we don't hear the "s" in things because it's followed by a word that starts with 's.' As a result, many will say the 's' after 'thing' is not needed.

Think of it this way, though. In the sentence, "The first one/ones through was/were the Italians." We would use 'ones' and 'were,' respectively, right? By the same token, it should be 'things' and 'were.'

Inky · Apr 7, 2009

Good Gawd!

Dollywagon · Apr 7, 2009

Ooooh, the 'thing,' 'things,' make sense - I'm feeling happier now!

Ludka · Apr 7, 2009

Glad I could bring a smile.

was or were?

miles

agent at The Knight Agency

TrickyFiction

Who?

miles

agent at The Knight Agency

maestrowork

Fear the Death Ray

Anna Magdalena

Your friendly cynic

miles

agent at The Knight Agency

ideagirl

Anna Magdalena

Your friendly cynic

maestrowork

Fear the Death Ray

FennelGiraffe

It's green they say

Charlie Horse

Speaking in metaphors

Dollywagon

Ludka

Hath more hair than wit

Ludka

Hath more hair than wit

Inky

Eat, Sleep, Write...

Dollywagon

Ludka

Hath more hair than wit