SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Martin C. Tangora)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:53 2006
In-Reply-To:
<001701c621f2$d3209d10$1a5cb382@MADRIGAL>
Message-ID:
References:
<[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]> <001701c621f2$d3209d10$1a5cb382@MADRIGAL>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
A team is a collective, and can have a collective intent.  
Have you never participated in team sports?  :-)  
  
I am surprised to see that you are in Canada.  
In the USA a team is usually grammatically singular:  
Chicago beats Houston.  But in the UK  
it is more often plural: Manchester win again.  
I would have thought that Canada would follow the UK in this.  
Either way, "team" is grammatically a "collective noun."  
  
(My examples are dubious but I stand by my point.)  
  
In any event the last thing I would call a football team  
is an abstraction.  
  
Martin C. Tangora  
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2