There, There
Language Log: Agreement with nearest always bad?
So all would seem (relatively) clear, until I came across item (8), which happens to have the subject , in this case a coordinate subject, after the verb:
(8) Going to his house was what I lived for. There were liquor, music, and a strong desire for my body. (J. L. King, On the Down Low (Broadway Books, 2004), p. 33)
As I pointed out on the American Dialect Society mailing list on 12/28/04, (8) has the “correct” (plural) agreement with expletive there, but it still sounds weird to me; I’d much prefer (8′).
(8′) Going to his house was what I lived for. There was liquor, music, and a strong desire for my body.
A few respondents stuck with the technically “correct” (8) — and I am not denying their judgments — but many agreed with me that (8) was awful, (8′) much better (maybe even simply the “correct” version), and (8″) straightforwardly acceptable:
(8″) Going to his house was what I lived for. There were drinks, music, and a strong desire for my body.
8 sounds fine to me, but only if there is the locative. Reading it as the existential there sounds really odd to my ear, and I would go with 8′ in that case. I don’t know if that’s strange or not.
Friday, February 4th, 2005