After reading this on Yahoo! Beauty, I don’t feel good:
Let’s hope that was just a typo; I’d hate to think the writer thought it was correct.
So, the editor for Yahoo! Sports was going to check this headline — you know, for grammatical errors, spelling, that sort of thing — but took a detour at the latte station and totally forgot about this:
Ha! I made that up. I really don’t know why that headline contains that error. It seems pretty obvious that there’s a plural subject, but a singular verb.
Folks looking for clear information about the effects of Brexit on the US should steer clear of Yahoo! Finance, which offers this prediction:
Can you overlook the obvious disconnect between the plural subject (economy and market) and the singular verb (has)? I should have stopped reading at that point, because the next sentence is a mess of pronouns with no antecedents, except maybe in the mind of the writer. What does “it does have one… exposure” refer to? Does the pronoun it refer to the US economy or the US stock market or the UK economy? And what does its refer to? Some country? I have no freakin’ idea. What I did learn from this? I won’t be reading the accompanying article.
If I were this Yahoo! Style writer, I’d learn something about English grammar:
I’d learn that a verb must agree with its subject and that it is a singular subject and were is a plural verb. I might also learn that it were can be correct — but only when it’s stating something that is not true. Consider this example: We laughed at the sentence as if it were a joke.