# There's lots of things



## tablecloth

Acabo de leer en un libro de texto la frase "theer's lots of things...". ¿Es eso correcto? ¿No debería ser "There are lots of things"?
Muchas gracias por sus respuestas.


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

tablecloth said:


> Acabo de leer en un libro de texto la frase "theer's lots of things...". ¿Es eso correcto? ¿No debería ser "There are lots of things"?
> Muchas gracias por sus respuestas.



Usted está correcto. Debería ser "There are a lot of things".


----------



## SrRdRaCinG

Es coloquial.


----------



## El Sonámbulo

Grammatically speaking, "there is a lot of things" is correct, only because "a lot" is singular, denoted by the "a"

One would not say "There are lots of things" because "lots" is not even correct grammar, one should select "many" over the word "lots"

Hope this cleared it up


----------



## tablecloth

Thank you very much, but I still don't understand why we can't say "There are lots of things". For me, it would mean "Hay montones de cosas" 
Could you help me to understand it? Thank you again.


----------



## jamafrind

Actually, grammatically speaking, it is possible to say, "there are lots of...". "Lots" is a permissble word in the English dictionary, and has an equivalence to "a great many/great deal". Accordingly, "there are lots of things" is permissible, as well. It depends upon the preference of the speaker...


----------



## tablecloth

Thank you very much.


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

El Sonámbulo said:


> Grammatically speaking, "there is a lot of things" is correct, only because "a lot" is singular, denoted by the "a"
> 
> One would not say "There are lots of things" because "lots" is not even correct grammar, one should select "many" over the word "lots"
> 
> Hope this cleared it up


 
There is a lot of things is not correct at all. The subject of the sentence is "the things", which is plural.
*There are a lot of things.*


----------



## El Sonámbulo

I disagree... "of things" is an adjective clause describing the "lot"


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

El Sonámbulo said:


> I disagree... "of things" is an adjective clause describing the "lot"


I'm sorry, but it is incorrect. Think of it this way:

There *are* a lot of things over there.
How many things *are* over there? --> You couldn't say "how many things is over there?"


Things is a plural word and the subject of that sentence, therefore the verb must agree.


----------



## El Sonámbulo

Think of it this way.

"There are a lot"

Don't even include the "of things" which is clearly an adjective clause describing the singular "lot"

If you omit "of things" then you would say "there is *a* lot"

"there are things" is correct

"there are lot" is incorrect


----------



## marquess

For years I have said 'a lot' to mean 'many' without thinking where it comes from. There is another use of the word 'lot' as in a lot at an auction (which could be a lot of one item or a lot of several things), and yet another use meaning one's postion and possessions in life ('be content with your lot', 'That's your lot'). They are all quite closely related, so although I would normally say 'There are lots of things', in the second sense it would be correct to say 'There is a lot of things' (lot number 35 in the auction - a pen collection). In one case the things are subject, in the other the lot is subject. Possibly the first use derives originally from the second which interestingly suggests the second construction is strictly more correct - even though I think the first is more common colloquially in full, and the second only common in short form ('there's a lot' rather than 'there is a lot') - maybe because there're a lot would be a horrible shortening?


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

El Sonámbulo said:


> Think of it this way.
> 
> "There are a lot"
> 
> Don't even include the "of things" which is clearly an adjective clause describing the singular "lot"
> 
> If you omit "of things" then you would say "there is *a* lot"
> 
> "there are things" is correct
> 
> "there are lot" is incorrect



We're not talking about the 'lot'. It's not "a lot" as in a parking lot. It's a lot meaning many.

There *are* many *things*. plural
There *are *a lot of *things*. plural
--
There *is* a lot of *salt*. singular
There *is* a lot of *paint*. singular


----------



## marquess

VivaReggaeton88 said:


> We're not talking about the 'lot'. It's not "a lot" as in a parking lot. It's a lot meaning many.
> 
> There *are* many *things*. plural
> There *are *a lot of *things*. plural
> --
> There *is* a lot of *salt*. singular
> There *is* a lot of *paint*. singular


 
There *is* a lot of *salt*. singular = there is many salt?
There *is* a lot of *paint*. singular = there is many paint?


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

marquess said:


> There *is* a lot of *salt*. singular = there is many salt?
> There *is* a lot of *paint*. singular = there is many paint?



That is how it is used. It is correct to say "There is a lot of salt/paint". Whoever doesn't think it's correct, english is not your first language.

What I was trying to say there was that *is *goes with a *singular* noun and *are *goes with a *plural* noun. 

There *are* a lot of *things.* correct.
There *is* a lot of *salt.* correct.


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

*a lot*
 a large quantity or number

Example: What a lot of letters!  

_See also:_ lot, lots

*Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary (Beta Version), © 2000-2006 K Dictionaries Ltd.*


----------



## El Sonámbulo

VivaReggaeton88 said:


> That is how it is used. It is correct to say "There is a lot of salt/paint". Whoever doesn't think it's correct, english is not your first language.
> 
> What I was trying to say there was that *is *goes with a *singular* noun and *are *goes with a *plural* noun.
> 
> There *are* a lot of *things.* correct.
> There *is* a lot of *salt.* correct.



There are a lot of things....incorrect here's why.

"Is" definitely goes with a singular noun; "a lot" is a singular noun.

"are" goes with a plural noun too, but you are forgetting what the actual direct object, or actually, in this case, the predicate nominitive is in this sentence...it is not "things" that is the predicate nominative, it is "a lot" that is the predicate nominative, therefore the verb has to agree with that subject.

"many" and "a lot" in this case, have different functions in the phrase; observe:

"There are many things"---"many" is an adjective that describes the predicate nominative "things." Therefore, it is correct to use "are" because in essence the sentence reads "there are things"

"There is a lot of things"---"a lot" is now the predicate nominative and *NOT* an adjective...in fact, "of things" acts like an adjective in this sense because it is a prepositional phrase using the preposition "of" to describe the "lot"


----------



## marquess

VivaReggaeton88 said:


> That is how it is used. It is correct to say "There is a lot of salt/paint". Whoever doesn't think it's correct, english is not your first language.
> 
> What I was trying to say there was that *is *goes with a *singular* noun and *are *goes with a *plural* noun.
> 
> There *are* a lot of *things.* correct.
> There *is* a lot of *salt.* correct.


 
Sorry, I was being a bit tongue in cheek here. I guess I was saying 'a lot' used this way is not always equal to 'many'. In this case it's 'much', or 'a great deal/amount'


----------



## VivaReggaeton88

marquess said:


> Sorry, I was being a bit tongue in cheek here. I guess I was saying 'a lot' used this way is not always equal to 'many'. In this case it's 'much', or 'a great deal/amount'


Yes, you are correct =] I'm sorry.


----------



## mhp

El Sonámbulo said:


> There are a lot of things....incorrect here's why.
> 
> "Is" definitely goes with a singular noun; "a lot" is a singular noun.
> 
> "are" goes with a plural noun too, but you are forgetting what the actual direct object, or actually, in this case, the predicate nominative is in this sentence...it is not "things" that is the predicate nominative, it is "a lot" that is the predicate nominative, therefore the verb has to agree with that subject.
> 
> "many" and "a lot" in this case, have different functions in the phrase; observe:
> 
> "There are many things"---"many" is an adjective that describes the predicate nominative "things." Therefore, it is correct to use "are" because in essence the sentence reads "there are things"
> 
> "There is a lot of things"---"a lot" is now the predicate nominative and *NOT* an adjective...in fact, "of things" acts like an adjective in this sense because it is a prepositional phrase using the preposition "of" to describe the "lot"



Read this: http://www.englishdaily626.com/qna.php?013
And this: http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=122290


----------



## El Sonámbulo

First of all, I don't trust English teachers...for one; because my teacher's grammar is not as good as mine (she uses prepositions at the ends of sentences, and she cannot correctly use the subjunctive tense in English; It's pretty bad when you are an English teacher holding a Masters' degree, and your students know the language better, then again, she may just prefer speaking in the coloquial tongue.

The thing that bothers me about both of those documents is their neglect for what the sentence is really saying. Each site says, "rearrange the sentence and read it"

If you were to rearrange "there is a lot of things" it would read "a lot of things are there," and the "of things" still has the same function: it's a prepositional phrase, and by no means is it the subject because it has an "of" preceeding it, therefore it has no bearing on the verb. One can erase the "of things" and read the sentence "a lot is there" and that would be correct. Or...the person can erase the subject of the sentence, which by the way, defines the pluralness or singularity of the verb, and it would read: "Of things are there" which is not correct.


----------



## RoseLilly

Most people, in speaking, would say "There's lots of things ..." One reason, perhaps, is that it sounds funny to say there're.  Another reason, perhaps, is that "there is/are ..." is used here just to fill the role of subject and verb.  They don't have any meaning.  

In writing, the phrase should be "There are lots of things ..." Wait! NO -- in writing, "lots of" is probably too informal, so the phrase would become "There are many things ...


----------



## Aspirante a Políglota

I think El Sonámbulo is technically correct.  "There is a lot of" is more gramatically correct.  But the thing is, nowadays the distinction often isn't made.  Colloquially you will hear "there are a lot of houses on this road" or "there are a lot of people here" or "there are a lot of cars on the road".  Do a search on google for "there are a lot of..." and you will see just how common it is.  And to that extent I believe VivaReggaeton88 is correct. 

But if you care about saying it right, you should say "there is a lot of...".  Same goes for other expressions such as "there is a ton of...", "there is a load of...", "there is a plethora of... (good books on the subject)", etc.
For example if we look at the spanish equivalent and replace the invariable "hay" with the verb "existir" we would say "existe un montón de libros" not "existen un montón de libros".  It sounds totally wrong to say it the second way in spanish but in English people have somehow become confused about what the verb is conjugating for. 

Now, as far as the expression "there are lots of...(cars on the road)" I believe it is a bit redundant (after all, "a lot" already signifies a large amount so why do we need to say "lots") but nevertheless gramatically correct.

En fin, según las normas (en inglés correcto) se puede decir lo siguiente:
There is a lot of salt.
There is a lot of hungry people here.
There is a lot of books in this library.

También lo siguiente:
There are lots of cars on the road today.

Pero no se puede decir:
"There are a lot of animals in the zoo.
"There is lots of things"


Sin embargo, si quieren saber cuales formas se usan con más frequencia, son estas:
There is a lot of salt
There are a lot of hungry people here
There are a lot of books in this library
There are lots of cars on the road
There are a lot of animals in the zoo
There's lots of things


So to the orginal poster,  you can say "there are lots of things" or "there is a lot of things".  In fact, if you don't care about official grammatical conventions and only care about how people actually speak you can also say "there are a lot of things" or "there's lots of things" (you won't be right, but you won't be alone either).  La primera palabra de la frase del texto está bien, ya que "there's" es una contracción de "there is".


----------



## El Sonámbulo

Exactly, the whole question is more of a preference. If you want to use pristine and completely correct grammar, definitely use "there is" if you want to use more coloquial, and thus, more common phrasing, say "there are," the majority of people do not care enough to make the distinction, so go with whichever phrasing you want.


----------



## mhp

El Sonámbulo said:


> First of all, I don't trust English teachers...for one; because my teacher's grammar is not as good as mine (she uses prepositions at the ends of sentences, and she cannot correctly use the subjunctive tense in English; It's pretty bad when you are an English teacher holding a Masters' degree, and your students know the language better, then again, she may just prefer speaking in the coloquial tongue.
> 
> The thing that bothers me about both of those documents is their neglect for what the sentence is really saying. Each site says, "rearrange the sentence and read it"
> 
> If you were to rearrange "there is a lot of things" it would read "a lot of things are there," and the "of things" still has the same function: it's a prepositional phrase, and by no means is it the subject because it has an "of" preceeding it, therefore it has no bearing on the verb. One can erase the "of things" and read the sentence "a lot is there" and that would be correct. Or...the person can erase the subject of the sentence, which by the way, defines the pluralness or singularity of the verb, and it would read: "Of things are there" which is not correct.


  I completely see your point. Normally, this argument of changing predicate with subject is bogus: My problem *is* my two cats. My two cats *are* my problem. 

  However, the sentence considered here is different. The verb “to be” in the construction “there is/are” is not copulative. In other words, “a lot” is not a predicate nominative as you have assumed. A predicate nominative is a noun that renames the subject: Mary is a girl: Mary=a girl. But: There is an apple: there < > an apple.

 PS. I’m sorry for the very short reply; I’m doing several other things right now. But I know you can fill in the gaps.


----------



## marquess

El Sonámbulo said:


> First of all, I don't trust English teachers...for one; because my teacher's grammar is not as good as mine (she uses prepositions at the ends of sentences, and she cannot correctly use the subjunctive tense in English; It's pretty bad when you are an English teacher holding a Masters' degree, and your students know the language better, then again, she may just prefer speaking in the coloquial tongue.
> 
> The thing that bothers me about both of those documents is their neglect for what the sentence is really saying. Each site says, "rearrange the sentence and read it"
> 
> If you were to rearrange "there is a lot of things" it would read "a lot of things are there," and the "of things" still has the same function: it's a prepositional phrase, and by no means is it the subject because it has an "of" preceeding it, therefore it has no bearing on the verb. One can erase the "of things" and read the sentence "a lot is there" and that would be correct. Or...the person can erase the subject of the sentence, which by the way, defines the pluralness or singularity of the verb, and it would read: "Of things are there" which is not correct.


 
I have to disagree with at least part of this:
If you were to rearrange "there is a lot of things" it would read "a lot of things is there," - which doesn't normally sound right to me. I still think there are two uses going on here. The more common one (as in the two links - post 20) uses 'a lot of ' interchangeably with 'lots of' to mean many or much (my example 1 post 12) - in this case, 'are' fits better than 'is', as everyone else seems to believe. It would only sound correct in the more uncommon, but existing, use of 'a lot' (my example 2 post 12), which is what El Sonámbulo seems to be arguing is the correct interpretation. It strikes me as possible the second use came first, but it is by no means the most common now, to the point where the first has become quite acceptable and natural usage.
Another interesting point which I think has been overlooked in this thread is the original poster's example was 'there's lots of' not 'there's a lot of' as in El Sonámbulo's first reply. What does El Sonámbulo say when lots and things are both plural as in the original? When expanded 'there is lots of things' seems doubly wrong, but people do say it - hence my question at the end of post 12!


----------



## El Sonámbulo

It would be correct to say "There are lots of things" because "lots" is now the plural predicate nominative, and thus you can use a plural verb.



> n other words, “a lot” is not a predicate nominative as you have assumed. A predicate nominative is a noun that renames the subject: Mary is a girl: Mary=a girl. But: There is an apple: there < > an apple.


Mhp, you bring up an interesting thought here, however I'm almost certain that the "there" does not even matter. In Latin, many times there is no subject even included because the "it" or whatever subject may be is implied. If you have ever come across impersonal expressions in Spanish you might be able to better relate. For example, in spanish one would say "es bueno que" or "es posible que" meaning "it is good that" or "it is possible that" because the word "es" although it means "is" in the sense of "to be" has an implied "it" in front of it.

Therefore, the with the implied "it" in "there is a lot" 

it = a lot


----------



## mhp

I’m sorry, but you lost me.  
The verb _haber _can be impersonal...but that's Spanish grammar, not English! Do you understand why your analysis of predicate nominative was incorrect?

 In a construction like “there are two apples”, “there” is a “dummy subjects” that serves as a placeholder for the real subject: two apples. In “there are a lot of people” the real subject is not “a lot,” but “a lot of people”. 

  There is a set of knives. The real subject: a set of knives
  (a set of knives) is what I want for Christmas.
  (a set) is what I want for Christmas. [Nonsense]

  There are a lot of people. The real subject: a lot of people
  (a lot of people) are here.
  (a lot) is here. [Nonsense---Unless, as Viva points out, you are a referring to a parcel of land]

Edit: Or
  There are a lot of people named John. The real subject: a lot of people
  (a lot of people) are named John.
  (a lot) is named John. [a parcel of land is named John]


----------



## Aspirante a Políglota

Pensándolo bien, creo que me equivoqué.  Estaba pensando en la expresión en español y resulta que son distintas.  Estoy de acuerdo con mhp.  Así que deberían borrar lo que dije antes.

En cuanto a la pregunta de RoseLilly, "What's wrong with using a preposition at the end of a sentence?"
Well, nothing is wrong with using a preposition at the end of  a sentence if you are speaking/writing informally.  But in more formal writing/speaking situations it is considered bad gramar to leave the preposition at the end of the sentence. 
For example, in informal speach you could say "the woman I want to get married to" but in more proper English you would need to say "the woman to whom I want to get married".  Another example might be "the profesor I studied with" which in formal language would be "the profesor with whom I studied".


----------



## tablecloth

Thank you all for all those interesting explanations. This forum is really wonderful.
Saludos.


----------



## El Sonámbulo

mhp said:


> I’m sorry, but you lost me.
> The verb _haber _can be impersonal...but that's Spanish grammar, not English! Do you understand why your analysis of predicate nominative was incorrect?
> 
> In a construction like “there are two apples”, “there” is a “dummy subjects” that serves as a placeholder for the real subject: two apples. In “there are a lot of people” the real subject is not “a lot,” but “a lot of people”.
> 
> There is a set of knives. The real subject: a set of knives
> (a set of knives) is what I want for Christmas.
> (a set) is what I want for Christmas. [Nonsense]
> 
> There are a lot of people. The real subject: a lot of people
> (a lot of people) are here.
> (a lot) is here. [Nonsense---Unless, as Viva points out, you are a referring to a parcel of land]



In response to this I'd have to agree with the part where you said 



> There is a set of knives. The real subject: a set of knives
> (a set of knives) is what I want for Christmas.
> (a set) is what I want for Christmas. [Nonsense]



The reason for this is that, yes when you say you want "a set" that does sound awkward, yet the reason it doesn't sound awkward when you add the prepositional phrase "of knives" is because that prepositional phrase acts as an adjective to specify what kind of set you want. The direct object is still a set, and the "of knives" specifies what kind of set it is.


----------



## El Sonámbulo

Aspirante a Políglota said:


> Pensándolo bien, creo que me equivoqué.  Estaba pensando en la expresión en español y resulta que son distintas.  Estoy de acuerdo con mhp.  Así que deberían borrar lo que dije antes.
> 
> En cuanto a la pregunta de RoseLilly, "What's wrong with using a preposition at the end of a sentence?"
> Well, nothing is wrong with using a preposition at the end of  a sentence if you are speaking/writing informally.  But in more formal writing/speaking situations it is considered bad gramar to leave the preposition at the end of the sentence.
> For example, in informal speach you could say "the woman I want to get married to" but in more proper English you would need to say "the woman to whom I want to get married".  Another example might be "the profesor I studied with" which in formal language would be "the profesor with whom I studied".



I agree with this. It's merely informal to leave prepositions at the ends of sentences, but you may do whatever pleases you, either way gets the same point across.


----------



## cubaMania

tablecloth said:


> Acabo de leer en un libro de texto la frase "theer's lots of things...". ¿Es eso correcto? ¿No debería ser "There are lots of things"?
> Muchas gracias por sus respuestas.


*lots of* y *a lot of* se usan informalmente para *mucho* (la cosa no es contable) o *muchos* (la cosa es contable.) Entonces lo correcto es:
There *are* lots of things. There *are* a lot of things. (nombre contable: things)
There *is* lots of butter. There *is* a lot of butter. (nombre no contable: butter)
El error que han cometido algunos arriba es en confundir este sentido the "*lot*" con otro sentido, en español "*parcela*" o "*lote*".

You can figure out which of these different uses of the word "lots" is in play by trying to substitute "one" or "two" for "a". If you cannot substitute, then you are dealing with a case where "a lot of" or "lots of" means "much" or "many" and the verb agreement is with the noun, not with "lot". Only if "lot" is being used in the sense of "parcel" or similar would you have verb agreement with "lot".
For example:
"A lot of items *was* purchased at the auction." is OK if you mean that, as is common in auctions, several items were bundled together and sold as a parcel or "lot". If it would make sense to say "One lot of items was purchased at the auction." then "lot" is the subject and it takes the singular verb form.
But if what you mean is that many separate items were purchased at the auction using the "a lot of" or "lots of" terminology, you must say:
A lot of items *were* purchased at the auction. Here "items" is the subject and it takes the plural verb form.

The same goes for "a lot of land" or "lots of land". It (EDIT: i.e. whether verb agreement is with "lot" and "lots" or with "land") depends upon whether you mean much land, or whether you mean a parcel ("lot") or several parcels ("lots") of land.


----------



## RoseLilly

cubaMania, 

Your explanation is great!  Thanks for posting.

Rosie


----------



## Aspirante a Políglota

cubaMania, I agree with everything you said.  However, I do believe that "a lot of land" could mean either "a large amount/extent of land" or "a given parcel of land".  For example, if I say "I want to buy a lot of land", it really isn't clear whether I mean "to buy a large quantity of land" or whether I am refering to a particular measured piece of land having specific boundaries. 
I think the english constructions are much more confusing than the spanish constructions used to say the same things.

I study a lot -- Estudio mucho.
I have a lot of friends -- Tengo muchos amigos / Tengo un montón de amigos
There are a lot of people here – Hay muchísima gente aquí 
There are lots of books in your room – hay un montón de libros en tu cuarto

English has:
there is a lot of
there are a lot of
there are lots of
there is lots of

And all of them simply mean “hay un montón de”.  The various English constructions don’t even contain any shades of meaning, at least not to my ears.  Some people will argue that “there are lots of” refers to an amount greater than “there are a lot of”, but I don’t agree.  They are used interchangeably.  They all mean the same exact thing: “there exists a large amount of”.  

“There is a lot of” and “there is lots of” are interchangeable.  As are, “there are a lot of” and “there are lots of”.  But the verb has to agree in number with the subject.

For example, you can say:
There is a lot of salt on the ground
There is lots of salt on the ground

or if the subject is plural you can say:
There are a lot of books on the ground
There are lots of books on the ground

In Spanish you use the same construction for all four examples, “hay un montón de”.
“Hay un montón de sal en el suelo” covers the first two examples.
“Hay un montón de libros en el suelo” covers the second two examples.		

Of course, there are many other expressions both in Spanish and English that have similar meanings.  But “hay un montón de” directly corresponds to the four English expressions mentioned above and it is much easier to use, in my opinion.


----------

