# Two plus two is/are four



## Outsider

There was a previous thread about this question in the English forum, but I would like to extend it to other languages. What do you think is the right way to say this equality? Please answer the poll.

I will throw in a few extra questions, as well:

1) Were you taught a particular way to make these sorts of statements in school?
2) If so, does what you were taught coincide with how people actually speak?

I'm looking forward to your replies.


----------



## dn88

Hi, in Polish it's definitely "is". In no way can one say "are" in my mother tongue. That would sound dreadful. Simply impossible. We say "Dwa plus dwa *jest* cztery" - "Two plus two *is *four".

Cheers


----------



## irene.acler

In *Italian*, either options are acceptable:

_due più due *fa* quattro_
_due più due *fanno* quattro._

Notice that we use the verb "fare" (literally = to do) and not "essere" (= to be).
As far as I'm concerned, I prefer to use the singular form of the verb, but you can find both versions.


----------



## Outsider

In Portuguese also, both versions are used:

_dois mais dois *é* quatro
dois mais dois *são* quatro
_
We do use the verb "to be".


----------



## Lemminkäinen

In Norwegian it's *to pluss to er fire*, but as we don't conjugate verbs in person (*er* means 'am, are, is') I voted for that option.


----------



## Aurin

In German:
2 + 2 = (ist: Singular) 4
In Spanish:
2 + 2 = (son: Plural) 4


----------



## Whodunit

Aurin said:


> In German:
> 2 + 2 = (ist: Singular) 4
> zwei plus zwei *ist/macht/ist gleich* vier


 
That's what we were taught at school, but it is also possible to use the plural. The singular, however, is more common for longer (more complicated) calculations.

Anyway, we should point out that we are taught to use _ist gleich_ (= is equal to) or _macht_ (= makes) for the equal sign. But you wouldn't use the verb _machen_ for inequality, for which we say _ist ungleich_ (= is inequal to) or _ist nicht _(= is not).


----------



## jonquiliser

We make it easy for ourselves: Swedish has it "två plus två är fyra". As in Norwegian, no personal/plural verbal conjugations.


----------



## badgrammar

I would say "is", or more often "makes 4" or "equals 4"...  But always as a second person conjugation, not third person.  But I'd hardly be shocked that some folk do say it that way.  Thinking about it, I guess it makes sense that it be plural though. Two and two are four.  They are four.  Not they is four. 

Maybe I've been saying it wrong all these years.  It's entirely possible.


----------



## Lemminkäinen

In Russian, you say *два плюс два - четыре* (dva plyus dba - chetyre), as the present form of 'to be' is not written. I'm curious of what they'd say in the future or the past, though (theoretically, as it's sort of a basic truth  ).


----------



## jonquiliser

badgrammar said:


> I would say "is", or more often "makes 4" or "equals 4"...  But always as a second person conjugation, not third person.  But I'd hardly be shocked that some folk do say it that way.  Thinking about it, I guess it makes sense that it be plural though. Two and two are four.  They are four.  Not they is four.



But maybe in "two and two equals four" the subject is "two and two" (not "two" and "two") so then singular..? And in "two and two is four" the two twoes really are two separate subjects? Could that be? (I don't really have any clue, I guessing only).


----------



## Whodunit

jonquiliser said:


> But maybe in "two and two equals four" the subject is "two and two" (not "two" and "two") so then singular..?


 
That should be true. As I said, in German we use the singular for longer calculations, e.g. with roots and multiplications. So the singular sees it as a whole.

In _Four minus two is two_, the plural wouldn't make much sense, would it?


----------



## Outsider

jonquiliser said:


> But maybe in "two and two equals four" the subject is "two and two" (not "two" and "two") so then singular..?


Or maybe it's "four"... 


The verb in this sentence is a copula, so I think that in principle each of its two arguments has equal claim to being the subject.


----------



## Stéphane89

In French, we say *Deux plus/et deux font quatre* which litteraly means _Two plus/and two make four_. So, the verb is in the plural form.

But, *Deux plus deux ça fait quatre* (_Two plus two that makes four)_ can also be acceptable. Here the verb is in the singular form.


----------



## cyanista

Lemminkäinen said:


> In Russian, you say *два плюс два - четыре* (dva plyus dba - chetyre), as the present form of 'to be' is not written. I'm curious of what they'd say in the future or the past, though (theoretically, as it's sort of a basic truth  ).



I'm having a hard time with the available poll options -  it's either "option one" or "neither of the above".

Lemminkäinen's translation is absolutely correct. Such sentences don't normally have or need a verb in the present tense. ("Two plus two - four.") Even if we used *есть* it wouldn't help us much as it's unchangeable. In the past or future we would use the singular, though. 

Another alternative would be *два плюс два равняется четыре *(two plus two equals four). Here it's as clear as daylight - the verb is in the singular. 


By the way, Lemmi,* два плюс два будет четыре* (two plus two will be four) and the like are actually used in colloquial speech. If someone is slowly adding things up and thinking aloud they would be likely to say "A plus B will be... C... no, wait!.. D".


----------



## Outsider

cyanista said:


> I'm having a hard time with the available poll options -  it's either "option one" or "neither of the above".


If you language has zero copula in this kind of sentence, you should pick option four.


----------



## tom_in_bahia

I think I've heard "two plus two are four", but to me, a number is a singular item (hence "a number"). However, the equation, in the mind of (most?) native English speakers, must be a singular concept as well.


----------



## cyanista

> If you language has zero copula in this kind of sentence, you should pick option four.


But in doing so I would disregard the "singular-oriented" logic that is indisputably present in "my" language, wouldn't I?


----------



## ryuusaki

Chinese:
2加2等於4
We say 等於(equal).

2加2是4
是 kind of means is/are (there is no plural form in chinese)

It is also a possible way to say it, but people use "equal" more.


----------



## linguist786

In *Gujarati*, you don't use anything!

"be ane be chaar" (lit: two and two, four)

I'm not 100% on this, since I wasn't taught maths in Gujarati, but my parents were. When they count, that is what they say. I assume it's the same in Hindi/Urdu, but I can't be sure. 

(To be honest, I never count in Gujarati - my mind works about three times faster in English!)


----------



## Outsider

cyanista said:


> But in doing so I would disregard the "singular-oriented" logic that is indisputably present in "my" language, wouldn't I?


I don't follow you. Do you think you could explain better what happens in Russian?


----------



## Whodunit

Outsider said:


> I don't follow you. Do you think you could explain better what happens in Russian?


 
See it like this:

_2 + 2 = 4_ would be _two plus two four_ in Russian. So, there's no copula (which is very normal in some languages) in the present tense. If you were to say _2 + 2 = ... 5, hm no, 4!_ in Russian, a copula would be used (the copula exists, but is normally not used), because it works like a filler word.

This can be proved if you used the future in Russian (I think it works the same in Arabic): _two plus two will most likely be four, but I can ask my calculator_. So, you would use the singular for _will be_.


----------



## Outsider

Thank you for the explanation. I now see that Cyanista had alluded previously to the use of the singular with other tenses:



cyanista said:


> In the past or future we would use the singular, though.


You can choose the option with "is", then.


----------



## Lemminkäinen

cyanista said:


> In the past or future we would use the singular, though. [/SIZE]



But in what gender? I'd guess you'd use the neuter singular past tense of 'to be': *было*. Is that correct?


----------



## elroy

Arabic is like Russian: either "equals" (singular - never plural) or zero copula (less common). I don't know whether to vote for option 1 or option 4. 

As I was not ever taught math in Arabic I cannot answer your follow-up questions. However, I assume that what people say coincides with what they've been taught to say.


----------



## Frank06

Hi,

In *Dutch* it's 
twee plus twee _is_ vier (_singular)_
twee plus twee _is gelijk aan_ vier (_singular_, lit. is equal to)

Also:
twee appels plus twee appels _is gelijk aan_ vier appels.

Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## Outsider

elroy said:


> Arabic is like Russian: either "equals" (singular - never plural) or zero copula (less common). I don't know whether to vote for option 1 or option 4.


Option 4 would not be entirely accurate. Pick 1.


----------



## cyanista

Whodunit said:


> See it like this:
> 
> _2 + 2 = 4_ would be _two plus two four_ in Russian. So, there's no copula (which is very normal in some languages) in the present tense. If you were to say _2 + 2 = ... 5, hm no, 4!_ in Russian, a copula would be used (the copula exists, but is normally not used), because it works like a filler word.


Just to make it clear: the present tense copula *есть* would not be used under any circumstances. The future tense copula *будет* could be used colloquially when someone doesn't have the answer straightaway (see my previous post). In a more official setting you would always use равно/равняется.


Lemminkäinen said:


> But in what gender? I'd guess you'd use the neuter singular past tense of 'to be': *было*. Is that correct?


Yep. That is, if anyone would ever need to say it. 
В былые времена, когда два плюс два еще *было* четыре. (In times long gone, when two plus two still used to be four).


----------



## suslik

In Estonian there is no difference between "is" or "are"


----------



## OldAvatar

irene.acler said:


> In *Italian*, either options are acceptable:
> 
> _due più due *fa* quattro_
> _due più due *fanno* quattro._
> 
> Notice that we use the verb "fare" (literally = to do) and not "essere" (= to be).



Similar in Romanian.
_due più due *fa* quattro = doi plus doi *fac *patru

*fac*_, from verb _*a face*, *facere* _(literally = to do, to make). 

Best regards


----------



## Jana337

I too have a hard time choosing an option.

In Czech, it depends on the number after =.
If you say *"two/three/four men are ..-"*, it translates - logically - to "*number + men + are ..."*.
But if the number is five and more (but not 22-24, 32-34 etc. in standard Czech), you get a genitive construction with a singular verb (no kidding!): "*Pět mužů je ..."* - "*Five of men is ...*" In the past tense where gender matters, the verb is always neutral. More.


So:
1 + 1 = 2 - jedna plus jedna *jsou (are)* dvě
1 + 2 = 3 - jedna plus dvě *jsou (are)* tři
2 + 2 = 4 - dvě plus dvě *jsou (are)* čtyři
2 + 3 = 5 - dvě plus tři *je (is)* pět
2 + 4 = 6 - dvě plus čtyři* je (is)* šest

Colloquially, some people would say "je" also for 2, 3, 4.
Then there's a way out: is equal, which translates to "rovná se", a singular verb regardless of numbers involved.


----------



## Outsider

I hadn't anticipated that situation. I guess Czech will have to be left out of this poll, Jana.


----------



## betulina

In Catalan we use the plural form:

_Dos més _(or rather _i_)_ dos *són* quatre_, or also with verb "to make": _fer_, like Italian, Romanian and French - _dos i dos *fan* quatre_ (plural, too)

The singular sounds very odd. You are very likely to hear it without a verb, though: 

_Dos i dos, quatre._


----------



## Abu Bishr

Frank06 said:


> Hi,
> 
> In *Dutch* it's
> twee plus twee _is_ vier (_singular)_
> twee plus twee _is gelijk aan_ vier (_singular_, lit. is equal to)
> 
> Also:
> twee appels plus twee appels _is gelijk aan_ vier appels.
> 
> Groetjes,
> 
> Frank


 
In Afrikaans it's exactly the same except that "_gelijk_" is spelt "_gelyk_". For a moment I thought I was reading Afrikaans .


----------



## sagar grammar

Here is something related

Two and two make<s> four.

Note that.
OALD has a sentence and singular verb is used.
"Three and three is/equals six"
 notes


----------



## apmoy70

Greek:

In formal language 2 + 2 *«ίσον»* [ˈison] (neut.) 4 --> _equal sign_ (sing.)

Colloquially we may equally use *«κάνει»* [ˈkani] (3rd p. sing. present indicative) --> _it makes_ but also *«κάνουν»* [ˈkanun] (3rd p. pl. present indicative) --> _they make_


----------



## Penyafort

Whether I use the verb "to be" or "to make", in both Catalan and Spanish, I'd definitely use the plural form. Specially if I use the "two and two" formula instead of the "two plus two". This is probably due to the fact of seeing it as a subject made of two elements. Like when you say "John and Mary", "the book and the pencil", etc.


----------



## Armas

Finnish:

We use the singular 2 + 2 _*on*_ 4 "2 + 2 *is* 4".


----------



## ilocas2

In Serbian/Bosnian/Croatian both are used in this case.

Dva i dva je četiri. (Two and two is four.)
Dva plus dva je četiri. (Two plus two is four.)
Dva i dva su četiri. (Two and two are four.)
Dva plus dva su četiri. (Two plus two are four.)


----------

