# C'était une bonne nouvelle



## Mag1977

Hi!

Would you accept this translation: "it was *a* good news" or is it better to say "those were good news".

Thanks

Mag

PS
I haven't understood if "news" is used as a singular or a plural word yet...


----------



## la_cavalière

"It was good news." No "a."

"News" is singular: "The news was good."


----------



## texasweed

*That was good news*

*News *is* both* singular and plural, somewhat like "information" (which *never* takes an "s" at the end.)


----------



## texasweed

la_cavalière said:
			
		

> "News" is singular: "The news was good."


What about when you watch the news ? One information and BANG, pubs et film ?


----------



## la_cavalière

texasweed said:
			
		

> *That was good news*
> 
> *News *is* both* singular and plural, somewhat like "information" (which *never* takes an "s" at the end.)


 
Texasweed, can you think of a case where "news" is plural? I can't think of one.


----------



## Paulinne

Hi all!! 
In my opinion, *news* is uncountable.. So it isn't plural but on the other hand it isn't singular neither because we can't use "a".. The same case as *information *or *advice*, isn't it?
 P.


----------



## emma42

Mag, if you wanted to refer to just one piece of news, you would have to say,

That was an interesting piece of news
That was an interesting news item (this would be used if talking about news on the TV)
That was an interesting bit of news


----------



## texasweed

la_cavalière said:
			
		

> Texasweed, can you think of a case where "news" is plural? I can't think of one.


I posted one instance ! : What about when you watch the news ? One information and BANG, pubs et film ? 
Even WR dictionary concurs.


----------



## la_cavalière

texasweed said:
			
		

> I posted one instance ! : What about when you watch the news ? One information and BANG, pubs et film ?
> Even WR dictionary concurs.


 
The news on TV is singular:

The news is on!

Is the news over yet?

The news starts at 10 p.m.


----------



## risingsun

News is uncountable, just like information or advice, for that matter.

Emma's examples are excellent as they quantify the news.
If you do not want to quantify, we can say
There was some good news.
There was good news.

Similarly,
I have some advice for you.
I have a piece of advice for you.


----------



## emma42

texasweed, I don't understand your last post.  ??


----------



## Mag1977

And what about "c'est une terrible nouvelle!". "It's a terrible piece of news" or  "It's terrible news" ?


----------



## marget

texasweed said:
			
		

> I posted one instance ! : What about when you watch the news ? One information and BANG, pubs et film ?
> Even WR dictionary concurs.


If someone were to ask me: "Did you watch the news"? I think I'd say "Yes, I saw watched it". I wouldn't say "Yes, I watched them".
  My own dictionary says that news always takes a singular verb.  I think we'd use singular pronouns too.


----------



## texasweed

news(plural & in general)*nfpl *nouvelles news(ite*m*) *nf **nouvelle *news(recent events)nfactualités (_presse, radio_)


----------



## emma42

Mag, you would translate that as "It's a terrible piece of news" - if that's what you were asking!

The point is, you can't say "a news".  It's that simple.


----------



## marget

texasweed said:
			
		

> news(plural & in general)*nfpl *nouvelles news(item)*nf **nouvelle *news(recent events)nfactualités (_presse, radio_)


When I read that, I thought they just meant that it could be plural or singular in French, not English.


----------



## texasweed

*75 million* and 200 thousand hits for "a news" on Google...
I'm sick of this argument, just look it up on the dico.


----------



## risingsun

I did check on the google. Checked up to 50 hits, none of them have "a news" as a stand alone expression. It is always followed by a noun like "a news item", "a news service" or "a news site", "a news conference" etc... 
"a" is clearly not for "news"...


----------



## la_cavalière

texasweed said:
			
		

> *75 million* and 200 thousand hits for "a news" on Google...
> I'm sick of this argument, just look it up on the dico.


 
We love you Texasweed, but unless you can find an example where "news" takes a plural verb ("the news were"), you have to trust us: news is never considered a plural noun.


----------



## risingsun

la_cavalière said:
			
		

> We love you Texasweed, but unless you can find an example where "news" takes a plural verb ("the news were"), you have to trust us: news is never considered a plural noun.



Gramatically speaking, in fact news is a plural noun which is used with a singular verb formation. But actually it is uncountable. It is neither singular nor plural.


----------



## la_cavalière

risingsun said:
			
		

> Gram*m*atically speaking, in fact news is a plural noun which is used with a singular verb formation. But actually it is uncountable. It is neither singular nor plural.


 
You are technically correct, but the original poster wanted to know what kind of verb to use with "news." Telling someone that "news" can be either singular or plural confuses the issue.


----------



## Mag1977

Now it's clear for me!

Thanks a lot!


----------



## texasweed

la_cavalière said:
			
		

> We love you Texasweed, but unless you can find an example where "news" takes a plural verb ("the news were"), you have to trust us: news is never considered a plural noun.


I'll take the challenge 

In 1972, the news were reorganized once again 
The News were nominated for a Grammy award
The news were everywhere
The latest news were scandalous
Viewers would benefit if the news were more parsimonious by using shorter terms
The news were from the beginning exactly like BBC
Etc, etc, etc....
60 100 hits on Google.


----------



## emma42

Sorry, texasweed, but all your examples are incorrect English (BE and AE).


----------



## la_cavalière

texasweed said:
			
		

> I'll take the challenge
> 
> In 1972, the news were reorganized once again
> The News were nominated for a Grammy award
> The news were everywhere
> The latest news were scandalous
> Viewers would benefit if the news were more parsimonious by using shorter terms
> The news were from the beginning exactly like BBC
> Etc, etc, etc....
> 60 100 hits on Google.


 

Thank you, Texasweed.

None of these examples sounds right to my native American ear.

Plus, in your sentence beginning with "viewers," the verb "to be" is in the conditional form and not the plural form.


----------



## texasweed

emma42 said:
			
		

> Sorry, texasweed, but all your examples are incorrect English (BE and AE).


These examples come straight from Google and are perfect English.


----------



## emma42

Mate, google often provides incorrect English, among many other things.  The sentences are not correct.


----------



## risingsun

texasweed said:
			
		

> I'll take the challenge
> 
> 1) In 1972, the news were reorganized once again
> 2) The News were nominated for a Grammy award
> 3) The news were everywhere
> 4) The latest news were scandalous
> 5) Viewers would benefit if the news were more parsimonious by using shorter terms
> 6) The news were from the beginning exactly like BBC
> Etc, etc, etc....
> 60 100 hits on Google.



In your examples , 2, & 3, "the news" is the name of a band "Huey Lewis & *the News*"
1 & 2, "the news" refers to the various news programmes
5 as pointed by cavaliere, "were" is the conditional form
As for 4, I tried to find in google, but couldn't....

While the rest of your 60,100 hits, are something like this:
1) the largest category of stories in *the news were*  stories that share knowledge
2) Over the past seventeen years 41 issues of *the News were* published
3) Four journalists from the Liberian daily *The News were*  released on March 30

I really think you have taken this argument of yours too far by referring to the number of hits you get on Google. You should perhaps check the hits first... I have read your translations earlier and they are good. But you have to accept what we are saying here... Your argument fails you...


----------



## texasweed

Fine, I surrender. Fact is : I'm beat. Dead tired. Slept some 4 hrs et je suis somnambule to top it. I'll discard all dictionaries' versions and let members have it their way


----------



## risingsun

texasweed said:
			
		

> Fine, I surrender. Fact is : I'm beat. Dead tired. Slept some 4 hrs et je suis somnambule to top it. I'll discard all dictionaries' versions and let members have it their way




What a surrender!!! You are not really surrendering, are you? Your reference to the so-called dictionary versions clearly means that we are wrong....

Sorry that I am insisting even though you are tired...  But which dictionary versions are you talking about??? Could you name them please.. 

And maybe you should look at the following one:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=news


----------



## la_cavalière

I haven't yet find a dicitonary that says that "news" is used with a plural verb.

Here are a few:

Merriam-Webster:
*news *Function: _noun plural but *singular in construction*_

Dictionary.com:
*news* _pl.n._ _(used with a *sing. verb*)_

American Heritage:
*news *PLURAL NOUN_ (used with a *sing*. verb)_

Harper Collins:
*news* NOUN *SING*


----------



## risingsun

Just one last word for Texasweed... Please verify what you say on the Forum.. It is better to say "I do not know", "I am not sure", "I suggest" rather than mislead someone...


----------



## OlivierG

Well, the original topic seems to have been fully addressed, so this thread is now closed.
The outcome of this story could be: don't trust Google too much.


----------

