Who were / was there? (2025)

The Newt said:

We need context, please. "The people who were there were all French" is grammatically correct, but I suspect that's not what you're asking.

Click to expand...

For example, my friend goes to a party but I don't. Next day I ask her, who were/was there?

deadbeesonacake said:

For example, my friend goes to a party but I don't. Next day I ask her, who were/was there?

Click to expand...

Only "Who was there?" is correct.

The Newt said:

Only "Who was there?" is correct.

Click to expand...

Thanks for your answer! Why is the other option incorrect?

deadbeesonacake said:

Thanks for your answer! Why is the other option incorrect?

Click to expand...

In English we use the singular to form the question, even if we know there were several people there.

The Newt said:

In English we use the singular to form the question, even if we know there were several people there.

Click to expand...

Ok, got it! Thank you very much for your time!

The Newt said:

In English we use the singular to form the question, even if we know there were several people there.

Click to expand...

I had never noticed this about English. It seems odd, but of course you are right that we only use the singular in such questions. That also applies to other question words. For example, if we know that many different items were taken in a burglary, we would still ask "What was stolen?" (not "were").

However, it wouldn't strike me as horribly unnatural if I heard someone ask "Who all were there?" This "all" sort of serves as a plural marker. This, though, is very colloquial and probably not considered strictly correct.

gengo said:

[...]

However, it wouldn't strike me as horribly unnatural if I heard someone ask "Who all were there?" This "all" sort of serves as a plural marker. This, though, is very colloquial and probably not considered strictly correct.

Click to expand...

Yes, in fact "who-all" serves as a pronoun in some dialects. But I think we'd still probably say "Who-all was there?" There's an earlier discussion of that point (see comment #3) here: who all

I just realized that this is even more inconsistent than I thought. If, for example, a group of people walks past our restaurant table and they all say hello to us, but I don't recognize them, I could ask my companion either "Who were they?" or "Who was that?" In both cases I am referring to a plurality of people.

I'm just glad I learned English as a native, because I'd hate to have to learn it otherwise.

Aloha gengo!

I do not find it all that inconsistent. Definitely, not setting my English books on fire because of this. Here's my take — please let me know what you think.

The convention The Newt referred to in #6 would have fitted in an answer for 'Is it "Everyone were laughing," or "Everybody was laughing"?', making it look like a systemic feature rather than an exception, or a weird way of saying. To my eyes, at least.

On the other hand, the pair you brought ("Who were they?" & "Who was that?") got me on your boat at first, but after pondering a bit I rather think they came from different toolboxes. While the former focuses on the people that caught you by surprise (mentioned by "they," thus triggering "were") in a perfectly logical layout, I think the latter comes in to solve special communicative instances where the speaker needs to make it clear that he either ignores, or does not feel entitled to guess what's going on. To me, deadbeesonacake's Who was there? and your Who was that? belong in that group of extremely conventional solutions — my favourite is when somebody knocks on your door, you say '

is

?', and even the person outside, playing along, replies '

is

' (!).

I mean, I won't be the one to say learning English as a non-native isn't a tad nightmarish, but I've dealt with wilder horses to tame.

Sendro Páez said:

I rather think they came from different toolboxes. While the former focuses on the people that caught you by surprise (mentioned by "they," thus triggering "were") in a perfectly logical layout, I think the latter comes in to solve special communicative instances where the speaker needs to make it clear that he either ignores, or does not feel entitled to guess what's going on.

Click to expand...

I don't really see that distinction. Both questions simply indicate the speaker's ignorance of who the people were. And both sound equally natural to me.

Of course, "that," being singular, must take the singular "was," but since "Who was that?" appears to be simply a shortened form of "Who was that person?," in the case of a group of people I wonder why we don't say "Who were those?" The fact that we do not say that is the inconsistency I was referring to.

All languages have their pitfalls for non-native speakers, but I believe English has more than its share.

deadbeesonacake said:

Thanks for your answer! Why is the other option incorrect?

Click to expand...

In Who was at the party?, "who" is indefinite in nature; it doesn't specify or limit the possible answer(s). Linguistically, indefinite who is by default "singular."

Morphologically, "who" is unmarked for number—it can refer to either a singular or plural entity depending on the context. If the context is indefinite, as in Who was at the party?, "who" is treated as singular, and we use "was." However, if the context is clearly plural, "who" takes a plural verb.

If a group of people walks past our restaurant table, I can ask Who were they? because the members of that group are identifiable and clearly plural. On the other hand, I could ask, Who was that? where "who" is indefinite and singular, not picking as referent any member of that group. Of course, if a member of that group stands out in a particular way (for example, by shouting "hello!"), then "who" in Who was that? is definite rather than indefinite (and still "singular" in verb agreement). All of this is possible because "who" is, again, an unmarked pronoun that depends on context for verb agreement (and context can be provided by speaker perspective).

gengo said:

I just realized that this is even more inconsistent than I thought. If, for example, a group of people walks past our restaurant table and they all say hello to us, but I don't recognize them, I could ask my companion either "Who were they?" or "Who was that?" In both cases I am referring to a plurality of people.

I'm just glad I learned English as a native, because I'd hate to have to learn it otherwise.

Click to expand...

Lucky you! hahaha Personally I find it interesting and I like to spend time trying to understand. I can speak fluently but sometimes I have doubts. Anyway, the important thing is that you can communicate. I speak 5 languages so I'm used to it! My native language is Spanish and I honestly prefer having doubts with my second language (English) to learning Spanish! Spanish must be crazy to learn :'D Thanks a lot for your answers, they've been truly useful and clarifying!

A teacher might ask "Who were there?" to be sure a student will answer in the plural (just as "__ were there" might appear on a fill-in-the-blanks test).

Except as such a prompt, who is normally singular. By the way, everyone, anyone, someone, and no one are always singular.