What Is a Collective Noun Definition and Examples

A collective noun is a noun—such as team, committee, jury, squad, orchestra, crowd, audience,  and  family—that refers to a group of individuals. It is also known as a group noun. In American English, collective nouns usually take singular verb forms. Collective nouns can be replaced by both singular and plural pronouns, depending on their meaning. Examples and Observations In the following examples, the collective noun or nouns are listed in italics. The family is one of natures masterpieces. Nouns such as committee, family, government, jury, and squad take a singular verb or pronoun when thought of as a single unit, but a plural verb or pronoun when thought of as a collection of individuals: The committee gave its unanimous approval to the plans.The committee enjoyed biscuits with their tea. It is possible for singular collective nouns to be followed either by a singular or a plural verb form (see number): The audience was delighted with the performance.The audience were delighted with the performance. Colorful Collective Nouns Many noncount nouns have an equivalent countable expression using such words as piece or bit (partitive or collective nouns) followed by of: Luck: a piece of luckGrass: a blade of grassBread: a loaf of bread Venereal Nouns Venereal noun: A noun denoting a collection of persons or things regarded as a unit, defining them through word play... Nouns of Multitude The notion of collective nouns dates back centuries. Willam Cobbet noted in 1818: Nouns of number, or multitudes, such as Mob, Parliament, Rabble, House of Commons, Regiment, Court of Kings Bench, Den of Thieves, and the like, may have Pronouns agreeing with them either in the singular or in the plural number; for we may, for instance, say of the House of Commons, They refused to hear evidence against Castlereagh when Mr. Maddox accused him of having sold a seat; or, It refused to hear evidence. But, we must be uniform in our use of the Pronoun in this respect. We must not, in the same sentence, and applicable to the same noun, use the singular in one part of the sentence and the plural in another part....There are persons who pretend to make very nice distinctions as to the cases when these nouns of multitude ought to take the singular, and when they ought to take the plural, Pronoun; but these distinctions are too nice to be of any real use. The rule is this; that nouns of multitude may take either the singular or the plural, Pronoun; but not both in the same se ntence. The Lighter Side of Collective Nouns Collective nouns can also add humor to any written piece. [C]ollective-noun inventing is a game that continues today. The aim is to find a word which puns on the meaning of the plural entity. Here are 21 of the best from my own collection: An absence of waitersA rash of dermatologistsA shoulder of agony auntsA crop of barbersA clutch of car mechanicsA vat of chancellorsA bout of estimatesAn annoyance of mobile phonesA lot of auctioneersA bumble of beekeepersA flutter of gamblersA complex of psychiatristsA fidget of choirboysA mass of priestsA sulk of teenagersA whored of prostitutesA crash of softwareA depression of weather forecastersA mucking fuddle of spoonerisms Everyone loves to play with language. The ways of doing so have no order and no end. (David Crystal, By Hook or by Crook: A Journey in Search of English. Overlook Press, 2008) Sources Cobbet, William A. Grammar of the English Language in a Series of Letters: Intended for the Use of Schools and of Young Persons in General, but More Especially for the Use of Soldiers, Sailors, Apprentices, and Plough-Boys. 1818.Crystal, David.  The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge University Press, 2003Marsh,  David, Guardian Style. Guardian Books, 2007.

The Wimpy Kid Movie Diary Book Summary

The Wimpy Kid Movie Diary is an illustrated account of the making of the movie by series author. Jeff Kinney provides a behind the scenes look at the casting and making of the Diary of a Wimpy Kid movie, as well as its relationship to the Diary of a Wimpy Kid book, the first book in the series. Highlights Kinney then recounts the differing viewpoints of Hollywood executives on what the movie should be like, the initial drafts of the script and the hiring of the director. He describes the search for the perfect young actors to portray Greg and his friend Rowley and their screen test. Kinney includes sketches and essays by the young actors about the character each was to portray, which provide insight as to what they thought about their characters. Author Jeff Kinney and His Books Diary of a Wimpy KidDiary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick RulesDiary of a Wimpy Kid: Dog DaysDiary of a Wimpy Kid: The Ugly TruthDiary of a Wimpy Kid: Cabin FeverDiary of a Wimpy Kid: Do-It-Yourself Book

Indian Removal Act Of 1830 - 923 Words

â€Å"I fought through the civil war and have seen men shot to pieces and slaughtered by thousands, but the Cherokee removal was the cruelest work I ever knew†, remarked a Georgia soldier who had participated in the removal of Indian Natives during the mid-1800’s. As a result of the Indian Removal Act, Indian natives have been perceived as mistreated and cheated throughout history. The Indian Removal Act was passed during the presidency of Andrew Jackson on May 28, 1830. This act granted authorization to the president to exchange unsettled lands west of Mississippi for Indian lands residing in state borders. Initially, the Indian Removal Act of 1830 was passed to expand the Southern United State for farmland and to aid the government in furthering our development as a nation. With this plan in mind, the government provided money to establish districts in the west of the Mississippi River for the Indian natives, ensured trade and exchange in those districts, allowed Nati ve Indian tribes to be compensated for the cost of their removal and the improvements of their homesteads, and also pay one years’ worth subsistence to those Native Indians who relocated to the west. However, while few Indian tribes went peacefully, majority of the tribes resisted the removal policy. Additionally, government agents were authorized to negotiate and enforce treaties. Therefore, during the fall and winter of 1838 and 1839, the Cherokee natives were removed forcibly to the west by the government. As aShow MoreRelatedThe Removal Of The Indian Removal Act Of 18301820 Words   |  8 Pagespolicy of the Government, steadily pursued for nearly thirty years, in relation to the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation. Two important tribes have accepted the provision made for their removal at the last session of Congress, and it is believed that their example will induce the remaining tribes also to seek the same obviou s advantages.† (Jackson, 1830) This quote from President Andrew Jackson showed the happiness of the â€Å"white settlers† ofRead MoreIndian Removal Act Of 18301155 Words   |  5 Pages2015 Indian Removal Act of 1830 The Indian Removal Act of 1830 was an act that helped aid the expansion of the United States population into the southernmost states, occupied mainly by Native Americans. The act was a long time coming, especially with President Andrew Jackson, a long-time proponent of Native American removal, at the helm. This paper explores the history leading up to the law, the introduction and passage, as well as the sometimes-tragic implementation of the Indian Removal Act of 1830Read MoreIndian Removal Act Of 1830868 Words   |  4 PagesIndian Removal Act of 1830 The Indian Removal Act was signed into law on May 28th 1930 during the presidency of Andrew Jackson. Perhaps best known as the black eye of the administration and overshadowing his presidency’s accomplishments, the Indian Removal Act was passed into law to allow the president to negotiate with Indians to purchase land they occupied and offer them lands west of the Mississippi. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 could also amount to pure greed and racism, the beginning of theRead MoreThe Indian Removal Act Of 1830940 Words   |  4 PagesThe American’s desire for expansion of their nation and economic growth has always been their main interest and goal. The Indian Removal in the 1830’s was a great example of America’s efforts to expand through North America and their motivation to economically improve through profitable opportunities. When comparing the Indian Removal and the events that followed the Treaty of Paris, a similarity in the expansion of America i s discovered. Labor, politics, and economics of America during the two erasRead MoreThe Indian Removal Act Of 18301083 Words   |  5 Pages The Indian Removal Act of 1830 was a law passed by President Andrew Jackson that provided the funds for the removal of the Indian tribes found in South. These tribes were the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole. Slave states, following the lead of Missouri who in the 1820s forced its Indian population to leave, saw the opportunity to expand their industry in the fielding of cotton by â€Å"converting Indian soil into slave soil.† That along with the finding of gold and simply the desireRead MoreThe Indian Removal Act Of 1830892 Words   |  4 Pagesstudents are analyzing is; what are the major effects of the Indian Removal Act of 1830? The students will be given several data sets of events that occurred after the act was initiated and draw conclusions and revise their thesis statement as they go. The big idea of this lesson to have students understand the importance of the Indian Removal Act and it is essentially only the beginning of the journey that Indian tribes had to face after the act was initiated. It led to many heartbreaking events thatRead MoreIndian Removal Act Of 1830923 Words   |  4 PagesIt gives me pleasure to announce to Congress . . . the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation† (Jackson, 1830, para.1). With promises of new lands, protection, and monies, President Andrew Jackson portrays the Indian Removal Act of 1830 as beneficial to Indians, wherein governmental financial gain is incidental. However, when considering land transactions and gold discoveries, the true beneficiaries are revealed. While strengthening the States’Read MoreThe Indian Removal Act of 18301123 Words   |  5 PagesTHE INDIAN REMOVAL ACT OF 1830 Migdalia Tuero HIST101: American History to 1877 Professor Kathleen Davis February 13, 2014 There are several historical events and issues that have impacted the contemporary political development among American history. In the history of America one of these groups are the Native Americans. The white man throughout the South called for a removal of the Indian peoples. They wanted the Native Indians to be resettled to the west because their presence createdRead MoreThe Indian Removal Act Of 18301299 Words   |  6 Pageswere many diverse, and complex views when approaching this subject matter; however, in 1830 President Andrew Jackson passed the Indian Removal Act, which forced Indians to relocate from their homelands in south east to land west of the Mississippi river. This granted the U.S. a large portion of new rich land, unfortunately it was at the expense of the Native Americans. When passing the Indian Removal Act of 1830, President Jackson relied on teleological utilitarianism ethnic views, in that he focusedRead MoreThe Indian Removal Act Of 1830865 Words   |  4 PagesWhen the Indian Removal act of 1830 was enacted, the Cherokee Nation panicked. The Cherokee, specifically the romanticized Tsali, did their best to preserve their culture in the mountains of North Carolina, but what really saved them from their harsh fate that so many other Cherokee faced, was there white chief, William Holland Thomas. The Cherokee were â€Å"disagreeable and dangerous neighbors,† but they had a powerful ally in Raleigh, who saved the Eastern Band from a much harsher fate. The Eastern

Peoples behaviour free essay sample

‘Behaviour’ is a term defined by psychologists as an act done by an animal in response to any stimulus provided by the outside world. An assumption held by many social psychologists when attempting to explain the reasons behind the action of people’s behaviour is that we try to find certain reasons that explain our own and other people’s action towards an environmental stimulus. This is also known as the theory of attribution, ie. We often attribute a cause to certain behaviour. Different factors are accounted for when trying to provide an explanation for our own behaviour, and thus, we would also try to attribute reasons for the behaviour of other people. This essay will attempt to explain different theories of attribution as well as put forth supporting and contradicting evidence and theories in order to provide a more holistic view on how behaviour is explained. In the theory proposed by Heider (1958), he suggested that people are like ‘naive psychologists’ who are constantly trying to make sense of the social world, making a causal relationship for people’s behaviour. He suggests that human beings tend to see cause and effect even when there isn’t any. By examining and interpreting peoples’ behaviour, we try to infer intention and responsibility. When trying to explain behaviour, Heider suggests that it depends on whether we are trying to explain the behaviour of ourselves or other people. The actor-observer effect states that people are more likely to attribute behaviour of others internally, for example, we would be more likely to attribute the behaviour of other people to their personality. This is also known as dispositional attribution. However, when we try to explain our own behaviour, we are more likely to attribute them to external factors such as the environment. This is also known as situational attribution. Through Heider, these two main ideas are proposed which influenced further research such as the correspondent inference theory (Jones and Davis, 1965), the covariation model by Kelley (1967). Jones and Davis (1965) further developed the theory of attribution into what is known as the correspondent inference theory: It states that for an  observer to infer whether the action of the actor depends on dispositional attribution, the social desirability of the action is taken into account. For example, if a famous singer is found to by going to the gym often, observers will be more likely to attribute their behaviour to social desirability rather than as a dispositional aspect. However, if the behaviour is socially undesirable, i. e. smoking, observers will be more likely to attribute the behaviour to the actor’s disposition. However, it is important to note that the theory put forth by Jones and Davis may be quite nomothetic as cultural differences are not accounted for. In a study conducted by Lieberman, Jarcho Obayashi (2005) on American and East Asian participants investigating the â€Å"automatic and controlled components of attributional inference†, participants from both cultures were asked to watch a silent clip of an anxious woman and depending on the information they were given, such as the situation the woman was in, or her personality etc. The participants were then asked to attribute the behaviour of the woman. The results concluded that even though American participants and East Asian participants all show â€Å"automatic attributional habits†, East Asian participants are more likely to disregard situational constraints that are presented to them and would be more likely to say that a person’s behaviour is due to the dispositional attributions. Therefore, it seems plausible to suggest that although attributional processes are present across cultures, people from different cultures undergo a different attributing process, and thus, there is a certain need to individualize theories such as this one. Another model of attribution which originates from Heider’s attribution theory is Kelley’s (1972) covariation theory. This theory states that when an observer judges the actor’s behaviour, information is gathered across three different things: i) across consensus, ii) across distinctiveness and iii) across consistency. Consequently, this theory is different from the correspondent inference theory as Kelley assumes that people are more likely gather information from different scenarios rather than just one situation in order to attribute a cause to certain behaviour. Despite the amount of research conducted towards the attributional process undertaken by people, there are errors when we try to attribute causes to behaviour. These are important because they allow psychologists to gain further understanding towards the complex web of reasons of attributions made. One of the major errors in attribution is the fundamental attribution error. This is when people overestimate the role of dispositional factors and undermines situational factors in people’s behaviour. Social psychologists believe that this occurrence is due to people’s perception of self and others – people are more likely to see themselves as adaptable beings who are able to act differently depending on circumstances. However, when they judge other people’s behaviour, they are more likely to attribute their behaviour to disposition because there is not enough information for an unbiased decision. A study conducted by Ross, Amabile Steinmetz (1977) investigated the fundamental attribution error in participants who were judging actors performing certain roles. Participants were randomly assigned to a game show as a host, contestants, or the audience. The host was allowed to write their own questions to the show and after the show, the audience was asked to rate the intelligence of the people in the game show. The results showed that even though the participants knew that the host was given permission to write their own questions, they still rated him/her as the one with highest intelligence, a dispositional attribute, which shows that the fundamental attribution error has been committed. This experiment reveals the common presence of the fundamental attribution error and how the social hierarchy can be associated with it because experts in a particular field are usually considered intelligent even in other fields as well. It seems like a key fact that we often commit the fundamental attribution error because we’re mentally lazy as Gilbert Malone (1995) argued since FAE involves a two-step attribution process and for people to draw an inference, FAE happens either due to the lack of cognitive resources for behaviour to be explained, or the second step of conscious processing of information is automatically skipped resulting in incorrect attribution. Our attributions often exhibit another form of error – self serving bias (SSB). This type of error is mostly concerned with our individual desire to maintain self-esteem. Zuckerman (1979) SSB is when we explain the cause of our own successes to dispositional factors and blame failures to situational factors. Unlike FAE, SSB is more concerned with how people tend to explain their own behaviour rather than other people; hence it shows the elaborate attributional processes undertaken by people. The presence of SSB can be seen through a study conducted by Lau and Russell (1980) where they interviewed professional athletes and coaches on their successes and failures in football matches. The results shows that athletes and coaches attribute 80% of their wins to dispositional factors, for example, skills. However their losses are usually attributed to external factors, for example, bad weather. This shows that SSB is apparent in a lot of social settings. Another study conducted by Bernstein, Stephan Davis (1979) on students shows that they often attribute good grades to intelligence whilst attributing bad grades to having a bad teacher. Thus, it seems that just as FAE, SSB is evident in the social context, providing an explanation to people’s behaviour. Nevertheless, attribution theories reveal the intricate reasoning and links for observers to provide a cause their own and other people’s behaviour. For social psychologists, these theories may even lead to other problems that are present in the social world; for example, social categorization and stereotyping etc. In fact, Medcof (1990) suggested that all attribution theories are based around a similar concept; and each theory highlight a different point which furthers the understanding of human behaviour. Thus, Medcof believes that the theories will eventually integrate to become complimenting theories of attribution. In conclusion, it appears that humans have the tendency to become psychologists themselves when they attempt to explain their own and other people’s behaviour as Heider (1958) suggested. The attribution processes undergone are often linked to the amount of cognitive resources they have. Yet, it is important to note that by trying to create a causal relationship between dispositional or situational factors to behaviour, attribution errors become more apparent because of varying factors. Although there are flaws in attribution theories an models, as well as the observed errors in attribution, there is a fundamental concept that all attribution theories adhere to: Thus, as Medcof (1990) suggested, it may be that in the end, rather than having separate theories and models, there will be one integrated theory of how people explain their own and other people’s behaviour.