English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

In answer to the question, "Do we need any more chairs?" why does it sound correct to say, "No, three's enough." Why does "three are enough" sound wrong?

share|improve this question
You seem to be asking us to determine why something sounds right or wrong to you. We can only answer from our own perspectives. From mine, either usage sounds fine. – Robusto Apr 8 '12 at 13:54
Two's company, three's [is] a crowd. – FumbleFingers Apr 8 '12 at 20:52

This is a Use-Mention Problem, and we compound it by talking about it here.

And even more so by writing about it and not talking.

So we'll have to be very careful about the quotation marks, OK? I'll take it slow.

First, three is a word, and it is a plural word, since it denotes a number larger than one. Hence,

  • Is there a doctor around? There are three in the next room.

Second, three is a number, and numbers have names.

Third, the name for the number three is "three". With quotes.

Fourth, the name "three" is also a word in English (pronounced just like the number three).

Fifth, since it is the name of one thing, the name "three" is a singular word. Hence,

  • How much is seven minus four? Three is the correct answer.
  • How many chairs should I put at that table? Six is sufficent.

This last sentence essentially means

  • Six is [a] sufficient [number of chairs].

Therefore, in many situations we have the possibility of referring to any number either as a single unit quantity (by referring to the name of the number), or as a plural set (by referring to the number itself).

Philosophers talk about this as a distinction between Using a word (that's the plural number three), and Mentioning it (that's the singular name "three"), and they can get quite testy about confusions involving them.

share|improve this answer
I'm not convinced this requires a use vs. mention distinction. Amounts generally control singular agreement in English. See Do I use the plural or singular when referring to a positive number less than one?. – Alan Munn Apr 8 '12 at 16:07

Three is singular. There is a single set of three, and that is enough. Or rather, the single number three is sufficient.

share|improve this answer
Thanks for the reply. But what about "Have the chairs been delivered?" "Fifteen have been delivered, but three are broken." I know it's because a plural noun is implied, but it's no different to the first example. Is it something to do with the word 'enough'? – Tom Apr 8 '12 at 13:57
@Tom in that case, it appears that "fifteen" is being used with an omitted complement. You are essentially saying "fifteen (chairs) have been delivered". – siride Apr 8 '12 at 15:02

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.