Which of the following phrases is grammatically correct?

  • no animal is
  • no animal are
  • no animals is
  • no animals are
  • Thanks.

    closed as off-topic by Kris, Mari-Lou A, RyeɃreḁd, David M, choster Apr 9 '14 at 22:34

    This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

    • "Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic. A list of these references can be found here: List of general references" – Mari-Lou A, RyeɃreḁd, choster
    If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

    • 2
      Suggested migrating this Q to ell.se – Kris Apr 9 '14 at 6:39

    The second and third are NEVER used. Whether you use 'no animal is', or 'no animals are' depends on whether you are talking in the singular or plural.

    You could say 'No animal is as large as an elephant', but 'no animals are larger than elephants'.

    • What is wrong with the third one? "No" is used to indicate that zero of the noun is the subject, so shouldn't it come with singular verb? – chris97ong Apr 9 '14 at 6:50
    • 1
      But the subject, in that case, is still plural. 'No' is simply used here as an adjective qualifying 'animals'. In 'large animals eat lots of food', the verb 'eat' is used in the plural form. Equally 'No animals eat more than lions'but 'no animal eats more than the lion'. – WS2 Apr 9 '14 at 7:02

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