1. The bread and butter was tasty
  2. Bread and butter are sold in this shop.

I have been taught when things are considered separately, we should use 'are' but when they are used collectively, we should use 'is'.

But in the following example, which one is correct?

A. There is tea and juice
B. There are tea and juice

  • 6
    Both are "correct", depending somewhat on context. It depends on whether "tea and juice" is being treated as a mass noun or enumerated. "If you're thirsty there is some tea and juice on that table over there." "Your beverage choices are tea and juice." (Though "or" might be used in this second case>) – Hot Licks Feb 24 '17 at 13:06
  • @Lawrence - The sentence would be perfectly fine without "some". The reason it "works" is that the "tea and juice" is not being offered as options, but rather a single "thing". – Hot Licks Feb 24 '17 at 13:31
  • 1
    @HotLicks and Mari-LouA I like F.E.'s post so much that I'm withdrawing my comments above. – Lawrence Feb 24 '17 at 14:03
  • 2
    Just a comment from personal experience, your choice in how to contract this form might be different from your choice about the non-contracted form. In some cases where I'd say "There are X and Y in the Z", if I shortened it, I'd say "There's X and Y in the Z" (in contrast to "There're [nonstandard?] X and Y in the Z." – Joshua Taylor Feb 24 '17 at 16:07
  • ... Yes, two effects are overlapping here. The notional agreement pull (here, I'd say 'tea and juice' would rarely be considered unitary, unlike 'gin and tonic') is one. The other is the move to regard 'There is' (and certainly 'There's') as a generalised existential construction like the French Il y'a, followed by either a singular or a plural noun group. – Edwin Ashworth Feb 24 '17 at 17:51

The following is an answer post by the venerable F.E., originally posted in relation to this question here.

You should trust your ear. :)

This topic comes up a lot. Your question involves an existential construction.

It is safest (imo) to consider that the dummy pronoun "there" to be the grammatical subject. There are syntactic tests that can be used to sorta figure out the grammatical subject. Both the 1985 reference grammar by Quirk et al., A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, and the 2002 reference grammar by Huddleston and Pullum, The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, basically consider that "there" is the grammatical subject.

In Quirk et al., page 1405, in section "The status of existential there as subject", it has:

18.46 The there of existential sentences differs from there as an introductory adverb in lacking stress, in carrying none of the locative meaning of the place-adjunct there, and in behaving in most ways like the subject of the clause, doubtless reflecting the structural dislocation from the basic clause types:

(i) It often determines concord, governing a singular form of the verb (cf 10.34 ff) even when the following 'notional subject' is plural:

  • There's some people in the waiting room. < informal >

occurs alongside:

  • There are some people in the waiting room.

(ii) It can act as subject in yes--no and tag questions:

  • Is there any more soup? There's nothing wrong, is there?

(iii) It can act as subject in infinitive and -ing clauses:

  • I don't want there to be any misunderstanding.

  • He was disappointed at there being so little to do.

  • There having been trouble over this in the past, I wanted to treat the matter cautiously.

Huddleston and Pullum et al. go into this in even more depth, in their section "Evidence that subject function is uniquely filled by dummy it and there" on pages 241-3.

I discussed the above because there are numerous, er, grammatical sources out there that get this wrong.

So, if we consider that the "there" is the subject, then that which is to the right-hand-side (RHS) of the BE verb is NOT the grammatical subject. That RHS has been called a whole bunch of stuff, such as "true subject", "notional subject", "displaced subject", etc. So, there is no such thing as a grammatical rule of subject-verb agreement between the BE verb and the RHS -- because the RHS is not the grammatical subject.

When teachers and "pop grammarians" and pedants say that there must be "subject-verb" agreement between the BE verb and the RHS, they are wrong. It is a bogus rule. It is like the other bogus rules like: "You must not start a sentence with a conjunction", "You must not split an infinitive", "You must not strand a preposition", "You must not use a relative 'that' to refer to a human", etc.

I've seen a lot of bad guidance, er, "rules" getting passed around as to the pseudo-subject/verb agreement. Here's one:

"there is" + < plural noun phrase > is indeed nonstandard . . . but "there's" + < plural noun phrase > should really be characterized, in current English, as merely informal/colloquial, rather than nonstandard.

Let's address this part:

"there is" + < plural noun phrase > is indeed nonstandard

for that evaluation is dubious, obviously. One can easily create contexts and examples to disprove that evaluation. For example, using the plural noun phrase "two hundred dollars",

  • There is two hundred dollars in the man's wallet.

I'd think it'll be quite easy to create a context where that example sentence is acceptable.

Many instructors teach that the verb should be plural or singular depending on what that verb would be in a corresponding sentence where the RHS is the subject. Using the above example:

  • Two hundred dollars is in the man's wallet.

is acceptable and grammatical. (That example uses a subject that is a measure phrase, and this issue is discussed in Huddleston and Pullum et al., CGEL, section "(a) Measure phrases", page 504.)

And so, an existential construction corresponding to that could then be:

  • There is two hundred dollars in the man's wallet.

That sounds fine to me.

When the RHS includes a coordination of noun phrases, things can get confusing. Some usage guides and usage commentators prefer that the BE verb agree with the closest noun phrase for that situation. E.g.

  • There is one fat dog and two skinny cats in the box.

  • There are two skinny cats and one fat dog in the box.

and some still want the plural verb even when the first noun phrase is singular,

  • There are one fat dog and two skinny cats in the box.

Of course, if this is dirtied up with an "or" or "nor" coordination, then existential constructions can really clash with their corresponding versions where the RHS is the subject. E.g.,

  • (Either) One fat dog or two skinny cats are in the box that's sinking in the pond.

  • There are (either) one fat dog or two skinny cats in the box that's sinking in the pond. (ugh)

  • There is (either) one fat dog or two skinny cats in the box that's sinking in the pond.


Context is king. For instance,

I come from a small family. There is grandpa, mother, my big sister, me.

Hopefully an "editor" won't dare to mark that use of "There is" -- if the editor did, then that's an instant STET and a request for a different editor.


This post is getting long. Let me end it with this following bit of info.

A decent usage dictionary, such as MWDEU or MWCDEU, can provide useful info as to standard usage of the existential construction. In my Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage, entry "there is, there are", on pages 732-3, this is the concluding paragraph:

Jespersen notes that the invariable singular occurs mostly in the colloquial style--speech and speechlike prose--and is generally avoided in the literary style. That observation accords with our evidence. In the more complex constructions, you are best guided by your own sense of what sounds right in the particular context to avoid awkwardness and maintain the smooth flow of the sentence.

Their last sentence basically says it pretty well, imo.

  • 1
    'consider ... the dummy pronoun "there" to be the grammatical subject.' --- that's the crux of the matter. – Lawrence Feb 24 '17 at 14:01
  • 1
    The venerable FE. Why? Is he dead? I know he hasn't been active of late... EDIT: Alive! phew! – Mari-Lou A Feb 24 '17 at 15:01
  • @Mari-LouA Death is not a pre-requirement for being vernerated! One need only be respected because of ones wisdom and perhaps age :) [F.E., so he told me, qualifies in this second respect ...] – Araucaria - Not here any more. Feb 24 '17 at 15:03
  • 1
    But the OP hasn't said which version he prefers You should trust your ear. :) To be clear, I upvoted FE's answer on that post because it answered the question, and damn well too. But here? P.S I prefer version A – Mari-Lou A Feb 24 '17 at 15:04
  • 1
    @Mari-LouA That would kind of depend on if that is a fragment from the beginning of a sentence or if it is the whole sentence. If you stick available in the other room on the end, then are seems to be perfectly viable ... – Araucaria - Not here any more. Feb 24 '17 at 15:21

In the first example, "The bread and butter was tasty" Here bread & butter is considered as a sandwich. So I think using singular form /was/ is correct.

In the second example, " Bread and butter are sold in this shop" here each collective noun has different types, products. So they are considered plural. Nevertheless, the subject-verb agreement is clear in the second example.

| improve this answer | |
  • 4
    So far, so good. Tea and juice don't fit this pattern, though - they're not normally considered a unit, but singular agreement sounds better than plural agreement. Do you agree? Why or why not? Please continue your answer to address the question in the title. – Lawrence Feb 24 '17 at 13:09

I will hazard a guess that you are an English learner, wanting advice on how to talk about these things in a natural way. I'll try to say something helpful.

The bread and butter you gave me at breakfast was better than what we have at home. What kind of bread was it?

Singular because the bread and butter function together as a unit. But if you go with plural, it's not the end of the world.

The bread and butter were both homemade.

This is like your example 2, which is fine.

There is tea and juice at the drinks station; please help yourself.

In practice, people would be more likely to say

There's tea and juice at the drinks station; please help yourself.


Good morning. There are tea packets, carafes of hot water, and juice cartons set up in the conference room. Just let me know if you need anything else.

Note that even native speakers are somewhat haphazard in choosing to treat these as singular or plural. For example, I often hear less well educated people in the U.S. using a singular verb where technically a plural would be correct.

| improve this answer | |

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