7

I know news doesn't have a plural, but what is correct in the following example:

We must recognize real news from fake one.

or

We must recognize real news from fake ones.

Thank you in advance

  • 2
  • @ColleenV: Nicely found. It's nowhere near a "duplicate", imho, but definitely extremely relevant. – FumbleFingers Reinstate Monica Jan 30 at 17:38
  • @FumbleFingers Definitely not a duplicate, but I wanted to link it just in case someone with the other question found this discussion first. I wish there was a way to see the “related links” section of the sidebar in the mobile view. – ColleenV parted ways Jan 31 at 15:20
  • @ColleenV: Oh! I've only just noticed that Linked 4 News for plural on the sidebar (I'm on a PC desktop). I always assumed the Related list was just based on an automated search for earlier posts having many words / text sequences in common with the current one. I didn't even realise there was such a thing as Linked (which I assume arises purely because you put that link in your comment - or is it a "mod thing" that you can explicitly set the sidebar notification?). – FumbleFingers Reinstate Monica Jan 31 at 15:52
  • 1
    @FumbleFingers Any ELL question linked in a comment/answer/question by anyone should appear there. The Contributor’s Guide on English Language Learners Meta is a good example of a fully populated “Linked” list. – ColleenV parted ways Jan 31 at 16:10
20

Neither; either repeat “news” or omit it entirely:

“We must distinguish real news from fake news.”

“We must distinguish real news from fake.”

  • 1
    Interestingly, although I have at least "misgivings" about the usage, I found a few dozen written instances of long trousers, not short ones in Google Books. But you're quite right that we definitely can't / don't / won't use that construction with news. – FumbleFingers Reinstate Monica Jan 30 at 17:23
  • His question is still somewhat valid, why isn't it valid to say "We must distinguish real news from fakes?" – Bill K Jan 30 at 21:36
  • 1
    @FumbleFingers That's simply because news doesn't have a plural. "Ones" works in any case where you can refer to the noun as "those", such as "those trousers". No reason to have misgivings about this. – Apologize and reinstate Monica Jan 30 at 22:34
  • @FumbleFingers That's because "trousers" is plural. One "trouser" is just a tube of material. During the middle-ages, people in Europe would wear a tube of material on each leg (a.k.a. "hose" - or, in Scotland, "trews" which then became "trouser") with a codpiece in the centre. Someone then re-invented the idea of stitching both tubes together with some extra material ("a pair of trousers") - which Asians had already been doing since the 10th Century BC for riding horses... – Chronocidal Jan 31 at 9:28
13

You're right.  The word "news" doesn't have a plural form.  That fact is a good reason to avoid using the pronoun "one". 

There is a useful description for nouns that don't have plural forms.  We call them strictly uncountable.  As either an adjective or a pronoun, the word "one" involves counting. 

Your examples are trying to count something that is strictly uncountable. 

  • I found A fourth class of bipartite nouns (e.g. scissors, trousers) is generally recognised for English. Might that be as opposed to "not so strictly uncountable" nouns, that we can reference with I want the sharp scissors, not the blunt ones, or He's wearing short trousers, not long ones - whereas we can't do anything like that with news. – FumbleFingers Reinstate Monica Jan 30 at 17:34
  • 1
    I don't see much similarity between pluralia tantum and strictly uncountable nouns like "news" and "software". The idea of something being uncountably plural doesn't make sense to me. The lack of a singular form and the lack of a plural form have different consequences. – Gary Botnovcan Jan 30 at 17:44
  • 1
    But surely trousers and scissors are "uncountably plural", in that we have to use ones rather than one in my examples above. Whatever - Apparently the news are good (or were, back in Carlyle's day), but today the news can only take a singular verb form. – FumbleFingers Reinstate Monica Jan 30 at 18:04
  • Yes, we use the plural form "ones" to agree with the plural form "trousers". That's evidence of counting, rather than evidence of a lack of counting. We're distinguishing between one and anything other than one -- a very limited counting, but that's all that English grammar provides. – Gary Botnovcan Jan 30 at 18:18
  • 2
    @FumbleFingers Trousers and scissors aren't uncountable. They come in pairs. – Shufflepants Jan 30 at 19:25
9

When we use the word "news" as in your examples, it refers to news in general, not specific articles. Therefore, it's an uncountable noun, and you can't use a singular pronoun to refer to it.

If you want to refer to a specific piece of news, we call it an "article" or "item". So you could write:

We must recognize real news articles from fake ones.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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