• Actually, it can go either way.  It depends on how you diagram the sentence.  I've been checking a number of grammar sites and they all agree that both usages are acceptable, with Americans tending towards the plural, treating "a variety of" as a modifier of "positions" rather than the reverse.

      Loading editor
    • "...there is a variety of positions within Star Law..."

      The subject of the sentence is "a variety of positions" in the context being discussed.

      One could say "there are many/multiple" positions, where these modify "positions".

      The alternative would be "there are varieties of positions", which would indicate that there are several distinct groups of positions of positions, which is somewhat ambiguous without qualifying context.

        Loading editor
    • Not always.  It can also be diagrammed as I described with positiond being the subject.I'm

      just going by what the grammar sites say.  "Are" is perfectly acceptable in American English.

        Loading editor
    • I direct your attention to this answer at the English Language and Usage Stack Exchange, where a user acutally looked up the BNC and COCA stats (as of 2013):


      10 down vote Here are the actual usage stats from the British National Corpus (BNC) and the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA):
                                      BNC      COCA
      a variety of [n*]/[nn2] is     15/11     47/15
      a variety of [n*]/[nn2] are    26/26     83/82
      ratio plural:singular         1.7/2.4   1.8/5.5

      For those unfamiliar with the query syntax, [n*] stands for any noun form, while [nn2] stands specifically for "plural common noun".

      An important thing to note is that this has nothing to do with the verb immediately following the plural noun. We can move the verb directly in front of "a variety", but the preference for plural agreement doesn't change:

                                               BNC           COCA
      there is a variety of /[n*]/[nn2]     23/16/12      17/  9/  6
      there are a variety of /[n*]/[nn2]    56/37/34     260/187/172
      ratio plural:singular               2.4/2.3/2.8  15.3/20.8/28.7

      In short, plural is the agreement of choice on both sides of the pond, though interestingly considerably more so in the US.

      And as you pointed out yourself in comments elsewhere on this page, this is not really surprising, but in fact perfectly in line with how similar constructions such as a number, a lot, a total, etc. behave. This is sometimes referred to as notional agreement or notional concord: As Quirk et al. 1985 explains it, notional agreement (called notional concord by Quirk and others) is agreement of a verb with its subject or of a pronoun with its antedecent in accordance with the notion of number rather than with the presence of an overt grammatical marker for that notion. Another way to look at the matter is that of Roberts 1954, who explains that notional agreement is agreement based on meaning rather than form. In Wikipedia, the corresponding entry is to be found under synesis: Synesis [...] is effectively an agreement of words with the sense, instead of the morphosyntactic form. [...] Such use in English grammar is often called notional agreement (or notional concord), because the agreement is with the notion of what the noun means, rather than the strict grammatical form of the noun (the normative formal agreement). The term situational agreement is also found[.]

      Notional agreement for collective nouns is very common in British English. It is less customary in American English, but may sometimes be found after phrases of the type "a collective noun of plural nouns", e.g.,

      • ... a multitude of elements were intertwined. (New York Review of Books)
      • ... the majority of all the shareholdings are in the hands of women. (Daedalus)
      • ... a handful of bathers were bobbing about in the waves. (Philip Roth)

      close quote

        Loading editor
    • "sometimes" being the operative word.

      I'm not going to be arguing a point that is internationally subjective, so I simply replaced the relevant text with something clearer.

        Loading editor
    • A FANDOM user
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.