monkfish/fish is a plural noun hence correct!

IMO E

imo A
oa and source?

aspirant2011 wrote:There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.

A. There are no legal limits, as there are for cod and haddock, on the size of monkfish that can be caught, a circumstance that contributes to their depletion through overfishing.

B. There are no legal limits on the size of monkfish that can be caught, unlike cod or haddock, a circumstance that contributes to depleting them because they are being overfished.

C. There are legal limits on the size of cod and haddock that can be caught, but not for monkfish, which contributes to its depletion through overfishing.

D. Unlike cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, which contributes to its depletion by being overfished.

E. Unlike catching cod and haddock, there are no legal size limits on catching monkfish, contributing to their depletion because they are overfished.

[spoiler]OA: Will be posted later. Please guide whether the usage of their in option A is correct??????[/spoiler]

Ans should be A

guys I agree that the OA is A but my doubt is whether usage of their in option A is correct??????? because I don't think so that monkfish is plural noun........please clarify

aspirant2011 wrote:guys I agree that the OA is A but my doubt is whether usage of their in option A is correct??????? because I don't think so that monkfish is plural noun........please clarify

Fish can be singular and can be plural as well.

This is what Ron wrote in Manhattan forum:

nope. "monkfish" is plural.

in fact, it HAS TO be plural. since it acts just like "fish", i'll explain in terms of "fish" instead:
if "fish" is singular, it must be used WITH AN ARTICLE ("a", "the", etc.)
i saw a fish swimming beneath me --> singular (1 fish)
i saw fish swimming beneath me --> plural (multiple fish)

same deal here. since it's not "a monkfish" or "the monkfish", it's plural. end of story.

Original post>> https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/old ... -t651.html

Calvin123 wrote:

aspirant2011 wrote:guys I agree that the OA is A but my doubt is whether usage of their in option A is correct??????? because I don't think so that monkfish is plural noun........please clarify

Fish can be singular and can be plural as well.

This is what Ron wrote in Manhattan forum:

nope. "monkfish" is plural.

in fact, it HAS TO be plural. since it acts just like "fish", i'll explain in terms of "fish" instead:
if "fish" is singular, it must be used WITH AN ARTICLE ("a", "the", etc.)
i saw a fish swimming beneath me --> singular (1 fish)
i saw fish swimming beneath me --> plural (multiple fish)

same deal here. since it's not "a monkfish" or "the monkfish", it's plural. end of story.

Original post>> https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/old ... -t651.html

I went through Ron post but still its not clear to me ........

shouldn't it be i saw fishes swimming beneath me ------> if it would have to be plural

when I say i saw fish swimming beneath me -------> then I think we talk about one fish

experts please comment.......

ok i went thru the post. Good dicussion must say !!
What i am able to decipher is that fish can be included in both countable(number) and non-countabe(amountt/mass) noun categories. So its usage is different depending on it usage(as countable or non-countable).
I will try with other example - HAIR (aristotle)

Countable: I have A HAIR in my tea. ITS of green color.
Non countable: I don't have MUCH hair. THEY fall every day. (somewhat true , u got any sol->msg me )

SO if we notice something(probably the learning from this question) common from the 2 examples(fish+hair) is that:

Whenever we have a noun such that it can be placed in both countable and non-countable categories, it is important/MUST that the noun is preceded by article(a/an/the) to show its singular nature, else (without article) it WILL be treated as Plural.

The authenticity of this needs to be verified by an expert.

Also, we need a list of such nouns to cram esp the one those have already occured..

I hope i make some sense.

Thanks

aspirant2011 wrote:

Calvin123 wrote:

aspirant2011 wrote:guys I agree that the OA is A but my doubt is whether usage of their in option A is correct??????? because I don't think so that monkfish is plural noun........please clarify

Fish can be singular and can be plural as well.

This is what Ron wrote in Manhattan forum:

nope. "monkfish" is plural.

in fact, it HAS TO be plural. since it acts just like "fish", i'll explain in terms of "fish" instead:
if "fish" is singular, it must be used WITH AN ARTICLE ("a", "the", etc.)
i saw a fish swimming beneath me --> singular (1 fish)
i saw fish swimming beneath me --> plural (multiple fish)

same deal here. since it's not "a monkfish" or "the monkfish", it's plural. end of story.

Original post>> https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/old ... -t651.html

I went through Ron post but still its not clear to me ........

shouldn't it be i saw fishes swimming beneath me ------> if it would have to be plural

when I say i saw fish swimming beneath me -------> then I think we talk about one fish

experts please comment.......