I believe you are in error: 'was' is singular, 'were' is plural. An Administration can be thought of as singular if you are talking about the entire organization as a whole. Just as a musical group is referred to in the singular.
No, it should be were. Not because the Bush Administration is plural (you're right, it's not--it's a singular entity), but because of the "if."
I don't remember the name of the rule (future imperfect tense, maybe?), but when speaking about future possiblities, were is the correct form of to be to use.
I stand corrected. (not that it was my title) On the other hand, I think I would have done it correctly without thinking because it's whenever I think about those rules, I get them wrong.
On the other, other hand... my spelling is near-perfect, my grammar is not always so. I ascribe that to learning a second language before mastering my first heh heh.
Of course, the usage of "were" for the conditional tense is gradually phasing out of the English language, so that it's seldom used in informal speech. It falls in the same category of formal semi-archaisms as sentences rearranged so they don't end in a preposition, and the substition of "one must" for "you gotta" in sentences like, "You gotta be careful these days."
but then everything's debatable when informal speech is being used in a public medium.
It is like the use of "their" as a gender-neutral pronoun; technically it is incorrect but its usage is becoming common enough that it is overlooked in more factual, informative settings.
So it is. I think that's one of my favorite things about grammar. :)
Ultimately it comes down to the meta-argument about whether proper usage is defined by the grammar books or by the general consensus of how people actually use the language. That's a debate that's been going strong since the at least the 1960s, when the 3rd edition Merriam-Webster's included the word "ain't".
First: It's not wrong to end a sentence in a preposition. It is wrong to say "If I was you," though yes, it's becoming more common in informal speech.
Using "one" instead of "you" is an aspect of certain types of writing, which in general prefer the third person. But you don't have to use "one." Any third person noun or pronoun will generally work (if appropriate)--he, she, a person. One tends to sound pretentious to American ears, so if you can avoid it (like you could rearrange that phrase to say "so if it can be avoided"), you generally should. If you're doing that type of writing.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 09:53 am (UTC)some of these are pretty funny. I especially like "If the Bush Administration was your roommate" and "School Yard Politics" is almost touching.
WERE!
Date: 2004-01-29 11:11 am (UTC)Bastards.
And I'll check 'em out when I am home, and can have sound. And not supposed to be writing a paper that's due in under 4 hours.
Re: WERE!
Date: 2004-01-29 11:17 am (UTC)Re: WERE!
Date: 2004-01-29 11:25 am (UTC)I don't remember the name of the rule (future imperfect tense, maybe?), but when speaking about future possiblities, were is the correct form of to be to use.
Examples:
I wish I were an astronaut.
If I were you, I'd order the cheese fries.
no subject
Date: 2004-01-29 11:26 am (UTC)Re:
Date: 2004-01-29 11:57 am (UTC)On the other, other hand... my spelling is near-perfect, my grammar is not always so. I ascribe that to learning a second language before mastering my first heh heh.
almost forgot
Date: 2004-01-29 12:00 pm (UTC)(gold star for you boys!)
(....okay a cookie too)
Re: almost forgot
Date: 2004-01-29 01:37 pm (UTC)that's true too
Date: 2004-01-29 05:14 pm (UTC)It is like the use of "their" as a gender-neutral pronoun; technically it is incorrect but its usage is becoming common enough that it is overlooked in more factual, informative settings.
Re: that's true too
Date: 2004-01-29 05:59 pm (UTC)Ultimately it comes down to the meta-argument about whether proper usage is defined by the grammar books or by the general consensus of how people actually use the language. That's a debate that's been going strong since the at least the 1960s, when the 3rd edition Merriam-Webster's included the word "ain't".
LIES!
Date: 2004-01-29 07:05 pm (UTC)Using "one" instead of "you" is an aspect of certain types of writing, which in general prefer the third person. But you don't have to use "one." Any third person noun or pronoun will generally work (if appropriate)--he, she, a person. One tends to sound pretentious to American ears, so if you can avoid it (like you could rearrange that phrase to say "so if it can be avoided"), you generally should. If you're doing that type of writing.