Why are ABBA so popular?

[mathwonk]

ABBA who ???, ...ahh..., now I know why I have barely heard of them; they were not formed until 1972! I had stopped listening to pop music by then and was trying to earn a living. to me the Beatles were a recent fad. my apologies to the cognoscenti.

I am pretty sure now they did not name themselves after this classic song:

 

[pinball1970]

"Argh." says the pedant.

ABBA is a band. One band.
ABBA is singular. ABBA are not plural.

"Why is ABBA so popular?"
"... ABBA is in a class of its own ..."

I don't feel that. ABBA is multiple people like a football team. Manchester United is in a class of its own? That does not work for me.
Look I want to get into the flattened 5th thing with " I'm a Marionette" so we need to put this to bed.
Linguistics thread?

 

[pinball1970]

ABBA who ???, ...ahh..., now I know why I have barely heard of them; they were not formed until 1972! I had stopped listening to pop music by then and was trying to earn a living. to me the Beatles were a recent fad. my apologies to the cognoscenti.

I am pretty sure now they did not name themselves after this classic song:

ABBA is just the first names of the people in the band.

 

[sbrothy]

"Argh." says the pedant.

ABBA is a band. One band.
ABBA is singular. ABBA are not plural.

"Why is ABBA so popular?"
"... ABBA is in a class of its own ..."

Yeah I knew I effed up but at that time I’d edited the post so many times already I just sorta decided to live my errors. Thus my comment about your inability to talk decent Danish.

Seriously, how hard can it be for you people to talk a language 5 million out of 7 billion master?

:)

 

[pinball1970]

Yeah I knew I effed up but at that time I’d edited the post so many times already I just sorta decided to live my errors. Thus my comment about your inability to talk decent Danish.

Seriously, how hard can it be for you people to talk a language 5 million out of 7 billion master?

:)

You're not wrong! ABBA is people, plural. @DaveC426913

 

[sbrothy]

You're not wrong! ABBA is people, plural. @DaveC426913

Oooh ouch. *Hides in a corner*.

 

[DaveC426913]

Seriously, how hard can it be for you people to talk a language 5 million out of 7 billion master?

:)

 

[phinds]

You're not wrong! ABBA is people, plural. @DaveC426913

Yes, it is made up of people, but "ABBA" is a band. Singular. Period. You would not likely say "the team are winning" and you should not say "ABBA are in a class of it's own" or "ABBA are a great band".

 

[DaveC426913]

Yes, it is made up of people, but "ABBA" is a band. Singular. Period. You would not likely say "the team are winning" and you should not say "ABBA are in a class of it's own" or "ABBA are a great band".
View attachment 349952

I agree. But this sortta shut me down:

For example: https://abbasite.com uses "their" when referring to ABBA.

 

[phinds]

I agree. But this sortta shut me down:

The fact that they got it wrong doesn't make it right.

 

[sbrothy]

Yes, it is made up of people, but "ABBA" is a band. Singular. Period. You would not likely say "the team are winning" and you should not say "ABBA are in a class of it's own" or "ABBA are a great band

I really didn’t know here. The fact that you, supposedly, natural English speakers disagree gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside. :)

 

[phinds]

I really didn’t know here. The fact that you, supposedly, natural English speakers disagree gives me a warm fuzzy feeling inside. :)

Well, don't let it go to your head. I disagree with everyone

 

[pinball1970]

Yes, it is made up of people, but "ABBA" is a band. Singular. Period. You would not likely say "the team are winning" and you should not say "ABBA are in a class of it's own" or "ABBA are a great band".
View attachment 349952

To be honest I would say "ABBA are a great band," also "ABBA are in a class of THEIR own."
"They are in a class of their own."
So I should be saying, "ABBA is in a class of its own?"

I am moving offices today, it is 8.28am in sunny Oldham NW England and all I am thinking about now, is doubting the grammar of my mother tongue.

We can at least agree English is a silly language I hope.

I bet ABBA never made grammatical errors.

 

[PeroK]

Boney M were more of a creation, some of the members did not sing and none of them did any writing.

The lead singer, Liz Mitchell, had a great voice. She could have had a successful solo career.

The big difference was ABBA's songwriting. Although, Rasputin might be the best pure pop song ever! I heard a music critic say that the best pop should have something surreal about it.

 

[PeroK]

Yes, it is made up of people, but "ABBA" is a band. Singular. Period. You would not likely say "the team are winning" and you should not say "ABBA are in a class of it's own" or "ABBA are a great band".
View attachment 349952

Oliver's army is here to stay.
Oliver's army are on their way.

 

[Hornbein]

I have never ever heard anyone refer to The Beatles as singular.

"The Beatles is the best"? No way.

They might say "Wham! is the best."

 

[pinball1970]

Oliver's army is here to stay.
Oliver's army are on their way.

Clever trick he used there.

John Lennon used awful English on "How do you sleep." Probably to make it more edgy for his attack on McCartney.

"The only thing you done was yesterday."

 

[pinball1970]

This is brilliant and bonkers.

 

[Hornbein]

This is brilliant and bonkers.

I'm a sucker for the xylophone.

Here's a cover.

 

[phinds]

Oliver's army is here to stay.
Oliver's army are on their way.

Not sure what your point is. If you think "Oliver's army are on their way" you would be wrong. It should be "Oliver's army is on the way"

It would be correct to say "The men in Oliver's army are on their way"

 

[PeroK]

Not sure what your point is. If you think "Oliver's army are on their way" you would be wrong. It should be "Oliver's army is on the way"

It would be correct to say "The men in Oliver's army are on their way"

English is flexible, at least in common usage, in terms of a team or group being seen as a singular or plural noun, depending on the context. This is exemplified in those Elvis Costello lyrics. The second line implies the men in the army without stating this explicitly. I'm not sure of the status of this in terms of formal grammar, but it's stretching a point to say it's wrong. An English dictionary will often say something like "careful speakers will say such and such".

Similarly, it would be stretching a point to say that "Led Zeppelin are playing Madison Square Garden" is wrong. Or, "Real Madrid are the champions of Europe". The last one is particularly problematic if you insist that Real Madrid is a singular noun. "Real Madrid is the champion team of Europe" sounds clumsy and overly formal to me.

 

[DaveC426913]

Similarly, it would be stretching a point to say that "Led Zeppelin are playing Madison Square Garden" is wrong.

Gotta disagree.

Led Zeppelin is a single thing, not plural.

You might as well say "Madison Square Garden are sold out tonight."

 

[PeroK]

Gotta disagree.

Led Zeppelin is a single thing, not plural.

English is flexible. See here, for example:

https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/162608/led-zeppelin-was-vs-led-zeppelin-were

PS It seems to be a British English thing.

You might as well say "Madison Square Garden are sold out tonight."

Madison Square Garden is not a collective noun.

 

[phinds]

English is flexible, at least in common usage

On that we agree completely. I'm a bit more of a stickler than most people (OK, a LOT more) but I DO recognize that English is flexible and changing.

For example, when I was a kid saying something like "Thankfully, they were all OK" could only be interpreted grammatically as meaning that (1) they were all OK and (2) I am thankful for some unspecified thing. Also, "The desk will, hopefully, arrive before the weekend, could only be grammatically correct if you meant that the desk WILL arrive before the weekend and when it gets here it will be hopeful (about what is not specified).

Incorrect usage was SO prevalent that, as usually happens, "correct" bowed to actual usage, which is what a living language should do.

We disagree on singular/plural usage but it's one of those things where what I think of as correct may well change over time (and is, I guess, in the process of doing that now).

 

[DaveC426913]

Madison Square Garden is not a collective noun.

Neither is Led Zeppelin, or ABBA.

Both are not just four peeps in a vacuum. A band is more than just its performers or occupants, just like MSG. They have a structure, they are surrounded by support people, and they are useless without their volumes of equipment.

 

[pinball1970]

How not? I mean, any more or less than Led Zeppelin?

Both refer to the people in them, as well as the structure, people and equipment that surrounds and supports them.

You guys .....

Remember ABBA? Some decent tunes from them.
This one is pure beauty, I could gush about the pre chorus or the lovely middle eight or harmony but I'll leave it at, beautiful. I used to go and visit my gf in York and they had this on the Juke box. It went on every time, all the girls would look at me and say, "ABBA!?" Damn right.

 

[PeroK]

Neither is Led Zeppelin, or ABBA.

That's precisely what they are.

https://www.scribbr.co.uk/nouns/collective-noun/

 

[DaveC426913]

That's precisely what they are.

https://www.scribbr.co.uk/nouns/collective-noun/

I know what a collective noun is. That does not make the bands collective nouns.

As for their example: 'The Beatles broke up when Paul McCartney quit the band.' (which is a collective noun):

The name is explicitly indicating that
- The Beatles contains a definite article - a title as it were, indicating the performers themselves (that's their gimmick), and that
- The Beatles is plural - each performer being 'a Beatle'. Any one of them can say 'I am a Beatle_' (singular).

Contrarily, they are not called The ABBAs or The Led Zeppelins. And a single band member is not called 'an ABBA' or 'a Led Zeppelin'.

We don't say
- 'There are only three of The ABBAs left, after one ABBA passed away.'
- 'There are only three of The Led Zeppelins left, after one Led Zeppelin passed away.'

Apples and oranges.

 

[pinball1970]

The Tiger, listening to them with older ears again I have noticed the are absolute kings of middle eight and pre chorus.

"Yellow eyes are glowing....." Part.

 

[phinds]

Interestingly, my daughter happened to come in and saw the title of this thread. She was horrified. DAD ! She exclaimed loudly ... I can't BELIEVE you would use terrible grammar.

Ha. I taught her well

 

[PeroK]

I know what a collective noun is. That does not make the bands collective nouns.

There is no obligation on the rest of the English-speaking world to obey what one Canadian thinks is the only way to use the language. In British English, the name of a team or band can be used with the singular or plural verb. That's a fact.

You can say we are wrong and we should all speak like Canadians - but we are under no obligation to follow your edict.

 

[pinball1970]

I have been reading all the comments and trying out different contexts since yesterday.
(Since 41% of thread is now about that rather than music)
None of the singular applications sounds right.

A few examples.

I refer to Manchester United as "we," a lot. "Who are we playing tonight?" "Did we win?" "Yes, we beat Fulham."

Why we? I am a supporter.

Otherwise it is "they," "I hope they do better than last season."

It is one club, singular so I could use it but is sounds totally wrong, is this just my vernacular clicking in?
I really don't know.

Same with a band of two or more, "For me Deep Purple live 1972, no one could touch them or ever will."

 

[PeroK]

I refer to Manchester United as "we," a lot. "Who are we playing tonight?" "Did we win?" "Yes, we beat Fulham."

Why we? I am a supporter.

This is where semantics overlaps with grammar. Manchester United is technically a singular noun. In one context it is a single entity. I would definitely say:

Manchester United FC was founded in 1878.

But, semantically, it represents a collection of players (in one context) and a collection of players, staff and supporters (in a wider context). In these contexts, it becomes increasingly contrived to avoid the plural form. For example:

The players who are representing MUFC are playing well tonight!

In this case, it is acceptable in British English to say more simply:

Manchester United are playing well tonight.

This emphasises the semantic point that it is a team of individuals that are all playing well. We can contrast this with:

Manchester United is playing well tonight.

Although this is grammatically correct, it sounds stilted.

PS in North America, this situation is generally avoided by pluralising the team names: NY Giants, Toronto Blue Jays etc.

 

[pinball1970]

I know what a collective noun is. That does not make the bands collective nouns.

As for their example: 'The Beatles broke up when Paul McCartney quit the band.' (which is a collective noun):

The name is explicitly indicating that
- The Beatles contains a definite article - a title as it were, indicating the performers themselves (that's their gimmick), and that
- The Beatles is plural - each performer being 'a Beatle'. Any one of them can say 'I am a Beatle_' (singular).

Contrarily, they are not called The ABBAs or The Led Zeppelins. And a single band member is not called 'an ABBA' or 'a Led Zeppelin'.

We don't say
- 'There are only three of The ABBAs left, after one ABBA passed away.'
- 'There are only three of The Led Zeppelins left, after one Led Zeppelin passed away.'

Apples and oranges.

"The Beatles" is the name of the band.

ABBA, Deep Purple, Led Zeppelin do not have a definite article in the name.

Oranges and apples.

 

[DaveC426913]

In British English, the name of a team or band can be used with the singular or plural verb. That's a fact.

Humour me.

Name one.

...OK ... name another one.

Show an equivalent of an ABBA, or a Led Zeppelin or a The Who.