Were a pair or was a pair?

[VKALFIERI]

Eg. Vince turned around and couldn't believe what he saw. Standing on two feet instead of four were a pair of otters...

To me were seems wrong....but so does was, which is less wrong?

Cheers.

 

[The Judge]

To quote Collins:

Like other collective nouns, pair takes a singular or a plural verb according to whether it is seen as a unit or as a collection of two things: the pair are said to dislike each other; a pair of good shoes is essential

As far as this sentence is concerned, I'd say the otters are a collection of two things, not a unit, so I'd go for "were". (Actually, I'd probably change the sentence around to avoid the issue, but that's just me.)

 

[Ursa major]

Strictly speaking, a pair of otters has (not have) eight feet....

Perhaps you could rewrite it to:

Vince turned around and couldn't believe what he saw: a pair of otters standing on their hind legs.
​

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I'd have gone with was if pushed, but like @The Judge I'd rewrite around the issue, grammar not being my strongest suit in life.

 

[VinceK]

If in doubt – rewrite

Vince turned around and couldn't believe what he saw. A pair of otters standing on their hind legs...

Not sure what comes next so this might or might not work.

 

[SilentRoamer]

I would have gone with "were"

 

[Parson]

@The Judge is correct as usual. --- On the basis of the single sentence it would seem the "pair were" would be the correct usage, unless the we know the pair of otters are mated in which case it would be the "pair was."

 

[VKALFIERI]

Cheers all! This is in another story I've decided to rework. I didn't even think of hind legs! I am in hospital at the moment though and running on little sleep.

As for what comes next (with a quick rewrite of the line from suggestions here) the full line is: Vince had heard their whole exchange, but still couldn't believe that he was looking at a pair of otters, who were just having an argument with each other about whether they were still on Zearth and standing on their hind legs like that's how otters walk around all the time...

 

[Parson]

Nice fix. Get well soon!

 

[VKALFIERI]

Nice fix. Get well soon!

Thanks, I'm very much better now, long story short I had a really bad reaction to these pills I have to take.

Hoping they can change the dose.

 

[Parson]

Thanks, I'm very much better now, long story short I had a really bad reaction to these pills I have to take.

Hoping they can change the dose.

Amen to that! Bad reactions are bad news.

 

[Dan Jones]

Definitely hind legs for me. But for all things otter-related, @HareBrain is your man...

 

[HareBrain]

I've been told to point out that your story will be even better if you describe the otters' hind legs as being strong, agile and sleekly furred. Also, the advice against overusing adverbs doesn't apply here, so feel free to write "standing intelligently" etc.

 

[Dan Jones]

I believe the adverb you're after is "standing otterly", or, at a stretch, "beaverishly"...

 

[Wiglaf]

Can I get an example of "a pair was" that is correct? I can't think of one. The closest I can come is a pair of scissors, pants, or trousers; all of which use the plural verb with or without a preceding "pair of".

 

[VKALFIERI]

Well the funny thing is I only chose otters because in the original it was time travelling elves and I thought it would be more fun to have them be dimension hopping otters instead

 

[HareBrain]

Can I get an example of "a pair was" that is correct? I can't think of one. The closest I can come is a pair of scissors, pants, or trousers; all of which use the plural verb with or without a preceding "pair of".

A pair of blackbirds was nesting in my beard.

 

[Dan Jones]

A pair was the best hand I got all night in my poker game.

 

[Parson]

The matched pair of revolvers was a magnificent heirloom.

 

[pambaddeley]

Hmm ... isn't 'pair' a collective noun where 'was' is appropriate? However, agreed it's probably best to reword.