"Ninguno de los niños necesita camisetas."
Translation:None of the kids needs T-shirts.
"need" is obviously fine; however, "needs" isn't wrong.
Searching Google with quotes, here is the entirely of the relevant results:
- I guess part of the problem is that none of the kids needs me so much anymore.
- With the short cycling distances involved, none of the kids needs to have a triathlon bike.
- Some moms sneak in a video during that rare 10 minutes when none of the kids needs anything.
A rare moment where none of the kids needs something…
We're not sure what the need is out here in Deer Creek in the suburbs but regardless, none of the kids need to feel uncertain.
- Sure hope none of the kids need a bathroom call, because that means boots and pants back on and a walk across the yard to the building with lights and water.
- None of the kids need counseling, and Crosland didn't feed the turtle in front of a whole class.
4 vs. 3 for "needs" over "need"; of course the specific counts are but an anecdote; this is a ridiculously small sample. But it's reasonable evidence that "none of [plural group]" can be used with a singular verb in English.
Looking at an ngram from Google books is interesting (still anecdotal, but with more voluminous data).
In 2018, treating "none of them" as a plural noun phrase is still more than twice as common as singular. But historically, plural was the only way. Prior to 1870 there were no occurrences of singular usage, then singular usage started to creep in.
Maybe that explains why some folks (like myself) think "none of the kids needs" is so wrong? Our body of reading just hasn't led us to accept the slow drift of grammar in common usage.
Both need and needs would be correct here. Here this is listed as one of the "Top Ten Grammar Myths"
None of the children need t-shirts. In English, this noun is plural so the verb shouldn't have an s.
According to my grammar book Practical English Usage, "When we use none of with a plural noun or pronoun, the verb can be singular (a little more formal) or plural (a little more informal).
Yes because the subject of the sentence is "none." People get confused and think that "children" is the subject, so they say "need"
Both the words none and children are plural in this sentence. None is plural if it means not any like it does in this case.
Whatever, it is "need" in this case not needs. I have been speaking English correctly for 44 years. I'm out of this conversation. You can argue with someone else.
Looking at the comments and quotes above tells me that people are divided on "none" being grammatically singular or plural. If you view "none" as a stand in for "no one" or "not one", I can see how that makes sense. But as for me, "none" still sounds plural.
Looking at the examples given, Need singular suggests a need occurring at a distinct point of time while needs plural suggests something a bit more continuous. Given they are talking about kids who grow fast the sentence is likely to hold true for a short period of time so I would err towards use of need.
When the need or needs occur, it has nothing to do with time. You are on the wrong track, donna.scha.
nobody says needs, dont care if its gramatically correct. it sounds retarded