The singular of data in Latin is datum, but in English it’s data. It is a mass noun where it’s not easy to break it into individual, countable pieces. Something like sand is almost never represented in ite plural form of sands.

  • @Semjaza
    link
    English
    15 hours ago

    Yanks say mass noun and not uncountable noun?

    To me, mass noun sounds more like a group noun, such as family or police - where they work as both singular and plural .

    My family are hungry. My family is hungry.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Brits who say “Microsoft are doing a thing” are poking knitting needles into my ears every time!

      It’s not plural. Microsoft is a company. A. One!

      It doesn’t matter that it’s a company of individuals. Next your going to tell me my person is plural because I’m made from many cells. “CrayonRosary are mistaken about language!” No!

      Bonus: Math is singular, too, because mathematics is singular. It’s not the plural of mathematic!

      We overthrew your rule specifically because of this one language issue!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    171 day ago

    It’s become a mass noun, but only thanks to years of people using it wrongly. It was originally very much the plural of datum

  • morgan423
    link
    fedilink
    English
    322 hours ago

    I think you’re confusing this due to the common incorrect use of “that” in relation to data as if it’s something singular, id est, “Could you please provide me that data?”

    Technically this is grammatically incorrect (and yes before you ask, I say “those data”), but I’ve come to understand that people actually mean “data set” when they say this, and are just omitting that word from the sentence.

    Since that is all that’s needed to have everything correctly agree again, I can just fix it in my head when I hear it so that my brain doesn’t explode.

      • morgan423
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        I really do think it’s a mass noun.

        I’m not sure why you think that. By definition (which you even gave in your original post) that would mean that data are something that can’t be broken down into individual, countable units.

        But there is a smallest unit, which is called a bit. Data can be broken down into smaller, countable units. So the word doesn’t fit the common definition of what a mass noun is.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          13 hours ago

          But there is a smallest unit, which is called a bit. Data can be broken down into smaller, countable units.

          That’s not a particularly compelling argument. There’s a smallest unit of sand, too, but we still use a mass noun for it.

          Besides, dictionary researchers agree it’s both a mass noun and a plural noun. People use it both ways. Here’s what Merriam Webster says about it. (I’m going to rework it to reduce the wordiness because it was so dense!)

          Data leads a life of its own quite independent of datum, of which it was originally the plural. It occurs in two constructions:

          1. as a plural noun (like earnings)
            • taking a plural verb and plural modifiers (such as these, many, a few), but not cardinal numbers
            • serving as a referent for plural pronouns (such as they, them)
          2. as an abstract mass noun (like information)
            • taking a singular verb and singular modifiers (such as this, much, little)
            • being referred to by a singular pronoun (it).

          Both constructions are standard. The plural construction is more common in print, evidently because the house style of several publishers mandates it.

          So OP’s post is only half right, if even that much. In common speech, data is a mass noun, but many scientists and publishers still treat it as a plural noun. I would even venture most do.

          Working as a programmer, most people I’ve interacted with use it as a mass noun, but not all. Language evolves, and the mass noun version is just as acceptable in most circles, but it certainly isn’t worthy of a “you should know” or “today I learned it’s actually a mass noun.”