Data a collective noun?

[Matthew Bin <mattbin -at- HOTMAIL -dot- COM>]

The assertion that data is a collective noun is, as others pointed out,
incorrect, since data is in fact a plural declension of the noun, and
collective nouns are always singular.

However, I imagine that this idea of data being a collective noun is a
sort of rationalisation that allows us writers, who are supposedly "in
the know" about things like grammar (and let's not even THINK about
whether this is, or should be, true!), to use language like the teeming
millions and still be on the windy side of the grammatical law.

So what's it to be?  Is it worth changing our standards to allow us to
speak the common lingo, and save our refined, grammatically correct talk
for the STC meetings?  I don't know.  In a language like English, where
there are very few "real" English words, how do we deal with the
imports?

Do we take the melting pot point of view, and say that data is as data
does?  Should we allow our language to take control of the imported
words?

Or do we, here in the wake of Canada Day (Our motto: "Not Just A Day To
Hang Red White and Blue Bunting On the Bandstand"), take the cultural
mosaic point of view, and force our language to deal with these words as
though they were still in their original context (while still extending
them their grammatical place, original conjugations/declensions, welfare
benefits, health care, etc.)?

Does anyone's style guide have any general advice on this score?  What
do y'all think?

Matt
(Not even making $100 000 in Canadian dollars)


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com