The actor’s are said to be protesting his director’s demand that they put on a five performaces a week instead of the standard four.

I have found this sentence in an internet site. It is said to have a typo error. ACTOR’S should be ACTOR. Is there anyone who can tell me the which one of the highlighted word/phrase makes the sentece wrong. I eed an explanation, too!
Urgent and important!

The actor’s are said to be protesting his director’s demand that they put on a five performaces a week instead of the standard five.

It can be either of these:

The actor is said to be protesting his director’s demand that he puts on five performances a week instead of the standard five.

The actors are said to be protesting their director’s demand that they put on five performances a week instead of the standard five.

You have to make the subject and verb of a clause agree in number; that is, if the subject is plural, the verb is plural, and if the subject is singular, the verb singular.

In the first, the subject, actor, is singular, so the verb, is, should be singular. The pronoun, his, needs to be singular because it refers to the singular subject, actor. The pronoun he in the noun clause, ‘that he puts on five…’ has to be singular because this pronoun also refers to the singular antecedent, ‘actor’

In the second, the subject is plural, so each of the pronouns above need to agree/match this plural antecedent.

Thanks! I’ve answered ARE SAID. Prior to the possesive noun ACTOR’S. I have not ever thought that such typo will occur.
I thought THEY refers to the subjects actor’s and director’s

I slightly edited my first post to make it clearer.

I thought THEY refers to the subjects actor’s and director’s

I can see why you thought this, but only the actors put on the performace, not the directors also, IMO. Therefore, I believe it only refers to actors, making it singular.

It is important to understand my first post. Subject and verb agreement is an important step to becoming a good writer.

Okay! I hit the nail! Thanks!
I stand corrected.

That sounds like it belongs on Idiom of the day: Hit the Nail, that is.

I’ve seen it on one of your posts.

It was your idiom, I thought I’d let you post it.

I was hit by the hammer! ^^
I remember a song with a lyrics of:
Give it all, give it all
to the one who’s life.

I believe that WHO’S is a contraction.
Contraction of what words?
WHO IS?
WHO HAS?

Who Is.

What a messed up thread!  I go away for a short time, and this place just falls apart.

1)  There is a typo in the SUBJECT LINE!

2)  I’m not convinced that the OP ever did realize that “actor’s” is not a plural.

3) No one seemed to notice that the sentence itself is senseless—they have to put on five performances instead of five. 

4) Eddie:

“The actor is said to be protesting his director’s demand that he puts on five performances a week instead of the standard five.”

“. . . his director’s demand that he PUT (not puts) on five performances . . .”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

5 & 6 ) Luke:

“Who Is.”

“Who is” AND “Who has”—as in “Who’s been eating my porridge?” asked Mama Bear.
- - - - -
“It was your idiom, I thought I’d let you post it. “
Run-on

Don’t vent your spleen. I haven’t noticed it. I corrected it already.

1)  There is a typo in the SUBJECT LINE!

2)  I’m not convinced that the OP ever did realize that “actor’s” is not a plural.

What is OP?

3) No one seemed to notice that the sentence itself is senseless—they have to put on five performances instead of five. 

I’m not here to quabble over semantics. I answer the questions that are asked.

4) Eddie:

“The actor is said to be protesting his director’s demand that he puts on five performances a week instead of the standard five.”

“. . . his director’s demand that he PUT (not puts) on five performances . . .”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Missed the subjunctive. No excuse.

5 & 6 ) Luke:

“Who Is.”

“Who is” AND “Who has”—as in “Who’s been eating my porridge?” asked Mama Bear.
- - - - -
“It was your idiom, I thought I’d let you post it. “
Run-on

Luke dislikes grammar, very much. He is a retired teacher who doesn’t worry about grammar as long as his point is clear—fair enough.

What a messed up thread!

No verb.

Eddie88 - 08 September 2009 09:10 PM

1)  There is a typo in the SUBJECT LINE!

2)  I’m not convinced that the OP ever did realize that “actor’s” is not a plural.

What is OP?

3) No one seemed to notice that the sentence itself is senseless—they have to put on five performances instead of five. 

I’m not here to quabble over semantics. I answer the questions that are asked.

4) Eddie:

“The actor is said to be protesting his director’s demand that he puts on five performances a week instead of the standard five.”

“. . . his director’s demand that he PUT (not puts) on five performances . . .”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Missed the subjunctive. No excuse.

5 & 6 ) Luke:

“Who Is.”

“Who is” AND “Who has”—as in “Who’s been eating my porridge?” asked Mama Bear.
- - - - -
“It was your idiom, I thought I’d let you post it. “
Run-on

Luke dislikes grammar, very much. He is a retired teacher who doesn’t worry about grammar as long as his point is clear—fair enough.

Thanks Eddie. If everything said from government officials on down were grammatically correct, nothing would ever be spoken, (which might not be a bad idea.)

cosmicmeeting - 08 September 2009 07:45 PM

What a messed up thread!  I go away for a short time, and this place just falls apart.

1)  There is a typo in the SUBJECT LINE!

2)  I’m not convinced that the OP ever did realize that “actor’s” is not a plural.

3) No one seemed to notice that the sentence itself is senseless—they have to put on five performances instead of five. 

4) Eddie:

“The actor is said to be protesting his director’s demand that he puts on five performances a week instead of the standard five.”

“. . . his director’s demand that he PUT (not puts) on five performances . . .”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

5 & 6 ) Luke:

“Who Is.”

“Who is” AND “Who has”—as in “Who’s been eating my porridge?” asked Mama Bear.
- - - - -
“It was your idiom, I thought I’d let you post it. “
Run-on

And are you now our self-appointed guardian? Why the ire? What did any of us do to you?