Conspicuously left out out from the self-driving car boom has been Japanese auto makers.


Hello. I'd like you to answer this question below.

I found the sentence "Conspicuously left out out from the self-driving car boom has been Japanese auto makers." in TIME. However, I think that this sentence is gramatically wrong. The subject is "Japanese auto makers", so "have" should be used instead of "has." The question is: is this just a mistake? Or did the writer use "has" on purpose, which means he / she knew that "has" is wrong, but used it deliberately?

I've heard that some English-native speakers used gramatically incorrect forms on purpose because they don't want their sentence to be too formal. For example, In chain relative pronouns, when they should use "whom", they sometimes use "who" deliberately. Is this the case with the sentence?

TIME is first -class magazine, so I guess this is not a mistake but the writer used "has" on purpose.

Thank you for reading. I'd like to hear opinions of English-native speakers.
  • Retired-teacher

    Senior Member
    British English
    I can't see any reason why it should be a deliberate mistake. It is much more likely to be carelessness on the part of the writer and something missed by the editor or other representative.

    The who/whom thing is an entirely different matter which has been discussed before.


    Senior Member
    English, USA
    It seems most likely to this AE speaker (me) that the writer is employing the entire clause as the subject of the sentence.

    Conspicuously left out from the self-driving car boom [subject, singular] has been Japanese auto makers.

    This is not good grammar, good writing, or probably even a conscious decision. Probably it's just a habitual misusage.
    Last edited:
    < Previous | Next >