I don't know, I think "were" is correct considering "couple" is generally an abbreviation for "couple of [object]." The English language is rather funny to begin with, especially when you take the subjunctive forms.

It would still be "A couple of people was found dead," or whatever.

It's a borderline call, but in American English, groups with collective names (couple, crowd, class) that act as a unit are treated as a single unit and get a singular verb. The couple was excited. The crowd had taken their seats. The class went on a field trip.

If you want to use "were" you need to say "A young man and woman with wanderlust were."

The rules are reversed somewhat in the United Kingdom.

Actually, Matt, besides being a Packers fan, LifeLongPackerFanAndStockholder is correct. As the article was referring to only one couple, so "was" is correct. Had they been referring to two or more couples, then "were" would have been correct.

Couple, while it consists of two objects/items, is still singular. Two or more couples would be the plural form.

Couple was; Couples were

In Britain nouns referring to multiple objects or persons use the plural form of the associated verb such as "Ford Motor Company are reporting record profits this quarter." It sounds strange to an American but they invented the language so they should know how to use it.

I think stole, borrowed or synthesized is a more accurate description of how the English language was formed :P

Both work. Has nothing to do with multiple couples vs a single couple. Its past tense, and both words fall into that category.

he was, they were. that is basic

Couple is singular, its the name of a group. Both words work.

Actually. either way is correct. Much the same way as the group of men WAS loud, or the group of men WERE loud. There are several examples, in the English language, where either a sngular or a plural possessive is correct.

@Comment #2 and following:

"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." -- James Nicoll.

Also, Comment #2.11 is correct-- both forms are grammatically accurate, though in American English, preference is given to the singular "was."

Couple, in this case, is a singular noun referring to two people who are romantically paired.

Can't say as it is important to prove that British-preferred usage is "wrong" in the U.S. At one point I was amused to read British football (soccer) stories with lines like, "Newcastle's beleaguered side were thoroughly routed by Manchester City, 4-0," but now I think little of it. Seems like a collective noun could arguably deserve this treatment. "A pride of lions were seen just outside our safari camp." "Pride" is the subject ("lions" being merely the object of a preposition), "were" being the main verb.

Not trying to overlook the fact that 2 people are dead

Yes you are. Your whole intent of posting a comment in the first place was to point out what you perceived as a grammatical error.

If you were not trying to overlook the topic of this article, you would have added something after your spelling lesson.

Are you people kidding? A young couple with wanderlust is (are, whogivesacrap) dead and all you can comment on is the grammar used in the article? What a cold bunch of snobs you are. This is a sad story about a couple who made an error in judgment and paid for it in a horrible way. Someone, somewhere probably misses them.

So one couple of peoples is was and two couples of peoples is were unless the two couples is a group or mob, then they are was again? So is y'all was or were? How about all y'all?

Most of you are wrong. It has nothing to do with single versus plural, but true versus false.

When the logical conclusion is false - were follows. (If I were a rich man...)

We were taught to test the grammar... i.e. 'the young couple' = "they", and they were, vs. he/she was.

Just sayin'.

Yay! English class online. Is this one free or do I have to pay?

Sad about the couple that were killed. And they "were" killed, not "was" killed.

Frank. I love your post and your logic.

sad they were kill'd...kill't...either is workable...if you know what i mean..

WTF?? We can only stay on topic with Comment 1, insensitive as it may have been, and then it's the grammar police?

First, the guy looks like he's straight out of an episode of Swamp People--isn't that a little more interesting?

Second, of course it has to be Flori-duh again.

Third, I thought the line on the home-page said "coat", which is the only reason I read this article.

Actually I prefer judging people's grammar to judging people!

Are you kidding me? Does it really matter how it was written, not one of you displayed any concern or compassion for the two that lost their lives but chose to comment on the grammatical errors. REALLY?

Here you go,,, have a hay day with mine.

If the writer was thinking of the couple as a single unit, it would be "couple was." If the writer was thinking of them as individuals, both of whom are now deceased, it would be "couple [of people] were." We are not using the rule about something being contrary to fact ("if I were king")--just whether or not the word is being viewed as a single unit or as a pair of units.

Seriously--this is one of those rules that no one gives a hoot about--go ask the next ten people you meet whether one uses a comma with a restrictive relative clause or a nonrestrictive relative clause. Do any of those ten people know (I do--but do they)? Unless you are at a grammarians' convention, it is almost certain that they will not. Rules like this only matter in formal writing--and journalistic writing is not formal writing (it is informal--more formal than a casual email but less formal than a sermon or law).

I am just sorry that these individuals were killed--it is sad that they didn't realize the coal was about to be dumped. It reminds me of the young people who climbed over the railings at Niagra Falls and were swept away. Sometimes, wanderlust is fatal.

WHO CARES ABOUT THE GRAMMAR!! Seriously that is the reason you all are leaving a comment. Shouldn't it be about 2 people that died, no matter if they were or was dead...they are still dead. The fact that they were wanderers and traveled by train they still kept in touch with their family enough to the point that the family knew who the girl was, and where they met. Losing a family member is terrible no matter how it was, or were done!!

Remember this Country is a melting pot of cultures and languages.. This is why our version of English differs from jolly ol' England as we accept them into our own.. Although Philadelphia Lawyers and school marmes require it the vast majority of us are able to read between the lines so to speak and grasp context and meaning.. All wonderfully varying by state and region with beautiful nuances of accent and slang..

acording to the previous posts it should be "WINNERS"

Should it be plural if it was a half-witted idea?

i'm with cingular...

Who gives a flyin fock what the grammar was ? What did all of you just come from grammar class?

nope...hooked on fawnic's...i rote the book...

Not all coal cars empty from the bottom. Some of them are emptied by rolling the car over and dumping it from the top. It's pretty neat to watch. The train pulls in to the coal bunker and the rest is all automatic. It takes less than 2 minutes per car to dump. Unless they were trapped or unconscious I don't see how they could have gotten dumped with the coal. Even in a dead sleep there is so much noise I don't know how they could have slept through it.

Maybe they weren't sleeping through it. You know, the rhythmic rocking of the train cars, the constant vibration of the irregular wheels over the uneven track joints, etc. Sometimes a couple can be caught up in the throes of a passionate moment and lose focus of the goings on around them.

Maybe this was the ultimate Big O - no, not big oprah.

Brad is right on the dumping. All the cars here flip over by pivoting on the hitch mechanism.

This couple may have been buried in the car, then dumped at the power plant. I have heard other reports of people gettting in an empty car, not being able to get out, and getting covered as the car fills.

That has to be the cause. They were killed when the car was loaded. Ghastly.

Your statement is very flat and lifeless Rick. How shallow of you, almost two dimensional.

i'm thinking 3-D...#1.gas #2.grass #3.your ass...that's pretty deep...

At least they won't be under any more pressure here on earth.

I have to agree with you here, they weren't hurting anybody with their lifestyle, yet people are throwing out insults, what gives?

I agree with Jacques-2757417 - nothing wrong with riding in train cars, or sleeping on train tracks for that matter. It harms no one!

Sheesh.

Didn't take anything from anyone but the rest of us have to pay for train tickets. Being a stowawy is the same as shoplifting - theft of services. Seems it might have been less costly to buy a ticket. That way they would not have had to pay so dearly.

Sometimes the thrill of stealing overrides logic and reasoning.

Sirlafalot

At least they won't be under any more pressure here on earth.

No more pressure on them, they dug them out.....

Human tragedy is is the seed of humor, people. Get over yourselves.

Sad. I hope they have found peace. It is a shame so many people find this funny. They might not been the brightest people but, being burried alive? How horrible is that?

I agree with you. I mean how many of us wish we could do that? To just be so fancy free and live off of a shared love.

My heart goes out to them and their families. Their lives were to shortly lived, but at least they died in love and doing something the loved.

I have to agree. Mocking people just because they chose the life they wanted and hurt no one in the process, shows a moral decay that makes those that mock seem pretty pathetic. While my major thought of this sad accident was "woops", I still feel sad for their loss of life and empathy for those that lost family or friends. While it may be a different lifestyle from the way most people are used to, they never deserved death for jumping a train.

The Thinker-318752 says:

"Didn't take anything from anyone but the rest of us have to pay for train tickets. Being a stowawy is the same as shoplifting - theft of services. Seems it might have been less costly to buy a ticket. That way they would not have had to pay so dearly.

Sometimes the thrill of stealing overrides logic and reasoning."

Somehow I doubt the railroad sells tickets on a cargo train, especially in the coal car. While you may be technically correct, it is an absurd notion that the railroad suffered any monetary damages from the couple's free ride in a coal car. "Sorry, we're completely sold out of coal car seats as we have two stowaways riding free tonight. "

Contrary to a lot o' posts, I'm jealous that they chose,could afford, and had the guts to seek such a carefree life. Gettin' to travel across this beautiful country with countless stories of your adventures... priceless. Most people rarely really venture outside their little tiny 5 mile radius, and they call that living. Condolences to their families and friends for the loss of two adventurous spirits

Dogma Bites, so true. No humor like dark humor. And it seems the holiday spirit is bringing out more of it than usual.

Well, let's don't act like they were truly hurting any one, but let's don't act like they were truly accomplishing anything, either. Still, it's bad that they died so young and never had a chance to live "normal", boring lives like so many of us and look back on this phase of their lives, which likely would've remained their favorite. But it goes to show you why the railroads look down on this sort of "passenger" business, or rather non-business. Somehow, I can see some ambulance-chasing tort attorney looking for an angle against the railroad, the power company, or both.

Taterwheel - Technically you are correct in that they don't normally sell seat tickets on a freight train. But they sell "tickets" for providing transportation from Point A to Point B. Sometimes that is in the form of "seat" tickets and other times it is in the form of "freight" tickets - bills of lading.

But to counter your point that the company didn't suffer any monetary damages from the couple hopping a "free" ride - do you think the company has not expended any resources (financial, manpower, etc) as a result?

Based on our litigious society I envision a lawyer trying to get the company to pay because they didn't physically inspect each car before loading - a sort of "attractive nuisance" strategy - they should have known that hoboes would try to hop a ride.

You are free to travel the web anywhere you'd like.... why stay here and bitch if you don't like it?

evermore, but yet you were here reading it on msnbc. People like you amaze me. Complain, complain, but yet return. Hmmmm.

verno..WTF?

is this a good place to bitch or what...LOL...

Let's not forget the times we live in. Maybe they couldn't find employment and decided to ride the rails for a while. Bet someone makes a movie of this next. RIP.

Most of them have illegal smiles.

I agree. It is very sad that people try to defend someone for their reckless behaviour. I'm of the opinion that this couple knew the risk they were taking. They were probably well aware of the possibility of being injured or killed by train hopping. The article infers that their family tried advising them but they chose to continue with their lifestyle.

I admire their decision to pursue whatever prompted and perpetuated their desires. At least they died doing what they enjoyed. After all, they could have died in a car wreck with a drunk while living in a normal, civilized society.

AS a species we realy do suck

Think again. Not defending them. Two people who were not harming anyone or anything are dead because of a mistake they made. Do you think the punishment fits the crime? The level of humor and scorn here is a SAD testimony to the lack of compassion today. To all the superior geniuses out there, hope you got your jollies.

We use humor to compensate for grief, it is a defense mechanism. Occupations that deal with death regularly produce people whose sense of humor would be a lot more insensitive than anything here. Go out drinking with a fire fighter, ER worker or mortician and you'll see what I mean. That said, I do hope none of the couple's family or friends decide to peruse this comment thread.

yes... if you read the post you notice ...most post are sadden ...2 young folks died...makes you dread getting that chunk of coal for christmas... for your loved one's...don't it...

Get of your partisan bandwagon.....

Desert King, you are a idiot. These people weren't doing anything wrong. They loved their lifestyle, and by hopping a freight was not costing anyone money. It was not a passenger train they were hauling coal. So by these two hopping the train hurt no one but themselves. Some people like you are such a pain in the butt.

that wood bee "an" idiot...I'm just saying...

@Verno Last Time I checked, you still have to pay to travel by train, Verno? Isn't that true where you live? The company who moves the freight had to pay, and now the transportation company, they will have to pay thru their insurance, for the casualties. Probably raising their rates, even in a no-fault accidental death, but hey your right, They did nothing wrong, except, well get coal in their stocking, pants, shirts.

Condolences to their family, but seriously, They really did do something wrong. It's still illegal to hop trains in the US. They paid a really bad price for it.

verno....correct me if I am wrong but doesn't our Government create laws, like not jumping onto freight trains, to protect people who do from themselves?

"@Verno Last Time I checked, you still have to pay to travel by train, Verno?"

Probably not in the COAL CAR. It was the freaking COAL CAR, not the honeymoon berth. Gimme a break and quit taking "the law" so literally. There is no fault attributable to the railroad, so their insurance company won't have to pay anything, and thus nobody's rate will go up. The only people that "paid" are the people that died, and it was their own fault, but they shouldn't be vilified like they pulled off a bank heist.

@Taterwheel, Ill buy you a soda If Im Wrong, but there will be compensation through someone's insurance for the death of these two, and there might be a few Ambulance Chaser's out there who will be proud to share in that Paycheck. The Engineer, like a Pilot, or a Captain, in the End is responsible for everything in their train, on their train, and transported.

My second paragraph said it once, Ill repeat, Its a tradgedy they lost their lives doing what they love. They paid a terrible price for breaking the rules/law/common sense. Just because it was only a coal car (firecracker, shotgun, skateboard, parachute, etc.) Is not even relevant.

they're...not their. There!

rightthewrong-

What's really sad was when they took up the tracks into Clarksville, in 1984, and never even bothered to run a symbolic "last train". It was kind of sickening, but they have at least maintained the right-of-way as a bicycle "rail-to-trail" for some of its length. My father, an ex-brakeman, said that one day they'd regret it. Now they are actually talking about re-laying the tracks.

"Emporer of the North" (1973).

Bingo. (And a much under-appreciated classic, even with its cheesy 70s score).

Well, everyone dies, so I guess you'll get your wish, but your statement sure carries an air of more than casual insensitivity, and it smells real bad. Tell ya what, when you are a bum, I'll agree with your statement. What an asshat!

Keyboard Cowboys in ass hats with absolutely nothing to offer that isn't full on rank. TYPE AWAY, LONELY STONER!

I'll have a happy Christmas if Jack-239263 never replicates. Insensitive assclown!

Skeeter --

Wow, until right this very minute, I had no idea whatever that the passage referenced was about hopping a freight train, but this had to be exactly what Paul meant ...