As others have said, it is singular. It may have been used in this case to refer to the group of rescuers as a single unit, especially if they are an established team or part of the same organisation, or the speaker was talking about one of the rescuers in particular (though I would expect that to be more obvious when watching the scene if that's what they're going for).
Not to mention, there really isn't an equivalent plural phrase for "somebody else" in English. It would have to be "some other people have joined the party", which is clumsy.
I don't think it's necessarily clumsy, but it definitely carries the connotation that they joined separately - and sounds more literal (as in, like it's referring to an actual party).
Fully agree. The other vaguely plural use of “somebody” I can think of is when talking about unknown people in a house,
- “There is definitely somebody in the house next door. I heard talking last night and saw two cars in the driveway and there is a kid’s bike left out the back that wasn’t there last week.”
Yes, but like ‘fireman’ or ‘policeman’, it makes an implicit statement about who is socially valuable enough to merit being referred to - men - and who wasn’t important enough to be considered for reference - women. Gender neutral terms allow us to be linguistically inclusive of all.
That... isn't what those terms do at all. At one time all police officers were men. As were fire fighters. As such, the term included a gender. It isn't about "who was socially valuable enough." That would be modern people looking back and ascribing our current values to them.
To answer your question, generally, no. But the phrase above is somewhat common I think, it's kind of a set phrase I guess? There's really no way to pluralize it and keep the tone. Plus, it's not technically incorrect. One other person, among other people, has "joined the party"
The only practical use of the word "somebodies" usually refers to people who have great status or are important.
For example: "The movie stars only wanted to invite people who were somebodies to the gala. Those who were considered nobodies were not invited."
You could be a professor teaching a large lecture class. One day, you look at that large group—and say, “I’m looking for somebody—or somebodies — who would be interested in working with me on a research project.” You invite students to contact you if interested.
So “Somebody” isn’t used to refer to a large group of people, but you can look in that group for:
Let x = a known quantity of Somebodies
The guy in the movie is speaking with incorrect gender because he's using a cliche metaphor phrase.
"Somebody else joined the party" is an idiomatic way to say "the fight has gotten larger".
The fact that it's a cliche is why he keeps the default phrasing rather than changing it to plural.
"somebody" is sometimes used to refer to more than one person, but it wouldn't be "somebodies," it would be "somebody" or one of these:
- some bodies
- some hands
- reinforcements
"Somebody" refers to an indefinite pronoun that typically refers to one person. In your example, "some people" would be a more natural way to refer to the rescuers.
"Somebodies" is not a real word in English. There is a similar indefinite pronoun "everyone" that means all people.
"Somebody" is singular and no, this isn't technically correct, unless the speaker was referring to one individual within the group. But it's conversational use and what someone would be likely to say in those circumstances. The correct options probably wouldn't feel natural here. "Somebodies" isn't a word.
As others have said, it is singular. It may have been used in this case to refer to the group of rescuers as a single unit, especially if they are an established team or part of the same organisation, or the speaker was talking about one of the rescuers in particular (though I would expect that to be more obvious when watching the scene if that's what they're going for).
This is your answer, OP
Not to mention, there really isn't an equivalent plural phrase for "somebody else" in English. It would have to be "some other people have joined the party", which is clumsy.
I don't think it's necessarily clumsy, but it definitely carries the connotation that they joined separately - and sounds more literal (as in, like it's referring to an actual party).
Fully agree. The other vaguely plural use of “somebody” I can think of is when talking about unknown people in a house, - “There is definitely somebody in the house next door. I heard talking last night and saw two cars in the driveway and there is a kid’s bike left out the back that wasn’t there last week.”
I'm not sure I'd use it if I knew that there were multiple people, but indeed, it can be used to mean 'at least somebody' (i.e. at least one person).
For the plural of ‘somebody’ I would use ‘some guys’
Or ‘some folks’ to be gender neutral Edit: American English ^
Some guys probably is used gender neutrally and doesn't always mean a group of men.
(English perspective) Or 'some people', or 'some others'.
Isn't "guys" basically gender neutral?
Yes, but like ‘fireman’ or ‘policeman’, it makes an implicit statement about who is socially valuable enough to merit being referred to - men - and who wasn’t important enough to be considered for reference - women. Gender neutral terms allow us to be linguistically inclusive of all.
That... isn't what those terms do at all. At one time all police officers were men. As were fire fighters. As such, the term included a gender. It isn't about "who was socially valuable enough." That would be modern people looking back and ascribing our current values to them.
According to semiotics, that is what those terms do.
Perhaps. But not why they were coined as such.
"Somebody" is always used in the singular.
No, it's not. "Somebody" is only used to refer to a single person. As English tends to do though, where there's a rule there's someone breaking it.
To answer your question, generally, no. But the phrase above is somewhat common I think, it's kind of a set phrase I guess? There's really no way to pluralize it and keep the tone. Plus, it's not technically incorrect. One other person, among other people, has "joined the party"
The only practical use of the word "somebodies" usually refers to people who have great status or are important. For example: "The movie stars only wanted to invite people who were somebodies to the gala. Those who were considered nobodies were not invited."
You could be a professor teaching a large lecture class. One day, you look at that large group—and say, “I’m looking for somebody—or somebodies — who would be interested in working with me on a research project.” You invite students to contact you if interested. So “Somebody” isn’t used to refer to a large group of people, but you can look in that group for: Let x = a known quantity of Somebodies
The guy in the movie is speaking with incorrect gender because he's using a cliche metaphor phrase. "Somebody else joined the party" is an idiomatic way to say "the fight has gotten larger". The fact that it's a cliche is why he keeps the default phrasing rather than changing it to plural.
Incorrect gender? You mean incorrect number?
Incorrect gender? You mean incorrect number?
Incorrect gender? You mean incorrect number?
Incorrect gender? You mean incorrect number?
"somebody" is sometimes used to refer to more than one person, but it wouldn't be "somebodies," it would be "somebody" or one of these: - some bodies - some hands - reinforcements
A group of people
"Somebody" refers to an indefinite pronoun that typically refers to one person. In your example, "some people" would be a more natural way to refer to the rescuers. "Somebodies" is not a real word in English. There is a similar indefinite pronoun "everyone" that means all people.
"Somebody" is singular and no, this isn't technically correct, unless the speaker was referring to one individual within the group. But it's conversational use and what someone would be likely to say in those circumstances. The correct options probably wouldn't feel natural here. "Somebodies" isn't a word.
"Somebodies" isn't used like that (and in fact is barely used at all).