In the first edition of William F. Stunk, Jr. and E.B. White's classic guide The Elements of Style, the authors declared, "None takes the singular verb." In the second edition, however, they changed their minds and said a plural verb was fine in instances "when none suggests more than one thing or person." They illustrated their changed opinion with the wry observation, "None are as fallible as those who are sure they're right." So what did the third edition of Stunk and White have to say on the topic? Not a word. You don't have to be a usage commentator to be brought up short by the question of whether one should say none is or none are. Grammarian Sir Ernest Glowers felt the answer was clear. As he explained, "What could be more obvious than that none, which is even less than one, cannot possibly take a plural verb?" Unfortunately for Sir Ernest, the ancestors of none were never strictly singular, and none has been used with plural verbs for as long as English has existed. King Alfred the Great himself was using it with plural verbs more than a thousand years ago.

It is the notion that none must be singular that is the new idea. That concept dates back only to the last century, and no one really knows where it originated.

All evidence indicates that it is acceptable to use either a plural or a singular verb with none. Our advice is to use a singular verb when the context makes none seem like a singular; if it seems like a plural, use a plural verb.