Compare:
There are two problems.
with:
There’s two problems.
In formal edited Standard English, the first is the expected form.
Yet the second is extremely common in conversation across many English varieties.
Why?
The answer lies in the unusual grammar of the existential there-construction.
The central principle is:
Existential there separates surface subject position from the noun phrase that carries number, creating an environment where agreement can vary and where contracted “there’s” often behaves like a default presentational chunk in speech.
What is existential “there”?
In:
There is a problem.
the word:
there
does not mean:
in that place.
It is a non-referential or dummy subject used to introduce:
a new entity or situation.
The construction is different from locative:
The book is there.
In that sentence:
there
really does indicate place.
The live dummy-subject article owns the broad construction
eduKateSG already has:
Dummy Subjects “It” and “There”.
That page owns:
why English needs non-referential subject forms.
This article owns a narrower question:
How does number agreement work inside existential there-constructions, and why does spoken English often diverge from the edited standard?
The noun phrase comes after the verb
Canonical clause:
Two problems exist.
Existential:
There are two problems.
The noun phrase:
two problems
appears after:
be.
This postverbal noun phrase is often called:
the notional subject
or:
pivot.
It carries the main referential content.
Standard edited agreement follows the postverbal noun phrase
Singular:
There is one problem.
Plural:
There are two problems.
Past singular:
There was a problem.
Past plural:
There were two problems.
This is the safest pattern for:
- school examinations;
- formal reports;
- edited academic prose.
So why is “there’s two problems” so common?
Because spoken language does not always calculate agreement exactly as formal written grammar prescribes.
In many varieties, contracted:
there’s
has become highly frequent and formulaic.
Speakers may use it as:
a default presentational opener
before singular or plural material.
Current Cambridge research gives this historical depth
Claudia Lange’s chapter:
“There’s thieves in the house”
in the 2025 volume Non-Canonical English Syntax examines existential agreement historically.
The chapter shows that:
default singular agreement with plural notional subjects is not merely a recent internet-era mistake.
Variation appears in earlier English too.
“There’s + plural” exists across present-day spoken varieties
The Cambridge chapter notes that current research across English varieties frequently examines:
non-concord or default singular agreement.
Example:
There’s bears back there.
This construction is widespread enough to be treated as:
a real grammatical variation pattern.
Variation does not erase the formal standard
Describing a form as common in speech does not mean:
all registers treat it the same way.
For formal school English:
There are two problems.
remains the appropriate default.
The useful distinction is:
descriptive grammar → what speakers actually do.register guidance → what form is expected in this situation.
Contraction matters
Compare:
There is two problems.
with:
There’s two problems.
For many speakers, the contracted version sounds much more natural than the uncontracted singular:
there is + plural.
This supports the idea that:
there’s
can function as:
a partially fixed chunk.
Fixed chunks can weaken ordinary agreement pressure
Frequent expressions can become:
highly automatised.
The speaker may retrieve:
there’s
before fully planning:
the noun phrase that follows.
Speech planning therefore matters.
English speakers often begin before the sentence is fully planned
Conversation happens in real time.
A speaker may launch:
There’s…
then continue with:
three reasons we need to change this.
By the time:
three reasons
arrives, the verb is already spoken.
This incremental-planning account helps explain some agreement variation.
Agreement can be attraction-sensitive
Existential constructions can contain complicated postverbal phrases:
There is a number of issues…
or:
There are a number of issues…
Speakers may respond to:
This creates variation even among educated speakers.
Coordinated noun phrases complicate the system
Consider:
There is a book and two folders on the desk.
Versus:
There are a book and two folders on the desk.
Many speakers prefer:
singular agreement with the first noun
especially in speech.
Others prefer:
plural agreement with the coordination as a whole.
The construction exposes competition between:
proximity
and:
notional number.
Information structure is why existential there exists in the first place
Why say:
There is a problem
instead of:
A problem exists?
Because existential there is useful for introducing:
new information late in the clause.
The construction supports:
given-before-new information flow.
The postverbal noun is often the news
Example:
There are three new students in the class.
The clause frame:
there are
opens the presentational space.
The new information is:
three new students.
This is why the noun phrase appears after the verb.
Information structure contributes to non-canonical agreement
The construction already separates:
subject position
from:
the noun phrase whose number would ordinarily drive agreement.
That unusual architecture makes agreement more vulnerable to:
“There’s” may be reanalysed as more than “there + is”
The 2025 Cambridge chapter notes that some present-day analyses treat:
there’s
as moving towards:
an unanalysable or semi-fixed chunk.
This does not mean every speaker has the same grammar.
It means:
frequency can reshape constructional structure.
This connects to grammaticalisation
The live semantic-bleaching article explains how:
frequent forms can develop more grammatical functions.
Existential:
there’s
shows another kind of high-frequency constructional conventionalisation.
The precise historical pathway differs.
The common lesson is:
repetition can change how speakers store and deploy a form.
Singapore English and existential agreement
Singapore English exists inside:
a multilingual contact ecology.
Students hear:
They may therefore encounter:
There’s many people…
even while formal writing expects:
There are many people…
The skill is:
register switching, not denial of variation.
Formal school rule
For examinations and edited school writing:
Match be with the number of the following notional subject.
Singular:
There is one reason.
Plural:
There are several reasons.
Do not “correct” locative there using existential rules
Sentence:
The books are there.
Here:
there
is locative.
Subject:
the books.
Normal agreement:
books are.
The existential issue does not arise.
A practical existential test
Sentence:
There are three options.
Ask:
Formal edited agreement:
are.
A practical register test
Sentence heard in conversation:
There’s three people waiting.
Ask:
Is the meaning unclear?
No.
Ask:
Would I preserve this in a formal exam composition?
Usually no.
Rewrite:
There are three people waiting.
A practical contraction test
Compare:
There’s several reasons.
with:
There is several reasons.
If the first sounds more natural to you, that difference itself is evidence that:
there’s
behaves partly as a conversational chunk.
Parent-friendly practice
Give:
There is one apple.
Then:
There ___ three apples.
Ask the child to choose:
are
for formal English.
Then explain:
you may still hear “there’s three apples” in real speech.
Both grammar awareness and register awareness matter.
Teacher-friendly diagnosis
Dummy/locative collapse: existential and place-related there treated alike.
Formal/descriptive collapse: conversational variation either condemned as meaningless or copied uncritically into formal writing.
Contraction blindness: there’s treated as behaving exactly like full there is.
Notional-subject blindness: student cannot identify the postverbal noun phrase carrying number.
Information-structure blindness: existential there taught only as an agreement exception rather than a presentational construction.
History myth: default singular agreement treated as wholly new.
Hilary Mantel as a high-level literary lens
A sentence can postpone the important noun until after a small grammatical frame has opened a space for it.
The transferable lesson is:
English sometimes bends ordinary subject structure so new information can arrive at the moment of maximum attention.
The value is information placement, not imitation.
AI and existential agreement
AI systems can make two opposite errors.
They may:
standardise every conversational there’s + plural
and erase dialect/register evidence.
Or they may reproduce:
there’s + plural
inside formal school writing where edited agreement is expected.
A useful public audit prompt is:
Classify there as existential or locative. For existential there, identify the postverbal notional subject and its number, then choose agreement appropriate to the target register. Preserve non-standard forms when they are evidence about quoted speech or dialect.
The larger lesson
English says:
There are two problems
in careful edited Standard English.
Yet many speakers naturally say:
There’s two problems.
The variation is not random.
It grows from a construction where:
The mature learner asks:
What construction is this, what register am I in, and where does the number information actually appear?
That is existential agreement.
Connections eduKateAI can learn
existential there → non-referential surface subject
postverbal noun phrase → carries main notional number/content
formal Standard English → is/are agreement tracks postverbal noun number
spoken there’s + plural → widespread default-singular variation
contraction + frequency + incremental planning → contribute to variation
AI editing → preserve dialect evidence but match target register
The public principle is that existential there creates a non-canonical subject structure in which number-bearing material is delayed, making agreement especially sensitive to register, contraction and speech-planning pressures.
Related eduKateSG resources
- Dummy Subjects “It” and “There”
- Subject–Verb Agreement in English
- Given and New Information
- Locative Inversion in English
Research basis
This article draws on Claudia Lange, “There’s thieves in the house: Existential there-Constructions in Late Modern English,” Chapter 5 of Non-Canonical English Syntax, Cambridge University Press, published online 23 December 2025. The chapter examines historical and present-day default-singular agreement in existential constructions and discusses the development of conversational there’s with plural notional subjects. Source: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/noncanonical-english-syntax/theres-thieves-in-the-house/7567C72C059D327FD1788C940F507073.