Grammar

[Gooseberries333]

Can anyone help with this sentence?

Woodfield gym, situated on the school site, were able to help 230 pupils last year.

Or

Woodfield gym, situated on the school site, was able to help 230 pupils last year.

I know 'were' is wrong as gym is singular, but for some reason 'was' sounds wrong. Is this wrong gramatically, if so why? Is it because (straws, clutching) a place can't help?

Woodfield gym, situated on the school site, was able to run classes for 230 pupils last year.

Would ^this make enough sense as it is? Or does it need to be

At Woodfield gym, which is situated on the school site, we were able to run classes for 230 pupils last year.

This has bugged me a while. Does anyone else feel anxiety when they have blind spots over grammar? I should say this is for work hence wanting to know.

the word is was, as you knew.
the rest of the query is not really about grammar, more style.
the second sentence, with was, sounds ok to me.
or turn it around,
230 pupils attended woodfield gym last year. the gym is conveniently situated on the school campus/site.
obviously you will use capitals where conventional !

In British English either is ok. Americans tend to use the singular "was".

Aha thank you! That's actually really helpful to know its style. Also your suggestion as that sounds more active.

Love MN.

Yep definitely 'was' but agree the style isn't ideal. I would use the above suggestion, or perhaps:

230 pupils attended classes at Woodland Gym last year. The gym is located on site at the school.

Something like that. Or, do you even need to say the location? Does the user already know the gym/are they familiar with the location/is that actually a key message - or is it more important to say how many kids attended?

If the location is important, perhaps that can be added to an intro eg

Woodland Gym
Woodland Gym is a state-of-the-art facility, conveniently located on site at XXX school. In the last year alone, 230 pupils attended fitness classes at the gym....

I know 'were' is wrong as gym is singular, but for some reason 'was' sounds wrong. Is this wrong gramatically, if so why? Is it because (straws, clutching) a place can't help?

If you think of the gym as an organisation rather than a place, does it then sound okay to you in the “was” version?

I definitely prefer “was”. “Were” sounds like a plural/singular clash to me, irrespective of the technicalities of what’s permissible.

Is it copy? Web content or similar? I appreciate you’re trying to keep it concise but I think a “which” in there might help a lot.

Woodfield gym, which is situated on the school site, was able to help 230 pupils last year.

@RickiTarr

I know 'were' is wrong as gym is singular, but for some reason 'was' sounds wrong. Is this wrong gramatically, if so why? Is it because (straws, clutching) a place can't help?

If you think of the gym as an organisation rather than a place, does it then sound okay to you in the “was” version?

I definitely prefer “was”. “Were” sounds like a plural/singular clash to me, irrespective of the technicalities of what’s permissible.

This sounds utterly ridiculous I know but thinking of it as an organisation, which I agree it is, and using 'was' makes the organisation sound a bit lonely to me.

I definitely think the passive voice has something to do with it.

Whereas

Woodfield gym ran classes for over 230 pupils last year.

Sounds ok, so I guess I'm happy with saying the organisation did something in an active voice. That's actually very helpful.

Its copy yes. Trying to write about an organisation bores the teeth out of me, whereas writing about...anything dynamic is much more interesting I find.

PP’s suggestions sound good. Or if you want to stay close to your original phrasing you could just get rid of the “was able to” circumlocution:

Wood field gym, situated on the school site, ran classes for 230 pupils last year.

This sounds utterly ridiculous I know but thinking of it as an organisation, which I agree it is, and using 'was' makes the organisation sound a bit lonely to me.

I have these conversations with myself too.