Nouns that exist only in the plural

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vanadium 50
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the peculiarities of English nouns that exist only in plural form, such as "trousers," "scissors," and "wages." Participants explore categories for these nouns, including clothing, tools, and wealth. They note that some nouns, like "species" and "series," can be both singular and plural, while others, like "physics," are treated as singular despite ending in "s." The conversation highlights grammatical nuances, such as the treatment of collective nouns and the evolution of language, referencing historical uses and changes in meaning over time. The dialogue also touches on the pluralization of Latin-derived words and the complexities of English grammar, with examples illustrating how context can alter the interpretation of singular and plural forms. Overall, the thread reflects a deep dive into linguistic structure and the quirks of the English language.
  • #91
mfb said:
Scissors half?
Rethinking that, maybe each piece should be called, "scissor".
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #92
Each of your front teeth is called an "incisor" after all. Surely from the same root (etymologically not dentally)..
 
  • Like
Likes gmax137
  • #93
hutchphd said:
Each of your front teeth is called an "incisor" after all. Surely from the same root (etymologically not dentally)..
This should have been easy to recognize, so now, having spent the effort to have thought through it seems to should have been a much lighter effort.
 
  • #94
Unless I've missed it (or missed the point) no one has mentioned the word people yet.
 
  • Like
Likes symbolipoint
  • #95
rsk said:
noone has mentioned the word people yet.

Peoples of the world.
 
  • Like
Likes rsk and phinds
  • #96
Vanadium 50 said:
Peoples of the world.
Hmm, so it's a word with two plurals then.

I've never heard 'the people is' , only ever 'the people are'
 
  • #97
rsk said:
Hmm, so it's a word with two plurals then.

I've never heard 'the people is' , only ever 'the people are'
No, peoples in the context that Vanadium used it is singular.
 
  • #98
phinds said:
No, peoples in the context that Vanadium used it is singular.
I can't think of a single example where 'people' would be used with the singular form of the verb.

Someone give me an example and convince me please!
 
  • #99
rsk said:
I can't think of a single example where 'people' would be used with the singular form of the verb.

Someone give me an example and convince me please!
I see no problem using in making use of a choice of "people" or "peoples"; only in analyzing each of them. Telling us the details is the work of a true linguist.

If you only want to focus on 1 or more specific individuals or maybe some individuals who are difficult to specify, may choose either "person" or "persons".
 
  • #100
'People' is the plural version of 'Person' 99% of the time.