- 1,748
- 52
Why is zero plural?
(eg. I have zero items on my agenda.)
(eg. I have zero items on my agenda.)
Why Is Zero Plural?
- Thread starter skeptic2
- Start date
Danger
Gold Member
- 9,564
- 244
You can't multiply by zero and obtain any result other than zero, it's still just zero. 
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 7,093
- 174
Last edited:
tiny-tim
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
- 25,790
- 249
- 253
- 2
Taking a wild guess.....
A single object is singular.
A plural object is non-singular.
Zero, under this definition, will be a plural quantity.
A single object is singular.
A plural object is non-singular.
Zero, under this definition, will be a plural quantity.
Hurkyl
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 14,845
- 17
I would assume the grammatical constructs for "zero", "one", and "more than one" evolved long before we actually had numbers to express those ideas. Then, when we invented numbers, we simply inserted the numbers into the existing constructs.
Here's another one you might not have noticed.
It's easy to say "there are fourteen and two-thirds apples in that basket", right? Sounds quite natural.
Now, replace 14 2/3 with 1 2/3.
You probably said "there are one and two-thirds apples", but I suspect were a bit more hesitant.
Now, try 2/3.
You probably couldn't do it -- you had to switch to an entirely different construct: "there is two-thirds of an apple", or maybe "there are two-thirds of an apple", but you almost surely couldn't bring yourself to say "there are two-thirds apples" or "there is two-thirds apple".
Here's another one you might not have noticed.
It's easy to say "there are fourteen and two-thirds apples in that basket", right? Sounds quite natural.
Now, replace 14 2/3 with 1 2/3.
You probably said "there are one and two-thirds apples", but I suspect were a bit more hesitant.
Now, try 2/3.
You probably couldn't do it -- you had to switch to an entirely different construct: "there is two-thirds of an apple", or maybe "there are two-thirds of an apple", but you almost surely couldn't bring yourself to say "there are two-thirds apples" or "there is two-thirds apple".
tiny-tim
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
- 25,790
- 249
There are two-thirds of an apple,
there is one-third of an apple,
but yes there are still no bananas.
George Jones
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 7,231
- 785
Last edited by a moderator:
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 7,093
- 174
Re: zero bananas
There are zero loaves of bread, or no loaves of bread? As opposed to, we have a zero count.
Didn't you just make my point? Would we say that we have zero bananas?Yes, we have no bananas
we have no bananas today!
There are zero loaves of bread, or no loaves of bread? As opposed to, we have a zero count.
dlgoff
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 3,733
- 1,640
russ_watters
Mentor
- 18,994
- 5,146
Because if you had no (zero) item on your adjenda, you could still have several items on your adjenda.
russ_watters
Mentor
- 18,994
- 5,146
- 6,171
- 1,275
This makes sense: everything that is not singular is by default plural.
russ_watters
Mentor
- 18,994
- 5,146
Simple and satisfying, but according to the dictionary, wrong: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/plural
Apparently, the real problem here is that we are speaking English:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural
- 6,171
- 1,275
So the answer is: it's a convention.
- 4,660
- 5
Zero in the above example is an adjective, not a noun. In English, unlike other languages, adjectives do not change with declension or pleurality of noun.
zero alumni, zero alumnae, etc.
A pleural use of zero as a noun is: How many zeros does 1 trillion dollars have?
- 6,171
- 1,275
By your logic "1 trillion" is an adjective here?
- 666
- 6
isn't it?
- 6,171
- 1,275
I'm checking to find out.
- 136
- 4
It appears so. If you look up the definition of a number it gives the definition when refering to a number of things as an adjective. Makes sense.
ibnsos
Wouldn't "1trillion" be the object? It isn't modifying the noun and I believe thats what adjectives do.
- 136
- 4
It is modifying the noun. Dollars being the noun it is describing the number of them.
ibnsos
Duh, got ya. I was confusing subject with noun hehe. Think I did that in English class alot too.
tiny-tim
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
- 25,790
- 249
me bananas!
Hi George!
all the natural numbers are adjectives, but they are written as numerals, with the same name, and a numeral is a noun …
eg the number "one" is written as the numeral "1", with the name "one".
but the number "no" is written as the numeral "0", with the name "zero".
Hi George!
I only tally me bananas.
I think the strict answer is that zero should always be a noun, not an adjective …
all the natural numbers are adjectives, but they are written as numerals, with the same name, and a numeral is a noun
…eg the number "one" is written as the numeral "1", with the name "one".
but the number "no" is written as the numeral "0", with the name "zero".
Last edited by a moderator:
MATLABdude
Science Advisor
- 1,646
- 4
You can pluralize zero:
Okay, not so much. In a similar fashion, there was some debate about what to call the first decade of this new millennium (in the same fashion as, say, the 20s and the 90s), and some suggested calling it the zeros. Never really caught on, so in the future, this decade might be the one that nobody ever talks about!