English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Certain words are ALWAYS pluralized. Can we "singularize" them and have them make ANY sense?

2006-06-14 02:25:44 · 8 answers · asked by Nick Focik 1 in Education & Reference Words & Wordplay

8 answers

No, you can't because the notion is that with scissors or pants or shorts or briefs etc. you deal with pairs. So, in order to singularize you'd have to say
'a pair of scissors', ' a pair of pants' etc.

2006-06-14 02:29:12 · answer #1 · answered by rainbowunweaver2002 5 · 0 1

Well, I suppose if you cut the pants down the middle (with the scissors) you could say you're putting on a pant, or if you only used half of a pair of scissors then you could use a scissor. Of course, then those things would be pretty pointless . . .

2006-06-14 02:32:48 · answer #2 · answered by Kyle 3 · 0 0

No. If you could, then they wouldn't be words that are ALWAYS pluralized.

You answered this question yourself. These words are ALWAYS pluralized. By definition, they can't be used in the singular form.

Give yourself 10 points.

2006-06-14 02:31:27 · answer #3 · answered by ratface29 2 · 0 0

You have to uncover their word origins.

ENTRY: pan-
DEFINITION: Fabric.1a. vane, from Old English fana, flag, banner, weathercock; b. Germanic compound *gund-fann- (see gwhen-). Both a and b from Germanic *fann. 2. Extended form *panno-. pane, panel, from Latin pannus, piece of cloth, rag. (Pokorny pn- 788.)

Call them leg pant covers

Unlike a knife, scissors have two pivoted (or hinged ) blades. Most types of scissors are not particularly sharp; it is primarily the shearing between the two blades which cuts. Children's scissors are even less sharp, and are often protected with plastic.

Although often used interchangeably with "scissors", the term shears are reserved by those in the industry for scissors longer than 15 cm[1].

Call them short shears

2006-06-14 02:42:16 · answer #4 · answered by mikey 4 · 0 0

They are plural in nature because they are made of a pair.
Therefore they need to have an "s" at the end and should be considered plural. Therefore they sould be used with: are, those
etc...

2006-06-14 02:39:33 · answer #5 · answered by frenchie123 1 · 0 0

Fun, though not so terribly unusual. This type of noun, which only appears in the plural, is called a "plurale tantum". Many languages have them.

(There is also a term, "singularia tantum," for nouns which only appear in the singular, e.g., "dust".")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurale_tantum

Wikipedia maintains a list of English pluralia tantum--currently with 57 entries:
acoustics, alternate angles, bagpipes, ballocks, bellows, binoculars, bollocks, chops, clothes, custom, dandelion greens, dynamics, earmuffs, esposas, glasses, goods, handcuffs, headquarters, jaws, jeans, knickerbockers, knickers, manacles, means, measles, mumps, pajamas, panties, pants, pfeffernusse, pliers, points, pork scratchings, pyjamas, rabbit ears, rompers, scissors, shackle, shackles, shades, shants, shingles, shorts, specs, spectacles, spoils, strides, sunglasses, sunnies, systematics, thanks, threads, tights, trews, trousers, underpants, undies

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_pluralia_tantum

A few more:
annals, billiards, credentials, measles, nuptials, thanks, tidings, tweezers, victuals

2006-06-14 06:18:28 · answer #6 · answered by bruhaha 7 · 0 0

There is reference to a half-scissor in Mary Morton's book: The Borrowers.

I suppose I could pretend to be out of breath...
l☺l

2006-06-14 02:31:17 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Pant is different.
When your tied from running you pant do you?

2006-06-14 22:58:13 · answer #8 · answered by aYuHiRi 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers