2007-02-20 10:39:08 · 15 answers · asked by youngie 2 in Education & Reference ➔ Words & Wordplay
The term is not meant to be pluralized. It is intended to specifically single out an individual who stands out from the rest of the guys for one or more admiralble qualities of character or accomplishments. It's endearing to the one receiving the title as if to suggest they are like no other.
If you really need to talk about more than one hell of a guy, then you're actually talking about something different, that being a pair or group of outstanding gentlemen. Your first hell of a guy is now a part of something different.
But if you really need to pluralize it, a hell of a bunch of of guys, or hell of a group of guys would work. This is saying that this group is like none other.
2007-02-20 10:52:30 · answer #1 · answered by Mickey Nation 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hell of a group of guys
2007-02-20 10:41:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You'd have to say something like "a hell of a group" or "a hell of a bunch"
2007-02-20 10:41:53 · answer #3 · answered by Phantom 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
'Hell' is a noun and so is 'guy', therefore your phase is not correct even in slang.
You will have to change the whole sentence and use an adjective to describe more than one guy.
"They are a hell of a bunch of guys."
"They are a bunch of hellish guys. " ????
2007-02-20 10:48:58 · answer #4 · answered by Catie I 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hell of a bunch of guys
2007-02-20 10:41:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
hell of a couple of guys
2007-02-20 10:42:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
hell of a group
2007-02-20 10:41:51 · answer #7 · answered by schrauf1981 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you guys are the living hell.
2007-02-20 10:47:46 · answer #8 · answered by annie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hellish guys
2007-02-20 10:42:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
An inferno of gentlemen?
An abyss of dudes?
A big, dark cave-full-of-fire of human males?
2007-02-20 10:42:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋