at one time the plural of fish was fish now its fishes did the yanks muck our language up again?

Answer 1

I don't think you can blame the Yanks for that one, fishes has been around for a long time.
I remember one of my Mothers favourite sayings, when something upset her, was "Ye Gods and little fishes."
That was over 50 years ago in Australia.

As far as I can find out it's a very old British expession.
Another is, "Hell's bells and little fishes".

Compact Oxford English Dictionary.
fish
• noun (pl. fish or fishes)

USAGE The normal plural of fish is fish, as in he caught two huge fish; however the older form fishes is still used when referring to different kinds of fish: freshwater fishes of the British Isles.

— ORIGIN Old English.

Answer 2

I've heard of "Sleepin with the fishes" But Fish are Fish, Just like Sheep are Sheep and Cannon are Cannon or Deer are Deer, A school, A flock, A bunch of them, or a Herd, are still called what they are!! Maybe too many "Soprano" episodes got the fishes started, The plural of Fish IS still Fish.! Not all us Yanks have "mucked up" the language YET!

Answer 3

Fish is the plural for a lot of an analogous sort of fish and Fishes ability many distinctive species of fish. I purely have fish in my aquarium. in line with threat asserting Fishes fell out of fashion in the English language, through fact I carry collectively books approximately fish and in the event that they have been revealed until eventually now 1975 they use the word Fishes- much less so after 1975.

Answer 4

I'm not sure who you mean by "yanks," but what you really need to know is that the English language is in a constant state of evolution. Words come and go; words change.

Compare a dictionary from 100 years ago to a modern day dictionary. There are amazing differences. Fishes might be in a newer one, but not in the older.

God Bless.
Pinkprairiestorm

Answer 5

I will answer this question very simply.
' FISH ' is the plural of 1 or 1000 fish of the same type.
However. If there are more than one species of fish they become fishes. EG. Look at that shoal of mackerel aren't they beautiful fish ? Yes but look at those tuna and cod they are wonderful fishes.

Answer 6

Nothing to do with Americans. " Fishes" is a correct plural of " fish " but is no longer in common usage. In the New Testament it refers to the parable of the loaves and fishes.

Answer 7

The word is simply FISH. If you want to add specific quantiy using the term you include the exact or specific quantity or you would describe more than one fish as several or many. The word has not changed and our vocabulary does not get re written in it's proper usage. New words are added with a meaning specific to the word. No adjustments.

Answer 8

Both are proper plural forms, BUT they are NOT interchangeable.

A group of fish of the same species are called fish. Two or more species of fish are called 'fishes'.

Actually, I believe it is ALWAYS correct to use "fish" for a plural, without regard to whether they are all of the same species or not. But "fishes" MUST refer to different species. (If you need to make a point of the fact that you are listing various species, use "fishes".)

Note that this is a more recent distinction. The KJV Bible (1611) speaks of "five loaves and two fishes" and is not referring to different species of fish. (In other words, it is NOT true that "fish" is the old plural, "fishes" a more recent one.)

http://www.amonline.net.au/fishes/what/fish.htm
http://crofsblogs.typepad.com/english/2005/02/fish_or_fishes.html

Answer 9

Never heard 'fishes' as a plural for fish before.

Answer 10

The Bible has a Parable about feeding the five thousand with loaves and fishes, so it is not a new expression.