Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 7th May 2008 21:24 UTC
Permalink for comment 313497
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Pants treated as plural
by kaiwai on Thu 8th May 2008 15:43 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Pants treated as plural"
Member since:

No. Not at all. My post was not intended as a complaint or nitpick, but to convey information which I thought might be interesting and helpful to a nonnative English speaker interested in languages.

Atleast I do appreciate all these insights and I find them very interesting. I have always been interested in learning languages and I just have some natural talent for it. Actually, everyone in my family has been fast at picking up new languages. Anyways, I do say "pants are" but I too have noticed some US-originated citizens tend to say it as "pants is".

I guess it falls under the same sort of reason why those of the 'commonwealth' (NZ, Aussie, UK and possibly Canada) tend to refer to a organisation and use are, "Microsoft are a large organisation" - are being used in terms of plurality, meaning, the plurality of the components which make it up. In the case of pants - "your pants are on fire", and when referring to pants its quite normal to say, "I own a pair of black pants".

Then again, it is like the use of an before a word beginning with a vowel "an apple" whilst at the same time using an even though the word doesn't start with a vowel but sounds strange if 'a' is used. When is is used instead of are, in respects to pants, it just doesn't sound right and the sentence doesn't flow - it sounds disjointed.

Edited 2008-05-08 15:44 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2