Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 7th May 2008 21:24 UTC
Comics
Thread beginning with comment 313414
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Pants treated as plural
by sbergman27 on Thu 8th May 2008 02:55 UTC in reply to "RE: Pants treated as plural"
sbergman27
Member since:
2005-07-24

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.

However, this is one comic that I didn't laugh at. Not because I think it is bad, but because the topic of SCO is so old and worn out. I think someone compared it to the monster in the horror B movie that just wont die, and I have to agree with the sentiment.

Edit: How about "Darl McBride vs The Eveready Bunny" for a B movie title? ;-)

Edited 2008-05-08 02:57 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

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".

Reply Parent Score: 3

sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

I suppose it has something to do with pants having two "pant legs". Then a again, a shirt has two arms, and a brassiere usually[1] has two cups. But still, as a whole, it does not really make sense to to me to treat "pants" as plural... unless you cut them in half with scissors. But then you have another problem, because "scissors" is also treated as plural.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_characters_from_The_Hitchhiker~*...

Edited 2008-05-08 11:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

ebasconp Member since:
2006-05-09

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.


I really appreciate that. I am always happy when someone corrects my "four-year old boy" English ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

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