61–70 of 247 posts
Makes me think of how Mädchen ("girl" or "maiden" in German) is neuter/neutral instead of feminine: https://blog.assarbad.net/20090810/das-madchen-why-is-it-gra...
In Dutch, child/children is kind/kinderen, which is the same double plural. We also have that construction with ei/eieren for egg/eggs. (Regular plural suffixes are -en and -s.)
In the chicken post, which they link to in the article in question, it says: "The OED notes versions in such Germanic languages as Dutch (kieken, kuiken)..." But chicken is kip in Dutch. Maybe they're talking about older versions of the word. Also interesting, perhaps, is the other '-en' that comes to mind: boy/boys, which is jongen/jongens
"jongen" is another story. It used to be "jonge", which is the substantivized version of the adjective "jong" (young). The -n was later added by analogy from the other cases. This is why the plural is pronounced "jonges" (written "jongens"), and the diminutive is "jongetje" even in the standard language.
Makes me think of how Mädchen ("girl" or "maiden" in German) is neuter/neutral instead of feminine: https://blog.assarbad.net/20090810/das-madchen-why-is-it-gra...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How long are we going to continually spell things like: knife, night, knight, thought, etc. When you add up the generations of wasted human effort in spelling words in such pointless ways, its mind boggling.
what do you suggest instead: naif, nife, nyve ..?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Data is a plural of datum, if you're considering the individual pieces, but it's more commonly used (in my experience as a US native) as a collection singular like sand. Ex the sand has formed a hill, the data has filled the hard drive.
And in the UK, Lego.
See also: Meccano, Duplo, Brio, Scalextric.
Worse imho is the "glasses", "pants", "pliers", "scissors", etc thing. Single object with plural name just because it happens to be made of two similar parts. Most objects are made of multiple parts though and they get a singular name just fine. That and the "double u", why not "we"??
I can live with "glasses", "pants", "pliers" and "scissors", but "data" drives me crazy because even native speakers seem to be completely inconsistent when it comes to its number. EDIT: Now that I think about it there is another one that is hard for me, even it I know it is the correct form in English: visa (singular) and visas (plural). In my mother tongue it follows the same pattern as datum and data, it's Visum (…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the sake of being a contrarian, there are two pieces of "glass" in a glasses. I do wonder if simpler english will ever catch on I do wondr if simplr nglsh wil evr cach on.
How long are we going to continually spell things like: knife, night, knight, thought, etc. When you add up the generations of wasted human effort in spelling words in such pointless ways, its mind boggling.
Worse imho is the "glasses", "pants", "pliers", "scissors", etc thing. Single object with plural name just because it happens to be made of two similar parts. Most objects are made of multiple parts though and they get a singular name just fine. That and the "double u", why not "we"??
I can live with "glasses", "pants", "pliers" and "scissors", but "data" drives me crazy because even native speakers seem to be completely inconsistent when it comes to its number. EDIT: Now that I think about it there is another one that is hard for me, even it I know it is the correct form in English: visa (singular) and visas (plural). In my mother tongue it follows the same pattern as datum and data, it's Visum (…