Eames Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 It's lunchtime here. My head's been a bit dozey all day and I need to get a good bit of work done so I went to take a Neurofen. Grabbed a packet from my medicine drawer, popped it out and washed it down with a glass of water. Realised that my Neurofen are in a bottle on the table, not a packet in the drawer. I just ate a sleeping tablet. Balls. This is how people die I took ritalin by mistake once..... that was an interesting day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 11, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 11, 2012 Yes but it's a flock of sheep, as opposed to sheeps. And a herd of deer as opposed to deers. Whereas it's a herd of cowS (as opposed to a single Cow) or a flock of birdS etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Fish. Shoal ? School ? I don't think that was the question CI. The name for a collective group of sheep is flock, Wiggy is asking if the plural for any animal matches the singular. i.e. There are 20 fish in my tank / there is a fish in my tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 More than 1 sheep = flock Deer = herd Thats the collective term not the plural. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 I like to invent collective nouns for animals that I don't know the term for. My favourite of which; "a cagoule of manatees". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Back to Wiggmaster Flash's question, off the top of my head; bison, buffalo and moose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Yes but it's a flock of sheep, as opposed to sheeps. And a herd of deer as opposed to deers. Whereas it's a herd of cowS (as opposed to a single Cow) or a flock of birdS etc Yeah, but if you saw a load of sheep in a field, you would still say "look at those magnificant sheep" Back to Wiggmaster Flash's question, off the top of my head; bison, buffalo and moose. Im pretty sure you would still say buffalo's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 11, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 11, 2012 Weirdly, it's the complete opposite with trousers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irreverentad Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Random thought of the day. 1 sheep on its own is called a sheep. 20 sheep in a group are stilled sheep...not sheeps. Is there any other example of this in the animal kingdom? Im struggling to think of any. Clunge? EDIT.... Word filtered! Cl*nge? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Hmmm let me see. Look at the Cl*nge stood in the corner. Look at that bit of Cl*nge stood in the corner. Yes, I think it works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 And apparently you'd be wrong, sir. Nouns with identical singular and plural Some nouns spell their singular and plural exactly alike; some linguists regard these as regular plurals. Many of these are the names of animals: buffalo deer moose sheep bison salmon pike trout fish swine money The plural deers is listed in some dictionaries.[7] As a general rule, game or other animals are often referred to in the singular for the plural in a sporting context: "He shot six brace of pheasant", "Carruthers bagged a dozen tiger last year", whereas in another context such as zoology or tourism the regular plural would be used. Similarly, nearly all kinds of fish have no separate plural form (though there are exceptions—such as rays, sharks or lampreys). And the word "fish" itself is also troublesome, being generally used as a plural when in the context of food, but forming a regular plural otherwise (thus "three lots of fish and chips", "the industry landed 5,200 tonnes of fish in 1998" but "the order of fishes", "the miracle of the loaves and fishes", the phrase "sleep with the fishes"). The usage does vary, however, so that for example the phrase "five fish in an aquarium" might to another native user be "five fishes in an aquarium". Using the plural form fish could imply many individual fish(es) of the same species while fishes could imply many individual fish(es) of differing species. Other nouns that have identical singular and plural forms include: aircraft; watercraft; spacecraft; hovercraft; ocean-going craft the blues4 cannon (sometimes cannons) head5 stone (occasionally stones)6 series, species (and other words in -ies) scissors7 ^ Note 4: Referring to individual songs in the blues musical style: "play me a blues"; "he sang three blues and a calypso" ^ Note 5: Referring, in the plural, to animals in a herd: "fifty head of cattle" ^ Note 6: As a unit of weight equal to 14 pounds ^ Note 7: When referring to a single item, used with either a singular or plural verb ("this scissors is dull" or "these scissors are dull"); some speakers avoid the issue entirely by using the phrase "pair of scissors" ("this pair of scissors is dull"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 11, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 11, 2012 Look how much Cl*nge there is in here. It's full of cl*nge yep, I'm on board with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Also fanny. Look at that bit of fanny. This place is full of fanny. I love this game! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 11, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 11, 2012 "win"? That is full of win That's a good win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 Cl*nge is word filtered? clunge clunge clunge clunge clunge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted July 11, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted July 11, 2012 This really belongs in the "Things you've often wondered" thread, but... Moving on from plurals, let's play "Missing Opposites": Why can you eat antpasti, but not propasti? (Don't answer, I know, I know) How can you demolish a building when it has never been molished? How can you be gormless, but not gormful? Why is there upholstery but no downholstery? Why a wardrobe, and not a peacedrobe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 And apparently you'd be wrong, sir. Nouns with identical singular and plural Some nouns spell their singular and plural exactly alike; some linguists regard these as regular plurals. Many of these are the names of animals: buffalo deer moose sheep bison salmon pike trout fish swine money The plural deers is listed in some dictionaries.[7] As a general rule, game or other animals are often referred to in the singular for the plural in a sporting context: "He shot six brace of pheasant", "Carruthers bagged a dozen tiger last year", whereas in another context such as zoology or tourism the regular plural would be used. Similarly, nearly all kinds of fish have no separate plural form (though there are exceptions—such as rays, sharks or lampreys). And the word "fish" itself is also troublesome, being generally used as a plural when in the context of food, but forming a regular plural otherwise (thus "three lots of fish and chips", "the industry landed 5,200 tonnes of fish in 1998" but "the order of fishes", "the miracle of the loaves and fishes", the phrase "sleep with the fishes"). The usage does vary, however, so that for example the phrase "five fish in an aquarium" might to another native user be "five fishes in an aquarium". Using the plural form fish could imply many individual fish(es) of the same species while fishes could imply many individual fish(es) of differing species. Other nouns that have identical singular and plural forms include: aircraft; watercraft; spacecraft; hovercraft; ocean-going craft the blues4 cannon (sometimes cannons) head5 stone (occasionally stones)6 series, species (and other words in -ies) scissors7 ^ Note 4: Referring to individual songs in the blues musical style: "play me a blues"; "he sang three blues and a calypso" ^ Note 5: Referring, in the plural, to animals in a herd: "fifty head of cattle" ^ Note 6: As a unit of weight equal to 14 pounds ^ Note 7: When referring to a single item, used with either a singular or plural verb ("this scissors is dull" or "these scissors are dull"); some speakers avoid the issue entirely by using the phrase "pair of scissors" ("this pair of scissors is dull"). You can also add Elk to the list! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiggyrichard Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 This really belongs in the "Things you've often wondered" thread, but... Moving on from plurals, let's play "Missing Opposites": Why can you eat antpasti, but not propasti? (Don't answer, I know, I know) How can you demolish a building when it has never been molished? How can you be gormless, but not gormful? Why is there upholstery but no downholstery? Why a wardrobe, and not a peacedrobe? Like, an uprising...never a lowrising! Or an assault on a army base...never an aspepper! A hot-rod...not a cold-rod! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted July 11, 2012 Share Posted July 11, 2012 This really belongs in the "Things you've often wondered" thread, but... Moving on from plurals, let's play "Missing Opposites": Why can you eat antpasti, but not propasti? (Don't answer, I know, I know) How can you demolish a building when it has never been molished? How can you be gormless, but not gormful? Why is there upholstery but no downholstery? Why a wardrobe, and not a peacedrobe? I can answer the last one "Ward" is an old word for protecting or guarding and "robe" is an old word for clothes. Hence "Wardrobe" is the place your clothes are protected (though not from moths in my case ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 11, 2012 Author VT Supporter Share Posted July 11, 2012 No more Moyles on the Radio 1 breakfast show. Some people will be very happy! Nick Grimshaw to replace him. I think I'm ok with that. Grimmy can be a bit annoying but he is pretty funny, imo. Hoping he can poach Becky from Scott Mills' show as a sidekick. Does anyone care? Just me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts