Message from discussion Plural but singular in construction
Received: by 10.66.82.37 with SMTP id f5mr1959822pay.17.1348383255320;
Sat, 22 Sep 2012 23:54:15 -0700 (PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 01:54:14 -0500
Subject: Re: Plural but singular in construction
References: <xvX4s.firstname.lastname@example.org> <kX97s.1$MX2.email@example.com> <eNCdnZ7tYvfRsMDNnZ2dnUVZ_tOdnZ2d@vex.net> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: m...@vex.net (Mark Brader)
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001)
Originator: m...@vex.net (Mark Brader)
Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2012 01:54:15 -0500
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
> I can't think of one. But, at a tangent, "scissors" is interesting.
> Standard English handles it like other inseparable pairs - trousers,
> spectacles, etc. But as late as the 19th C it was quite normal to
> speak of "a scissors" instead of "a pair of sc." - and in Welsh
> English it still is.
Also in railway English. This is a scissors:
(Also called a "scissors crossing", "scissors crossover", etc.)
Mark Brader | "I don't have to stay here to be insulted."
Toronto | "I realize that. You're insulted everywhere, I imagine."
m...@vex.net | -- Theodore Sturgeon