What's the plural for "junk" and "goodie"?
drow
small Chinese boats called "junk"?
TLK
"drow" <dr...@nomail.com> wrote
> What's the plural for "junk" and "goodie"?
I think 'junk' in itself is an uncountable noun that has a plural meaning.
As in, "get rid of all that junk in the backyard". 'Junk' in this case might
mean a rusty old car with no engine, a couple of baseball bats, 156 beer
cans, several unidentified automobile parts, 3 radios that need fixin' ....
But I digress.
The _singular_ of 'junk' would be 'piece' of junk. As in, "the new Britney
Spears album is a piece of junk".
The plural for 'goodie' is 'goodies'. If you visited any store a month ago,
you must have heard a song about that guy in red who always carries "lots of
toys and goodies" in his bag for good kids.
As for 'junk' the Chinese boat, I'm not sure about your spelling... but they
do have boats whose name is at least pronounced in the same way as 'junk'.
-T
R Fontana
> What's the plural for "junk" and "goodie"?
"Junk" meaning "garbage" is usually not pluralized, but if it were I
suppose it would have to be "junks". The plural of "goody" or "goodie" is
"goodies".
> Why are those
> small Chinese boats called "junk"?
Dictionary.
Murray Arnow
>What's the plural for "junk" and "goodie"? Why are those
>small Chinese boats called "junk"?
There is a marvelous source that can answer all your questions: it is
called a dictionary.
N.Mitchum
-----
> What's the plural for "junk" and "goodie"?
>.....
"Junk," meaning rubbish, is its own plural. You can't count this
kind of junk.
Singular "goodie" is usually spelled "goody." The plural is, as
you'd expect, "goodies."
-----
> Why are those small Chinese boats called "junk"?
>.....
The dictionary says the name comes from Portuguese, and before
that from Javanese and Malay. That is to say, it's an adaptation
of an Asian word.
The plural in this instance is "junks." No relation to the
"rubbish" junk.
----NM
OldContemptible
>called a dictionary.
>
Postings such as this are deconstructive and deter people from further
participation in discussions.
While you've got your dictionary to hand, have a look at 'supercilious'.
Newsgroups are for everyone, not just the minority who think that they are that
little bit smarter than everyone else.
Martin Ambuhl
>
> >There is a marvelous source that can answer all your questions: it is
> >called a dictionary.
> >
>
> Postings such as this are deconstructive and deter people from further
> participation in discussions.
>
> While you've got your dictionary to hand, have a look at 'supercilious'.
I think you need to read the FAQ. Asking questions which can be easily
answered by consulting a dictionary is not considered reasonable here.
>
> Newsgroups are for everyone, not just the minority who think that they are that
> little bit smarter than everyone else.
They are for people who behave. Try it.
OldContemptible
I did, but it was kinda boring. I think you know what I mean.