The plural of "reindeer" is "reindeers".

[Harrison Hill]

According to this SW London newspaper the plural of "reindeer" is "reindeers, and it can't be a typo because it is repeated twice.

No actually it isn't; it is repeated once.

http://www.kingstonguardian.co.uk/news/10786491.Kingston_Christmas_lights_goes_Old_school_with_reindeers_and_salsa_dancers/

[Iain Archer]

Harrison Hill wrote on Tue, 12 Nov 2013 at 09:43:34 GMT

On another page they describe what sounds like a small improvised cloche
of cannabis plants, hidden in woodland, as a "cannabis factory".
<http://www.kingstonguardian.co.uk/news/10789607.Police_taunt_owners_of_c
annabis_factory_hidden_in_A3_woodlands/>
--
Iain Archer

[Peter Duncanson [BrE]]

It's repeated thrice.

Kingston Christmas lights goes Old school with reindeers and salsa
dancers

rep1 <same words used a caption to a photo>

rep2 Reindeers, music, food and dance classes

The festivities get underway in Old London Road from 11am on
November 14, and will feature food and craft markets, live
[1] reindeer, Santa’s Grotto and circus performers.

rep3 "Children will be able to enjoy the reindeers and Santa’s Grotto,

[1] Jingle Bells - they've got it right!

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

[erilar]

In article <fa87191c-615a-4b9b...@googlegroups.com>,

A double mistake doesn't make it correct.

--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist

[Peter T. Daniels]

It's like computer mouses and baseball players who flied out. The count
plural (reindeers) is used when plastic (or wood?) reindeers are mentioned,
the mass plural (reindeer) when live raindeer are referred to.

[Leslie Danks]

Google finds for me:

"plastic reindeer": 30600 hits
"plastic reindeers": 3070 hits

Thus "plastic reindeer" count corrected for those also found by "plastic
reindeers": 27530

Clearly your rule is not being enforced properly.

--
Les (BrE)

[John Briggs]

Not really - it was a shed with presumably artificial lighting.
--
John Briggs

[Peter T. Daniels]

It looks like _your_ "SW London newspaper" has taken to heart Steven
Pinker's discussion of this topic -- the "flied" example, at least,
is his. The Kingston Guardian is to be congratulated on its assimilation
of the findings of cognitive science.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Leslie Danks skrev:

> Google finds for me:

> "plastic reindeer": 30600 hits
> "plastic reindeers": 3070 hits

> Thus "plastic reindeer" count corrected for those also found by "plastic
> reindeers": 27530

There shouldn't be any false positives when you use apostrophes
(precise search). The first two pages of hits suggest that I'm
right.

--
Bertel, Denmark

[Leslie Danks]

I would have thought that "plastic reindeer" would also catch "plastic
reindeers" - or have I missed something?

--
Les (BrE)

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Leslie Danks skrev:

>>> Thus "plastic reindeer" count corrected for those also found by "plastic
>>> reindeers": 27530

>> There shouldn't be any false positives when you use apostrophes
>> (precise search). The first two pages of hits suggest that I'm
>> right.

> I would have thought that "plastic reindeer" would also catch "plastic
> reindeers" - or have I missed something?

Did you find an example of this aming the hits? There wasn't one
on the first two pages.

The apostrophes mean "search for those precise words". You can
even use them around one word. It is for example useful if a
Danish spelling would otherwise be changed to a more common
English one.

--
Bertel, Denmark

[Leslie Danks]

I lived a few miles away from Kingston for about 20 years (admittedly many
years ago). I am not convinced that your explanation is the most likely.

--
Les (BrE)

[Leslie Danks]

I know that, but how do you explain your claim that "plastic reindeer" would
not catch instances of "plastic reindeers". Is it because Googles search
algorithm explicitly excludes plurals?

I have realised that my search was flawed in a much more serious way:
"plastic reindeer" could, of course, be singular. <slaps head>
How about this search:

"two plastic reindeer": 9150 hits
"two plastic reindeers": 8 hits

"three plastic reindeer": 9280 hits
"three plastic reindeers": 1 hit

--
Les (BrE)

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Leslie Danks skrev:

> I know that, but how do you explain your claim that "plastic reindeer" would
> not catch instances of "plastic reindeers". Is it because Googles search
> algorithm explicitly excludes plurals?

No. It is because Google searches for the precise words, i.e.
"reindeer" and not "reindeer+something".

A search for "reindeera" (with apostrophes) gives 7'020 hits.

--
Bertel, Denmark

[Leslie Danks]

Ah, <penny drops> thanks - I should have known that (perhaps I did know it
once...)

--
Les (BrE)

[John Briggs]

The idea that "Google searches for the precise words" is ludicrous. The
Google algorithm is proprietary, and secret, and changes every day.
Google try give you what they think you want, rather than what you ask
for. It is often impossible to get it to do a precise search - and
excluding plurals is a hopeless task.
--
John Briggs

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, November 15, 2013 6:37:21 AM UTC-5, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:

> A search for "reindeera" (with apostrophes) gives 7'020 hits.

Those are "quotation marks" or "quotes" -- an apostrophe is a
single one of the elements: ' When enclosing dialogue (Brit
style), those are called "single quotes." In BrE they're called
"inverted commas" (even though at most one of the pair can
actually resemble an inverted comma).

[Mark Brader]

Bertel Lund Hansen:

> The apostrophes mean "search for those precise words".

You mean quotation marks, or quotes for short. An apostrophe is the
symbol after the N in "Dan's" or "can't".

The same character as an apostrophe may be used as a quotation mark
when single quotation marks (the ones 'like this') are being used --
even in good typography the closing single quote is normally the same
character as an apostrophe. And a double quote mark ("like this"),
or at least a closing double quote, may look like two apostrophes
side by side. But these characters are not apostrophes and it is
confusing to call them apostrophes.

(British usage also has the term "inverted commas".)
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | "This one isn't close. It's not even close to
m...@vex.net | being close." --Adam Beneschan

My text in this article is in the public domain.

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

John Briggs skrev:

> The idea that "Google searches for the precise words" is ludicrous. The
> Google algorithm is proprietary, and secret, and changes every day.
> Google try give you what they think you want, rather than what you ask
> for. It is often impossible to get it to do a precise search - and
> excluding plurals is a hopeless task.

I agree that Google is quite untrustworthy. I use it only to get
a hint of what the situation might be. If it is important i read
through some of the hits.

The idea is not quite ludicrous. In this case I did read through
some of the hits. I found only the strict "reindeer" as I
reported.

I suffer from no illusion about the precision of the numbers.

--
Bertel, Denmark

[Bertel Lund Hansen]

Mark Brader skrev:

>> The apostrophes mean "search for those precise words".

> You mean quotation marks, or quotes for short.

Yes, I was sloppy. Thanks for the correction.

--
Bertel, Denmark

[Peter T. Daniels]

On Friday, November 15, 2013 9:50:07 AM UTC-5, Bertel Lund Hansen wrote:
> Mark Brader skrev:

> >> The apostrophes mean "search for those precise words".
> > You mean quotation marks, or quotes for short.
> Yes, I was sloppy. Thanks for the correction.

You're welcome.

[jennij...@btinternet.com]

The plural of reindeer, is reindeer as is the plural of deer, deer and sheep is sheep. Ptarmigan are Ptarmigan. Get it right.

[Peter Moylan]

We'd like people to get it right, but I doubt that the person who wrote
that article reads this newsgroup.

--
Peter Moylan, Newcastle, NSW, Australia. http://www.pmoylan.org
For an e-mail address, see my web page.