Poll

Do you wear 'Pants' or 'Pant'

pants
10 (100%)
pant
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 10

Voting closed: October 08, 2007, 01:08:50 AM

Author Topic: Pants!!  (Read 12418 times)

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Pants!!
« on: October 01, 2007, 01:08:50 AM »
Having asked for 'pants' to be allowed into our word list, and having it refused, i am repleading with Viral to reconsider.

I don't know about you, but i definately wear 'pants'..... i do not wear 'pant'..

What do you wear?

I would be grateful if you would vote in the poll, to help add some credability to my case for allowing 'pants' into our word list.

Many thanks.....

biggerbirdbrain

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8738
  • Texas
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #1 on: October 01, 2007, 01:11:01 AM »
Brilliant!

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2007, 01:34:32 AM »
Thank you....

rogue_mother

  • Eulexic
  • ***
  • Posts: 2165
  • I CAN'T BREATHE!
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #3 on: October 01, 2007, 02:05:41 AM »
How's this for bolstering your case -- precedent!  My example is plier and pliers.  Plier, meaning one who plies a trade, is found among the less common words, while pliers, the tool, is found on the common word list.
Inside the Beltway, Washington, DC metropolitan area

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #4 on: October 01, 2007, 06:06:22 AM »
Thank you too RM....what a star you are....

redwallylegs

  • Neophyte
  • *
  • Posts: 33
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #5 on: October 01, 2007, 08:24:03 AM »
Its a pair of pants............

Its a geometric thing isnt it ? And therefore is plural.

Quote
The terms for these objects are always plural in form, and they are usually referred to as "a pair of ...." This usage goes back to at least 1297 AD, when we have the expression "a peire of hosen."

The implication is that the two parts are separable in some sense, and in fact a pair of hose can often mean two separate pieces. (True, you can't separate tweezers, but I never claimed the English language was rational.)

In contrast to trousers, a shirt is thought of mainly as a covering for the torso, and may or may not have sleeves. Hence no pair.

The "pair of ..." designation is somewhat arbitrarily applied. At one time it was common to speak of a pair of compasses (for drawing), a pair of nutcrackers, or a pair of bellows. But I would venture to say that in the U.S., at least, these expressions are dying out.

On the other hand, we do speak of a pair of panties, even though panties aren't really a pair of anything, having (usually) no legs. But clearly this is merely an extension of the expression, "pair of pants."

Further confusing matters is "a dozen pairs of rosaries," even though there are 50-some beads. This harks back to an old use of the word "pair" to mean "a set of more than two like or equal things making a whole."

A related usage, supposedly common in the theater business for many years, is "a pair [flight] of stairs." Occasionally theatrical types will say of a pair that it is "nice," and one assumes the rest of the superstructure ain't bad either. But that's a discussion for another day.

--CECIL ADAMS



That and what was said on the other thread..........
« Last Edit: October 01, 2007, 08:26:08 AM by redwallylegs »
Dogs are our link to paradise.
They don't know evil or jealousy or discontent.
To sit with a dog on a hillside on a glorious afternoon is to be back in Eden, where doing nothing was not boring -- it was peace. 
--Milan Kundera

Alan W

  • Administrator
  • Eulexic
  • *****
  • Posts: 4969
  • Melbourne, Australia
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #6 on: October 01, 2007, 11:13:33 AM »
I know from bitter experience that if I devote a couple of hours preparing a carefully researched response on this issue, reviewing the many arguments that have already been aired in the forum, T will answer something like, "Oh Viral, can't you tell when I'm pulling your leg? I just thought it would be a bit of fun to bring this up again."

On the other hand, if I ignore it and just let people have their fun, T will relentlessly keep posting demands that I reply to her question, for all the world as if she is making a serious suggestion that I am refusing to answer, when in fact I have already devoted hours to researching issues sparked off by this question and written hundreds of words on the forum about it.

I was perfectly willing to add pants and 40 or so other words for clothing that are normally used in the plural. This provoked howls of outrage, because people apparently don't want a sudden influx of new words. It's not that they don't want to add hundreds of new words - it's just that they want them to be added one at a time.

So all I will add is that there are a lot of other words about which a similar question can be asked. For example:

acoustics, aerobics, airs, aloes, amends, amidships, ancients, annals, antipodes, anyways, aquatics, archives, arms, arrears, assizes, athletics, auspices, avionics, backwards, backwoods, badlands, basics, bats, batteries, bellows, bends, besides, betimes, biceps, bifocals, billiards, bioethics, bionics, bitters, blahs, bleachers, blinkers, bloomers, bollocks, bones, boobies, boondocks, bounds, bowls, boxers, briefs, buckskins, buns, burbs, cahoots, ceramics, chanties, checkers, cheers, chinos, chives, civics, clappers, classics, clippers, clothes, cobblers, combings, commons, confines, conkers, cords, corduroys, cosies, cozies, crabs, crackers, craps, creeps, cryonics, culottes, curries, customs, damages, darts, daylights, days, dealings, deserts, devices, dibs, dietetics, diggings, digs, dividers, doings, doubles, downwards, dramatics, draughts, drawers, droppings, duchesses, duds, dungarees, dynamics, earnings, eastwards, eats, eaves, economics, effects, elements, entrails, esthetics, eugenics, fajitas, falls, fates, fatigues, findings, fives, fixings, flannels, folks, forensics, gallows, gears, genetics, genitals, giblets, gleanings, goggles, goods, graphics, greens, grits, grounds, guts, hackles, harmonics, heaps, hearts, heavens, heroics, highlands, hipsters, homewards, hots, hustings, hysterics, impresses, indoors, innings, inwards, italics, jacks, jakes, jeans, jimmies, jitters, jodhpurs, kinetics, knickers, landwards, lashings, laurels, leavings, leftovers, leftwards, leotards, letters, links, lodgings, logistics, logos, longueurs, lots, makings, manners, marbles, maths, means, mechanics, mews, midships, mnemonics, moneybags, morals, mumps, munitions, nerves, ninepins, nuptials, nuts, nylons, oilskins, onwards, optics, others, outdoors, outgoings, outwards, overalls, pains, pajamas, phonetics, phonics, physics, physics, pickings, piles, polemics, politics, premises, privates, proceeds, pyjamas, quits, quoits, rags, ramblings, ravages, rearwards, receipts, regards, relations, remains, respects, robotics, rompers, rooms, roots, rounders, rubbings, rudiments, sales, savings, scads, scissors, scrapings, scrubs, seawards, secateurs, semantics, semiotics, sevens, shades, shambles, shears, shorts, shucks, silks, singles, skittles, skywards, slacks, slops, smalls, smarts, snips, sometimes, spareribs, spats, specs, stacks, staggers, stairs, stalls, starkers, stations, stats, stays, stocks, straits, strings, stripes, summons, sweats, sweepings, tails, takings, talks, taps, taxis, tectonics, teddies, teens, telesales, tenpins, terms, thanks, theatrics, theses, thieves, things, threads, throes, tidings, tights, times, togs, tongs, tops, towards, trammels, tramways, trappings, trews, triceps, trimmings, troops, tropics, trousers, trunks, tweeds, tweezers, unawares, upwards, vapors, vapours, velours, viands, vibes, victuals, vitals, waders, wages, wares, waters, weeds, westwards, whoops, wilds, willies, winnings, withers, wits, woolies, words, workings, works, yaws, yikes, yips
Alan Walker
Creator of Lexigame websites

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #7 on: October 01, 2007, 06:24:15 PM »

I am not a demanding woman....
I am a woman of simple pleasures....
I don't ask for much, but give aplenty....
I live a good[ish] life,
i'm not mean to animals....
Ok! i admit i swear a bit [well! a lot actually..]
But generally....i am a good, nice person...[someone back me up here please!]...
All i want...and it isn't much to ask really...
....is my 'pants'...

Sorry i put you to all that trouble Viral....i feel suitably chaste....and am heading for the corner, head hung in shame, as i type....well when i've finished...

I'm heading off now.....

goodbye.....

see ya later..





i'm really going...






i am look....




there i am...gone...

Linda

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 7063
  • Cumbria, England
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #8 on: October 01, 2007, 06:33:54 PM »
Much as I hate to agree with T ... I agree with T on this one ... you don't wear a pant, you wear pants, much in the same way that you wear a pair of jodhpurs! 
Come on Alan, you know it makes sense!  >:D

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #9 on: October 01, 2007, 06:43:58 PM »
Jodhpurs is in the list...[what is that 'H' all about???]
So is BOLLOCKS....

Thanks for the support Linda....appreciate it a lot...

biggerbirdbrain

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8738
  • Texas
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #10 on: October 01, 2007, 09:01:17 PM »
And the list goeth on..........and on.........and on. I understand the dilemma, but I must speak out, too, Master GAGL! Even if it contradicts anything else I might have previously said during "the outcries". Although I believe I've been consistent.

So, then: how many people (girls, mostly) are there who just wear ONE bloomer? Or how many people (mostly men) who wear just ONE boxer? Even boxers (mostly men) wear boxers!

There are more examples in that list with which I also would take exception!  ;)

technomc

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8513
  • Dorset UK
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2007, 10:34:37 PM »
How gratifying that others feel the same as me when it comes to our delicates....

I really don't much care about the other words, but my 'pants', 'knickers', 'thongs' and 'gs' are very personal to me..... i cannot say about 'bloomers' i don't do them....but the same theory applies.....

Thanks threeb....

Linda

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 7063
  • Cumbria, England
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #12 on: October 01, 2007, 10:36:07 PM »
Not forgetting my v. girly boxers!  >:D

biggerbirdbrain

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 8738
  • Texas
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #13 on: October 01, 2007, 10:40:19 PM »
Stand strong, hags! Just don't put too much starch in them drawers!  >:D

Linda

  • WordStar
  • ****
  • Posts: 7063
  • Cumbria, England
    • View Profile
Re: Pants!!
« Reply #14 on: October 01, 2007, 10:41:08 PM »
Just lots of fabric conditioner!  >:D