Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: wugi Newsgroups: sci.lang,alt.usage.english Subject: Re: "a Pair of Panties" ????? Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 19:03:35 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 27 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2024 19:03:37 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="820007a6b2d4536454840ae73f09fa12"; logging-data="2997700"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18PODQy4KDcA4iV6gDBovHIxYZlzUqfr3M=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.6.1 Cancel-Lock: sha1:99/D2vnrMBs75dp0gDTEIEVGlXU= Content-Language: nl In-Reply-To: Op 1/07/2024 om 7:56 schreef Hibou: > Le 01/07/2024 à 04:44, HenHanna a écrit : >> >> A pair of pants,    or    A pair of trousers >> >>                   ... ok because each Pair kinda looks like  [2 pipes]. >> >>     ...but... >>               "a Pair of Panties" ????? > > There appears to be a class of things that exist only in the plural - a > pair of tweezers, scissors, pliers, sunglasses... trousers, underpants, > knickers, tights... - things that bifurcate or are made up of two bits. > I suppose the briefer garments inherited the plural from longer ones > (though a few minutes' searching yields no support for this; briefs were > apparently in use in Ancient Egypt). [...] Why does English name all these things as pairs, being a single object? Others like French have a few (lunettes, ciseaux). Others like Dutch have none of it in plural or "dual". Any historic reason? -- guido wugi