One fish or two?
Driving down a French motorway I saw the word bois on the side of a lorry. 'Bois' meaning both wood (the substance) and wood (as in forest) retains the same spelling in the latter context both in the singular and the plural.
This set me thinking (you have to think about something on a 600km drive). We also have a selection of words in English which retain the same spelling both in the singular and the plural, e.g. sheep, deer, salmon, and the occasional word with an optional plural, e.g. fish/fishes.
Here we come across another point of interest: why are there so many names of fishes which have the same singular/plural? Salmon, as mentioned, cod ('cods' has a totally different connotation), haddock, mackerel, snipe, plaice, turbot, the list goes on.
This set me thinking (you have to think about something on a 600km drive). We also have a selection of words in English which retain the same spelling both in the singular and the plural, e.g. sheep, deer, salmon, and the occasional word with an optional plural, e.g. fish/fishes.
Here we come across another point of interest: why are there so many names of fishes which have the same singular/plural? Salmon, as mentioned, cod ('cods' has a totally different connotation), haddock, mackerel, snipe, plaice, turbot, the list goes on.
Where land animals are concerned we have sheep and deer, as mentioned, but I can only immediately otherwise think of elk.
If you can think of others, let me now via the Comments facility.
OK, I've had the first suggestion via the Comments: grouse (thanks Fi).
That's set me thinking again. We say pigeon/pigeons, but wigeon (a duck, and it rhymes with pigeon) is wigeon in the singular and the plural.
Keep the suggestions coming.



Although a bird and not a land animal, how about grouse?
Reply to this