Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Authentic_SCA] Re: What's the singular of hose?

Expand Messages
  • Carolle M Cox
    In German, Hosen is plural, Hose is singular. Now, remember pronunciation Hoe-sen, and Hoe-suh (roughly). : P Gerita ... From: Sarah Michele Ford
    Message 1 of 16 , Nov 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      In German, Hosen is plural, Hose is singular. Now, remember pronunciation"
      Hoe-sen, and Hoe-suh (roughly). :>P

      Gerita


      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Sarah Michele Ford" <sarah@...>
      To: <Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 10:37 AM
      Subject: Re: [Authentic_SCA] Re: What's the singular of hose?


      > On Fri, 1 Nov 2002, Lena Strid wrote:
      >
      > > Sarah wrote:
      > >
      > > > I'm going with "ho" just because it's funny. And that's what I've
      got -
      > > half of a pair of hose.
      > >
      > > I always assumed that hose was the singular (and plural unknown).
      > > Perhaps that's because I think in swedish terms: singular: hosa,
      > > plural: hosor.
      >
      > Without knowing the etymology of either, and when I'm not being silly, I
      > actually categorize "hose" with "pants" - things that always come in
      > pairs. ;^) Just like there's not an English singular of "pants" I'd say
      > there's not really one of "hose" either. What I really have is half of a
      > pair of hose.
      >
      > > Does anyone here have a clue whether hose is the plural or the
      > > singular? And also, what the singular/plural then would be.
      >
      > No clue. See above for my anglo-centric theory. Anyone got the OED lying
      > around handy?
      >
      > Alianor, who didn't really mean to start a linguistic discussion but isn't
      > complaining
      >
      > Sarah Michele Ford
      > /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
      > Illusion is the general rule of the universe;
      > reality is but an exception.
      > --Jean Baudrillard
      > \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
      >
      >
      > ----------------------------------------------------
      > This is the Authentic SCA eGroup
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > authentic_SCA-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
      >
      >
    • Kirrily Robert
      ... I think archaic means old-fashioned whereas obsolete means not used anymore . So an archaic term can be used, though it would sound funny to most
      Message 2 of 16 , Nov 1, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        Jenn wrote:
        > There's probably a difference in terminology between obsolete and
        > archaic, but I don't feel like digging through the Guide to the OED to
        > figure it out....

        I think "archaic" means "old-fashioned" whereas "obsolete" means "not
        used anymore". So an archaic term can be used, though it would sound
        funny to most people, whereas an obsolete word is no longer part of the
        language.

        Yours,

        Katherine

        --
        Lady Katherine Rowberd (mka Kirrily "Skud" Robert)
        katherine@... http://infotrope.net/sca/
        Caldrithig, Skraeling Althing, Ealdormere
        "The rose is red, the leaves are grene, God save Elizabeth our Queene"
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.