Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching
Learnglish.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Discussion Groups / English Usage / April 2007



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Roach

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
robotiser@googlemail.com - 30 Apr 2007 15:59 GMT
How come the plural of "roach" as in a common insect is "roaches", but
the plural of "Roach", as in a cyprinid fish found in Europe appears
to be "Roach"?
Mark Wallace - 30 Apr 2007 17:06 GMT
> How come the plural of "roach" as in a common insect is "roaches", but
> the plural of "Roach", as in a cyprinid fish found in Europe appears
> to be "Roach"?

What's the plural of "fish"?

Or "haddock"?

"Cod"?

"Bream"?

"Salmon"?

Keep at it; you may see a pattern emerge.
robotiser@googlemail.com - 30 Apr 2007 17:21 GMT
> <roboti...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
>
> Keep at it; you may see a pattern emerge.

Some do, some don't. Minnows, Miller's Thumbs, Stone loaches,
Sticklebacks. But as you point out, a lot don't. Pike, Rudd, Dace,
Lamprey.
Mark Wallace - 30 Apr 2007 17:37 GMT
>> <roboti...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
>>
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> Sticklebacks. But as you point out, a lot don't. Pike, Rudd, Dace,
> Lamprey.

I didn't say it's a solid pattern -- it's herringbone.
Leslie Danks - 30 Apr 2007 18:21 GMT
[...]

> Some do, some don't. Minnows, Miller's Thumbs, Stone loaches,
> Sticklebacks. But as you point out, a lot don't. Pike, Rudd, Dace,
> Lamprey.

But King Henry I of England is said to have died from eating "a surfeit of
lampreys".

<http://www.sheppardsoftware.com/content/animals/animals/fish/lamprey.htm>

Signature

Les

Flying Tortoise - 30 Apr 2007 19:31 GMT
> roboti...@googlemail.com wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> --
> Les

With the majority of fauna (and indeed flora) the singular can be used
as the plural quite legitimately even if there is a 'normal' plural
available. You could have a house infested with cockroach and beetle,
for example (though not, I suspect, with flea, fly, or louse). Or you
might hunt fox and pheasant, and, (once upon a time) elephant,
giraffe, and tiger.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2012 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.