To compare the pair, I would not care to dare pare “pairs” to “pair.”
Doesn’t “pair” mean a set of two?
I have a pair of books by the same author, and I hope to find the others.
Mama collects teaspoons. She has a pair from Niagara Falls.
an seanchai
After walking around saying “two pairs of _____” and “two pair of _________,” I think (but I might be fooling myself), it depends on what there are multiple pairs of how that word is pluralized. I think if it’s something that becomes plural by adding an s to the end, it’s “two pairs” (“two pairs of pants” “two pairs of monkeys”) but if it’s an irregular plural, it’s “two pair” (“two pair of dice” “two pair of geese”)
But I may have talked myself into thinking that, because it’s a nice rule that makes sense. And the word “pair” is has started to sound funny.
Two pairs. Plural needs the s added.
Born in Northwestern Ontario, grew up in Vancouver.
Yes, seanchi - a pair IS two; and you can have two of them, being four articles or two sets. I would not have necessarily thought that two books by the same author constitutes a pair; maybe a set, if they’d only ever written two books I guess, but hey, what do I know…? So if you did have two pairs of books, and your Mama had two pairs of Niagara Falls teaspoons, waddya call 'em?
What he said.
I think it’s actually two pair of pant, a bunch of monkeys, four die, and a goose and a goose.
Just curious: all of you who insist that it must be pairs:
Would you also say someone is “five-feet-seven”?
I would say “five foot seven” but “five feet seven” doesn’t sound all that strange to me. I’m certainly not insisting that other people are wrong, just trying to assemble some data. 
I would say they were 1.7 metres…
So…is it “a suit with two pairs of pants”, or “a suit with two pair of pants”?
…some may argue that it’s a suit with two pant…I wouldn’t, but someone would!
“Two pairs” except in poker.
Agree. My cowboy grandpa would have said “He’s got 2 pair a’ ostrich skin boots but don’t have a pot to piss in.”
It should be “pairs.”
1 pair of X
2 pairs of X
etc.
2 pair could be a dialect or slang.
Regarding foot/feet, it depends if it’s a noun or adjective. Compare:
A 30-foot-long rope
vs
30 feet of rope.
The issue is clouded in my mind because not everything that is called a ‘pair’ is not actually two things. A pair of socks is made of two individual and separate socks. But a pair of pants is in fact one pant, or possibly one pants – I’m guessing because of two leg holes?? A pair of shorts, a pair of swimming trunks, etc.
I don’t know why there isn’t a similar convention for shirts, which after all have two arms.
Nothing else that is called a ‘pair’ but isn’t really is coming to mind at the moment.
There’s no such thing as a “pant,” a “jean,” or an “eyeglass.” Some uncountable nouns end with “s” or “es.”
Shirts are countable, thus you can have a shirt.
Scissors? tongs?
I beg to differ, Superhal; there is in fact “pant suit” and an “eyeglass” is actually the lens - hence a pair of them being “eyeglasses.” Granted, there is no “jean” - except of course for its homophone.
Re: Pantsuit: words often lose their grammar or gain new grammar depending on how it is used. “Pants” is an uncountable noun. “Pant” as used in your example is an adjective, although dictionary.com says it’s one word (which creates a compound word, which would also not influence the grammar of “pants.”) The adjective “Pant” is not the singular form of the noun “Pants.”
For eyeglass vs eyeglasses, you can’t use eyeglass (a lens) to refer to a singular of eyeglasses (lenses in a frame.) Whether it does exist or not is irrelevant. “Trash” is an uncountable noun, yet “trashes” exists as the singular form of the verb “to trash.” Apples and oranges here.
Examples:
(Single lens eyeglasses) “One lens fell out! Can you fix my eyeglasses?”
(Eyeglasses without lenses) “Both lenses fell out! Can you fix my eyeglasses?”
(Plural, one lens each) “I want to recycle my old lenses. Can I get 2 pairs of eyeglasses with one lens each?”