Thanks for that Superhal - you’re super! I would however make the point that the Oxford Complete Wordfinder defines “pant suit” as two words, and “eyeglass” as:
*n *1 **a **a lens for correcting or assisting defective sight: **b ***(n pl) *a pair of these held in the hand or kept in position on the nose by means of a frame or a spring: 2 a small glass vessel for applying lotions etc to the eye."
I remember in grade school we our teacher would write a whole set of sentences on the chalk board, and they would each have one error in spelling and one in grammar. One of spelling errors was using the word feet in that context. She told me the word “foot” was acting as an adjective.
Maybe that dictionary is British English? What order is quadrillion, quintillion, sextillion, and septillion, from smallest to largest?
“Pairs of eyeglasses” follows all the rules of use that any other uncountable noun does. It is conjugated exactly the same as “cups of coffee,” “pairs of jeans” or “bottles of water.”
However, I do see the logic in the Oxford definition. I would be surprised if the evolution of the term “pair of eyeglasses” just so happened to match the general rule for non-count nouns in general.
Hmm, after running it through my head, it does seem possible that “pair of eyeglasses” behaves the same way as say “boxes of pencils” or “bags of potatoes.”
Hmm, maybe it’s time to call in an etymologist.
“I sold a code and two pair of plans.” – Chico Marx
I voted for “pair” since my initial thought was that I would say “two pair of pants.” Upon reflection, and reading the responses, I think I would also use “pairs” in some contexts. I would instruct a team of players to divide into pairs, for example.
This is one of those words like “deer” where sometimes you might say “I just saw some deer in my back yard.” Although sometimes you might say “the baby deers were running after their mother.”
I’m confused now.
*Two *trick questions to begin, super Superhal…? 1. Is there any other kind of English :D? 2. The order in which they are kindly presented (notwithstanding the forgotten “bazillion” which is the mostest.)
Indeed, my pair of eyeglasses often behaves like my boxes of pencils and bags of potatoes, so there’s more than just confusion with the English language around here.
Call the etymologist!
I almost always use “pair” as the plural. There’s nothing wrong with “pairs,” but I don’t use it much. I was raised in upstate New York. Both my parents were from New England.
Here’s what Bergen Evans and Cornelia Evans said in A Dictionary of Contemporary American Usage (1957): “The plural is pair or pairs. Six pair of gloves is the older form. Six pairs of gloves is the newer. Both are acceptable.” Bergen Evans, it so happens, was a teacher of a guy named Cecil Adams (cite).
It’s pairs. To everyone else here in S. GA, the plural of cent is cents!
I use “pair” more often than “pairs”, but I’ll certainly use either, and I don’t notice it when I or other people use the other.
Likewise, but in the poll I voted for “two pairs” exclusively, because poker is a special case in that “two pair” is just the name of a particular hand. I have heard people announce “two pairs” in poker, though, if only occasionally, and no-one thought that was particularly odd - just unusual. On the other hand, I would think of “two pair of socks” as very odd.
Another vote for “two pair” only being correct when playing poker.
I kinda use them in an odd way.
If I’m saying what the pairs are of, then I use the plural. “I have two pairs of shoes.” But if I’m just saying I have two pairs, I use the singular. “Did you bring your shoes?” “Yes, I brought two pair.”
I’m weird.
Usage note in the American Heritage Dictionary (4th ed., 2000):
“After a number other than one, pair itself can be either singular or plural, but the plural is now more common.”
As this poll bears out.
Ditto.