Not that I have much of any of the above.
In everyday talk, “money” can be singular or plural.
I know that “moneys” and “monies” are legalese terms, but they sound more like Ebonics, as in:
“I done give all de moneys I gots to dem mens.”
What’s the deal?
The various moneys of Europe (Francs, Marks, etc) are being replaced by the Euro.
Moneys looks correct to me, as opposed to monies, but I don’t have dictionary handy to check.
Scott
ps - Yes, I know that’s not a very accurate statement, I just wanted to show how the word would be used.
As an accountant, we use monies to refer to funds that are either owed to us or by us that have yet to be recieved or paid. Of course, the difference between monies and moneys can only be told when in writing, but it seems to do the trick.
Well, shut my mouth. It’s also illegal to put squirrels down your pants for the purposes of gambling.
The American Heritage Dictionary says they are both acceptable plurals for money. They also mean “sums of money collected” (“We collected the monies owed to us by the debtor.”).
What’s up with “money, moneys, monies”?
Isn’t that the title of a song by Tommy James & The Shondells?
Elmer J. Fudd,
Millionaire.
I own a mansion and a yacht.
doc: Yeah, I can see “moneys of Europe…” although “mediums of exchange” or “currencies” sounds better to me.
Mull and Guy: Yes, I know the terms are used like that. Any idea why? I guess my question is: If a word works, why use another word for accounting purposes, especially a word so similar? There must be a shade of difference in meaning that I am missing.
In my company, we use it “Because we always have.”
Yup, very helpful answers can be found when no one hear has any idea. It has apparently been done that way since before anyone who currently works here started. One of those stupid things that continues to survive.