# Whopper Juniors? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 8, 2007, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203 "2007-04-08T19:07:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![lovelybean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@lovelybean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lovelybean)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2007, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/1 "2007-04-08T19:07:15Z")
I’m wondering what you think would be the correct way to make Whopper Junior plural: Is it Whoppers Junior or Whopper Juniors? I have been told that it should follow the pattern of attorneys general, courts martial and passersby, since junior is technically an adjective, and only nouns are pluralized in English; however, I think that since junior is part of the name of the product, it should be thought of as a noun in this case-- sort of like its last name… hence, Whopper Juniors. What do you think? ---
**Author:** ![F.U.Shakespeare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aca169/32.png) [@F.U.Shakespeare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/F.U.Shakespeare)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2007, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/2 "2007-04-08T19:12:27Z")
[Here’s William Safire’s take on it (according to _The Onion_).](http://www.theonion.com/content/node/31525) ---
**Author:** ![TimeWinder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bcef8e/32.png) [@TimeWinder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TimeWinder)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2007, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/3 "2007-04-08T19:12:29Z")
Have you considered just eating all but one of them? Problem solved. I tend to agree with you (“Whopper Juniors”), treating the whole name as a noun, but I’d probably say “Junior Whoppers” instead, just to get around the whole issue. I suspect this is going to be just a style issue, and whatever you choose will be fine as long as you’re consistent. Even with the “Attorney/s General/s”, there doesn’t seem to be widespread agreement. Google searches show only a slight (12:10) preference for “Attorneys General,” and there are “real” sources high in both lists. ---
**Author:** ![Kat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/b19c9b/32.png) [@Kat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kat)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2007, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/4 "2007-04-08T20:49:42Z")
How about “Whopper Junior hamburgers”? (Although I, personally, would probably say “Whopper Juniors” just because I’m contrary.) ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2007, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/5 "2007-04-08T21:58:30Z")
It used to be the case that formal writing called for attorneys general and similar constructs. However, the trend has been swinging away from the formal for many years. The older phrases should still be written formally because that corresponds to much written history and because so many people would be upset by a change. But an informal advertising construct like Whopper Junior doesn’t need any formality added to it, and would look bad if you did. I’d\* go for Whopper Juniors and I’d probably make fun of anybody who used Whoppers Junior in any way other than ironic or satiric. (Took a look at the Onion article. My feeling exactly, except that Safire is savvy enough not to be so pedantic. John Simon would be, but he’s not sufficiently well-known as a idiot language critic to spoof.) \*Professional writer for 30 years ---
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2007, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/6 "2007-04-08T23:28:39Z")
It should be “Whopper Juniors”, since it’s a name of a product. Similarly, the plural of “BlackBerry” (the cell phone/email thingy) is “BlackBerrys”. ---
**Author:** ![VernWinterbottom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/c67d28/32.png) [@VernWinterbottom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VernWinterbottom)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2007, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/7 "2007-04-08T23:48:25Z")
Would you say Figs Newton? ---
**Author:** ![AskNott](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asknott/32/5790_2.png) [@AskNott](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AskNott)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 12:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/8 "2007-04-09T00:00:49Z")
[QUOTE=VernWinterbottom] Would you say Figs Newton? [/QUOTE] I certainly would not, nor even Egg Benedicts. On the other side of the street, though, a McGriddles is apparently a single sandwich. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/9 "2007-04-09T00:01:54Z")
The name of the product is Whopper Jr sandwich, so the plural would be Whopper Jr sandwiches. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/10 "2007-04-09T00:11:58Z")
[QUOTE=VernWinterbottom] Would you say Figs Newton? [/QUOTE] Perhaps, if Isaac had turned out to have invented some marvelous culinary item involving the fruit, presumably right after he was done with the cat flap. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/11 "2007-04-09T00:13:35Z")
[QUOTE=Dewey Finn] The name of the product is Whopper Jr sandwich… [/QUOTE] [No, it isn’t.](http://www.bk.com/#menu=3,1,-1) The name on the menu is **Whopper Jr.** No sandwich. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/12 "2007-04-09T00:29:09Z")
I’m inclined to say that the name of a product is a unit to be pluralized, hence Whopper Juniors, but a prepositional phrase breaks that, even if that’s what it says on the menu. I wouldn’t say “Give me two Whopper Junior with Cheeses.”. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/13 "2007-04-09T01:39:38Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] > [@Dewey Finn](#): > > The name of the product is Whopper Jr sandwich… [No, it isn’t.](http://www.bk.com/#menu=3,1,-1) [/QUOTE] Yes it is. Or at least, legally speaking it must be something like that. A search of the [USPTO trademark database](http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=login&p_lang=english&p_d=trmk) reveals that “Whopper Jr.” is a registered trademark for “hot sandwiches—namely, hamburgers”. Since trademarks can be used only as adjectives, the product’s name must be “Whopper Jr. sandwich”, “Whopper Jr. hot sandwich”, “Whopper Jr. hamburger”, or something similar. In fact, the page you reference lists “Whopper Jr.” under the “Flame-broiled Burgers” heading, so presumably it’s a “Whopper Jr. flame-broiled burger”. Or so a Burger King lawyer would argue were he ever called upon to defend his company’s trademark in a court of law. Again, this is a legal rather than linguistic argument, and ignores popular usage. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/14 "2007-04-09T01:51:24Z")
Not to NAAG pedantically, but the group that would have to be considered the proprietors of the title, the association to which each state attorney general belongs, is the [National Association of Attorneys General](http://www.naag.org/). I presume if they’re grabbing fast food between sessions at [their upcoming consumer protection conference](http://www.naag.org/spring_consumer_protection_meeting.php), they might each eat a Whopper Junior. And, of course, each married attorney general has a mother-in-law. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/15 "2007-04-09T02:05:47Z")
[QUOTE=psychonaut] In fact, the page you reference lists “Whopper Jr.” under the “Flame-broiled Burgers” heading, so presumably it’s a “Whopper Jr. flame-broiled burger”. Or so a Burger King lawyer would argue were he ever called upon to defend his company’s trademark in a court of law. [/QUOTE] Wrong. “Whopper Jr. flame-broiled burger” is the description of the product, not the name. The [word mark](http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=k0e8hv.2.1) is simply “Whopper Jr.” ---
**Author:** ![commasense](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/commasense/32/3017_2.png) [@commasense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/commasense)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/16 "2007-04-09T05:15:01Z")
[QUOTE=Fear Itself] Wrong. “Whopper Jr. flame-broiled burger” is the description of the product, not the name. The [word mark](http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=k0e8hv.2.1) is simply “Whopper Jr.” [/QUOTE] No, **psychonaut** is right. From a legalistic point of view, naked trademarks are explicitly **not** names (i.e. nouns), but must always treated by their owners as adjectives. They do this in the hope of keeping the mark from being used as a noun in common parlance, which is the first step on the way losing its status as trademarks. (See aspirin, linoleum, cellophane, etc.) As the [International Trademark Association](http://www.inta.org/index.php?option=com_simplefaq&task=display&Itemid=60&catid=284&page=1&getcontent=1#FAQ75) says, > [@INTA](#): > > NEVER use a trademark as a noun. Use the trademark only as a brand name in combination with the common or generic name for a specific product. Always use a trademark as an adjective modifying a noun. > > EXAMPLES: > > ``` > * LEGO toy blocks > * Amstel beer > > ``` > > NEVER modify a trademark to the plural form. Instead, change the generic word from singular to plural. > > EXAMPLES: > > ``` > * tic tac candies, NOT tic tacs > * OREO cookies, NOT OREOS > > ``` Thus, as **psychonaut** said, the full name of the product must be something like the Whopper Jr sandwich: adjective plus noun. But, as he said, this is what the lawyers advise their clients, and not necessarily what writers or editors (like myself) or ordinary folks actually do. For a take on what a wordsmith thinks about the INTA’s guidelines, see [here.](http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000943.html) ---
**Author:** ![Sublight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@Sublight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sublight)\ **Post date:** [April 9, 2007, 7:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/17 "2007-04-09T07:47:53Z")
If you were discussing members of the Foreman family, would you say: There are four George Foreman, Juniors; or There are four George Foremans, Junior? ---
**Author:** ![danny212](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/41988e/32.png) [@danny212](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/danny212)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2016, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/18 "2016-03-10T16:59:31Z")
> [@Sublight](#): > > If you were discussing members of the Foreman family, would you say: > > There are four George Foreman, Juniors; or > > There are four George Foremans, Junior? Foremen Junior ---
**Author:** ![boffking](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/858c86/32.png) [@boffking](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boffking)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2016, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/19 "2016-03-10T17:04:59Z")
I have a shirt with pictures of every version of Tony Stark’s suit on it. Every time I wear it, people debate if it shows “Iron Men” or “Iron Mans”. Which is the correct form? ---
**Author:** ![Colophon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f05b48/32.png) [@Colophon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colophon)\ **Post date:** [March 10, 2016, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203/20 "2016-03-10T17:16:06Z")
> [@boffking](#): > > I have a shirt with pictures of every version of Tony Stark’s suit on it. Every time I wear it, people debate if it shows “Iron Men” or “Iron Mans”. Which is the correct form? Per trademark law, Iron Man characters. Or, generically, iron men. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whopper-juniors/399203.md?page=2)