Read • Contests • Groups • Learn • Forums • Store • Help
 

Forums / Poetry and Inspiration Discussion /
Oldfashioned plurals, anyone?


  • Judith Chandler
    Nov 8 2:22 PM
    Reply
    Would any of you use the following plurals?

    "wharves" for "wharfs"
    "dwarves" for "dwarfs"
    "rooves" for "roofs"
    "hooves" for "hoofs"

    Though I'm a bit conservative in these matters, I would go with moderns plurals on these.

    On the other hand, "calves" (not "calfs") sounds right to me.

    What do you think, poets and poetesses?

  • Matt Holck
    November 8 ↑
    Reply
    I've always liked vees and use them in plurals when permitted

    halves

    • Judith Chandler
      November 8 ↑
      Reply
      that's another one I would use. I tend to go by the sound, as with a lot of grammar rules. I don't know if there's a rule for these plurals or not.

  • ea
    November 9 ↑
    Reply
    I don't like the fs endings for some reason; I have debated on which to use in the past, especially when it comes to dwarfs, which are a recurring theme for me.

  • imkleyurflesh
    November 9 ↑
    Reply
    "wharves" for "wharfs" Yes.

    "dwarves" for "dwarfs" No.

    "rooves" for "roofs" No. (Roof... pronounced, "Ruff"-
    like a dog barking. Plural... "Ruffs.")

    "hooves" for "hoofs" Yes.

    "calves" for "calfs" (For describing cows, yes. Legs... no. Cow
    legs, I dunno.)

    • Judith Chandler
      November 9 ↑
      Reply
      Do you have any particular way of deciding which?

      • imkleyurflesh
        November 9 ↑
        Reply
        It is the ease of pronunciation for me I think, with
        the exception being "roof" as that is colloquial.

        It also is a good way to play with the tone of a
        piece of writing without changing meaning to
        any great degree.

    • Matt Holck
      November 9 ↑
      Reply
      rooves is new to me

  • S A Adelmann
    November 9 ↑
    Reply
    I am nearly certain (although Cynewulf will surely come and correct me) that the old-fashioned plurals would be those that have the "fs" construction.

    I have no preference.

    • ea
      November 9 ↑
      Reply
      Cynewulf no longer wastes his time correcting dwarves but I do. Generally the "ves" ending is considered to be the old-fashioned one.

      • S A Adelmann
        November 9 ↑
        Reply
        Thanks. I stand corrected. I just love learning new things, don't you?

      • S A Adelmann
        November 9 ↑
        Reply
        Oh, was that an insult? I thought we were to refrain from insults on all but the Pub board. No-one informed me of this change in the rules.

        • ea
          November 9 ↑
          Reply
          It was a joke, can't you take one? If not, I am sure your pals will be glad to inform me that I am on the "ban ladder".

          • S A Adelmann
            November 9 ↑
            Reply
            Oh, so you were jokingly implying that I am a dwarf?

            Okay.

            hahahahahahahahahaha

            Funny stuff. You have a gift.

            • ea
              November 9 ↑
              Reply
              you know perfectly well that cynewulf has you on ignore, and can't see your posts, so for you to come in here and challenge him is "dwarflike" - yes.

              • S A Adelmann
                November 9 ↑
                Reply
                You really ought to give what i wrote a closer reading. I was, in no way, "egging" him on. Might it be an acknowledgment of the fact that Cynewulf knows more about such things than I do?

                And, Marcy, how would I know "perfectly well" that he has me on ignore unless I actually went to his page and tried to comment on his work? (I know this now, because you told me and I checked.) You seem to be making many assumptions. I will leave you to that.

            • Matt Holck
              November 9 ↑
              Reply
              and you have an emocron

      • DeeCrepit
        November 9 ↑
        Reply
        Section 523 page 514 to Section 532 page 526
        PRACTICAL ENGLISH USAGE by Michael Swan Published by Oxford (NY)

        Every possible situation old and new. Some surprises.

        • Judith Chandler
          November 9 ↑
          Reply
          Thank you.

        • ea
          November 10 ↑
          Reply
          This doesn't really help anyone who doesn't have access to this book at the moment, does it? But the link I provide in "old-fashioned" (which I only put in html because it would extend the comment box beyond the page) explains how they are both correct in most cases.

          I grew up hearing farmers say both hoofs and hooves, for instance, and reading roofs and rooves (in old carols, Christmas stories). The "ves" strikes me as sounding more genteel and the "fs" as more colloquial (or simply modern) but it is a matter of taste and would be applied differently, perhaps, in different types of writing.

          Neruda's "Song of Despair" is notoriously misprinted throughout the web, saying that dwarves are abandoned at dawn, and it is assumed, it should be wharves, but dwarves works too since they must return to the caves when the sun shines according to ancient literature.

          • DeeCrepit
            November 10 ↑
            Reply

            True, but

            not only that-- Mine is a new 2009 edition of the
            reference!
            Usage changes so fast now that each year gets a new edition.
            (The page numbers may change from edition to edition.)

            "old fashioned" is another name for Standard Grammar
            which has hardly changed at all for centuries.
            It used to be that once it was learned, no books (other than dictionaries) were needed. Too easy huh?


            • ea
              November 10 ↑
              Reply
              Published on 15 April 1755 and written by Samuel Johnson, A Dictionary of the English Language, sometimes published as Johnson's Dictionary, is among the most influential dictionaries in the history of the English language.

              There was dissatisfaction with the dictionaries of the period, so in June 1746 a group of London booksellers contracted Johnson to write it. Until the completion of the Oxford English Dictionary, 173 years later, Johnson's was viewed as the pre-eminent English dictionary.

              Webster published his "American" one in 1828, so how do you figure?

  • DeeCrepit
    November 10 ↑
    Reply

    1988 is not the most recent.

    My old Webster's is probably woefully out of date.

    • ea
      November 10 ↑
      Reply
      Try www.dictionary.com

      • DeeCrepit
        November 11 ↑
        Reply

        The ".com"

        Interesting but cluttered until approached through the alphabet.

        I just replaced my older Oxford Dictionary of Current English, 1995, with the most recent (fourth edition) 2006. There is not the same urgency I guess, but Usage is included when it differs.


  • CelticQueen
    November 11 ↑
    Reply
    I used "rooves" here once and was asked, rather pointedly, I felt, if that was a "new" word. I changed it because I didn't want a bunch of negative comments on a single word. I have since learned (sadly, I didn't know this before) that changing the "f" to a "ves" is not universal. Some you do, some you don't. Here is a website that lists the proper endings for both ways. It also gives a quiz you can take.

    http://www.virted.org/grammar/endsf.html

    celtic queen

  • Judith Chandler
    November 13 ↑
    Reply
    And is it "smurfs" or "smurves"? I never thought of it before but I suppose "smurfs" (my choice) are related to "dwarfs".

  • S Lexington
    November 14 ↑
    Reply
    They should bring back the smurfs. It was highly educational. I heard they canceled it because it only had one chick.

  • Matt Holck
    November 14 ↑
    Reply
    Jane and the Dragon has five
    Jane, Pepper, Princess Vavinia, Queen Gwendoline, and The Lady in Waiting
    - Foul Weather Friends

  • Judith Chandler
    November 14 ↑
    Reply
    This is so much fun, never came across it before.
  • :