And curiously, the Eurpean elk has the same characteristic of singular and
plural forms being identical. Or perhaps it is that there is no singular
form, ie that moose, elk and cattle are all thought of in the same way
(perish the thought!).
If the latter, it's an example of 'pluralia tantum'. If the converse, then
I don't know what the grammatical descriptive term is - any offers?
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Moose
Sent: 05 September 2004 03:09
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: T-32 Omnibounce questions
Steve Goss wrote:
>Henrik-
>There is no plural.
>
Sort of correct. The singular and plural forms of the word are identical,
although we can usually tell if there is more than one of us present. And
in Europe, I believe we are called elk. The various forms of North American
elk aren't found in Europe (except in zoos, I suppose), so there is no
confusion, or at least only a minimum.
> Moose is one of a kind.
>
Why thank you!
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|