cuz we have 2 legs.susnfx wrote:Can someone explain why we refer to trousers, pants, shorts, underwear... as a "pair?"
Susan
Trouser addiction, can you leave the house without a pair?
-
izzarina
- Posts: 6759
- Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2003 8:17 pm
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Limbo
- Contact:
(I'm not supposed to alert you to this, but you said it twice, which would indicate that you meant it emphatically. Scroll up......amar wrote:about why i should be feeling pretty strong about that?izzarina wrote:get what?amar wrote:i don't get it.
)Someday, everything is gonna be diff'rent
When I paint my masterpiece.
When I paint my masterpiece.
-
ErikT
- Posts: 1590
- Joined: Thu May 17, 2001 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Location: Colorado Springs, CO
- Contact:
That's because the sleeves are incidental to the shirt. The pants on the other hand are connected by the slack. So it would be correct to say, "pair of pants", but not to say, "pair of slacks". It is ok to leave the house without pants, but not without slack.
Erik
p.s. I'm just making this stuff up. I do have to say, that I used to be a shorts person (pair of shorts?) until I moved to Alaska. Now I wear flannel lined jeans in the winter and light hiker's pants in the summer to keep the bugs off my legs.
Erik
p.s. I'm just making this stuff up. I do have to say, that I used to be a shorts person (pair of shorts?) until I moved to Alaska. Now I wear flannel lined jeans in the winter and light hiker's pants in the summer to keep the bugs off my legs.
-
Darwin
- Posts: 2719
- Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2004 2:38 am
- Please enter the next number in sequence: 1
- Location: Flower Mound, TX
- Contact:
I thunk so. I think slacks are the opposite of tights.ErikT wrote:That's because the sleeves are incidental to the shirt. The pants on the other hand are connected by the slack. So it would be correct to say, "pair of pants", but not to say, "pair of slacks". It is ok to leave the house without pants, but not without slack.
[...]
p.s. I'm just making this stuff up.
According to one Web site, pantaloons (later pants) originally came in pairs, one for each leg, which were put on separately and then laced or belted together at the top--sort of like two-piece pantyhose. I suspect that the use of plural forms for trousers, drawers, tights, slacks, jeans, etc. are all by analogy with pants.
Mike Wright
"When an idea is wanting, a word can always be found to take its place."
--Goethe
"When an idea is wanting, a word can always be found to take its place."
--Goethe
-
Wombat
- Posts: 7105
- Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2002 6:00 pm
- antispam: No
- Location: Probably Evanston, possibly Wollongong
Actually pants form a rather unequal partnership. Depending on which side you dress, that side has to take up the slack.ErikT wrote:That's because the sleeves are incidental to the shirt. The pants on the other hand are connected by the slack. So it would be correct to say, "pair of pants", but not to say, "pair of slacks". It is ok to leave the house without pants, but not without slack.