The word 'lace' almost seems to equate more with 'pants' than 'fish'. I might have five fish, but I don't think I have five lace, or five pants. That just doesn't sound right. But 'laces' makes me think 'shoelaces', as opposed to what we're doing. so I think it's properly 'pieces of lace', like 'pairs of pants', and everything else is up to the rotten grammar of the average human being :D
On the other hand, it's definitely 'lacemaker', just like it's 'shoemaker'. I got a 50/50 split on 'shoe making' and 'shoemaking' when I Googled, and I confess I'm too lazy to hunt down the dictionary, so I half suspect it's a question of usage. Silly English language :) Fun to play with, hard to pin down. Chris - just one opinion, and worth every penny you paid for it. Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 5:42:55 +0000 > From: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [lace] Lacemaking or Lace making-style manual needed > > - ---- [email protected] wrote: > Another English language style issue which needs resolution in an official > lace style manual is whether the plural of lace is lace or laces. ---- > > "Lace" can be like "fish" (the words, not the objects!). Several of the > same species are "fish". Several different species are "fishes". When > talking about the laces of several regions, it's pluralized. When talking > about the category of textiles, we say "lace is made in many lands". Note > that the verb is singlular ("is", not "are"), so "lace" is singlular. I > would say "I have five pieces of lace", but again this is using "lace" as a > category, not a bunch of objects. > > It's late, I'm tired, and I suspect this doesn't make much sense, but I've > tried.... > > Robin P. > Los Angeles, California, USA > [email protected] > > > -- > Always proactively untwist octagonal hippopotomus pants. > Ozy & Millie http://www.ozyandmillie.net/2000/om20000809.html > - To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [email protected]. For help, write to [email protected]
