Indeed! Where in lies the reason I left the statement open; things are just rarely that simples...
Craig Higson said
Sat Mar 10 7:38 AM, 2012
Ian McKerchar wrote:
Easy, Teal/Wigeon...end of...
Simples. As said by a pair of Mongolian mongeeses!!!
Dean Macdonald said
Sat Mar 10 6:26 AM, 2012
No such thing as a Seagull
Rob Thorpe said
Sat Mar 10 6:22 AM, 2012
Would it be "7 Seagull" or "7 Seagulls"?
Ian McKerchar said
Sat Mar 10 6:17 AM, 2012
If there's a flock of Sheep, they're still sheep, not sheeps. That said I believe I have said "load of Wigeons" before, despite retrospectively not necessarily agreeing with myself. Clearly this subject really is a little 'heavy' for any night...
Rob Thorpe said
Sat Mar 10 5:34 AM, 2012
If there were 2 Eurasian Teal, 3 Green-winged Teal and a Baikal Teal on a pond, then I might say "oh, there's some teals...", but if there was only one species of teal present, no matter how many individuals, I'd say "Teal" not "Teals".
Dean Macdonald said
Sat Mar 10 5:25 AM, 2012
Could be a question of context.
"There are always Teals on the first pond" would be a correct plural for Teal.
However if a number is the prefix to Teal then the plural isn't needed.
Personally i still prefer "There are always Teal on the first pond"
Mike Passant said
Sat Mar 10 4:31 AM, 2012
Hi Craig, You raise an interesting point with these plurals.
I see where you are coming from, and basically agree. Referring to "Teals, Mallards, Wigeons", etc. simply sounds gauche; -because in fact it is.
When I'm out in the field I do tend to write down in my notebook, "Teals" if I see more than one, but I feel very uncomfortable in doing this. The reason I do it (quite truthfully) is that I want to record sometimes that there was more than one, but I'm too damned lazy to do an accurate count. I'd only count something if numbers were so relatively impressive (in whatever context) that I'd consider it worth the trouble. When for instance I visit Low Barns (a little wetland/ reedbed reserve up here), I don't really give a damn whether there are 8 Teal or 14, but if I encountered 48, that would be noteworthy enough to count them, in which case I should write "48 Teal" and accordingly feel rather more smug, in that I'd made a bit of an effort with both my recording and equally importantly, my grammar.
Cheers, Mike P.
Ian McKerchar said
Sat Mar 10 4:21 AM, 2012
Easy, Teal/Wigeon...end of...
Craig Higson said
Sat Mar 10 3:35 AM, 2012
Personally I have always referred to " 12 Teal" or "500 Wigeon" , or a flock of Shoveler for e.g.
I have noticed in the RSPB magazine and, more recently on here, people referring to "Teals" and "Wigeons".
To me, Teals is the equivalent of "geeses" if you see what I mean.
So, which is the correct way?
John Doherty said
Fri Mar 9 8:37 PM, 2012
I know this is a bit heavy for Friday night but - Teals to describe plural is fine as far as Collins English Dictionary goes - it's either/or for that as far as the online and print versions claim. I'm not just covering my back because I used 'Teals' in my last post.
-- Edited by John Doherty on Friday 9th of March 2012 08:38:06 PM
Simples. As said by a pair of Mongolian mongeeses!!!
No such thing as a Seagull
Could be a question of context.
"There are always Teals on the first pond" would be a correct plural for Teal.
However if a number is the prefix to Teal then the plural isn't needed.
Personally i still prefer "There are always Teal on the first pond"
Hi Craig,
You raise an interesting point with these plurals.
I see where you are coming from, and basically agree. Referring to "Teals, Mallards, Wigeons", etc. simply sounds gauche; -because in fact it is.
When I'm out in the field I do tend to write down in my notebook, "Teals" if I see more than one, but I feel very uncomfortable in doing this.
The reason I do it (quite truthfully) is that I want to record sometimes that there was more than one, but I'm too damned lazy to do an accurate count. I'd only count something if numbers were so relatively impressive (in whatever context) that I'd consider it worth the trouble. When for instance I visit Low Barns (a little wetland/ reedbed reserve up here), I don't really give a damn whether there are 8 Teal or 14, but if I encountered 48, that would be noteworthy enough to count them, in which case I should write "48 Teal" and accordingly feel rather more smug, in that I'd made a bit of an effort with both my recording and equally importantly, my grammar.
Cheers,
Mike P.
I have noticed in the RSPB magazine and, more recently on here, people referring to "Teals" and "Wigeons".
To me, Teals is the equivalent of "geeses" if you see what I mean.
So, which is the correct way?
-- Edited by John Doherty on Friday 9th of March 2012 08:38:06 PM