Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Animal names and collective nouns - patterns?
I probably learned this in fourth-grade science, but forgot and it's been bugging me lately so now I'll bug you all.
Why is it that for certain kinds of animals we have so many collective nouns in English that are the same as singular: that is, the singular and the plural forms are the same? Examples: sheep, elk, moose, etc; and perch, goldfish, trout, salmon, haddock, cod, etc. Is it a special ruminant-fish thing, did we get those groups of words from a single older language, or what is going on with this, if anything?
1 Answer
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
elks??
Here's my theory. I'm guessing, but it sounds good to me:
A long time ago, when the human race as we knew it consisted of the Anglos and the Celts and the Saxons and the Gauls ...
Let's say for arguments sake that we mostly speak a form of English that evolved from Anglo. What animals were the Anglos familiar with, and how did they refer to them?
Well, it goes like this. Papa Anglo tells his wife: "Arrrgh, my wife, tonight we eat of the haddock."
Another night he says "We eat of the sheep".
Any creature that was typically netted or farmed in large number was typically referred to in the plural.... a usage which has persisted despite dropping "of the" in favour of "a" as our use of the language changed.
That suggests that animals like ducks and geese were mostly migratory at that time, not yet domesticated or farmed.
Farming moose could be problematic.