'A pair of xyz' - zählbar:

I have two/three/six pairs of jeans.
I'm wearing a pair of jeans.

'Jeans', 'trunks' etc. - unzählbar:

I'm wearing jeans.
NOT I have two/three/six jeans.

CM2DD has (implicitly) drawn attention to a phenomenon not often mentioned. Usually when we say uncountable (unzählbar) we mean 'only singular', but there are some nouns that are uncountable and only plural. These are nearly all of the 'jeans' type (bifurcated garments) or the 'scissors' type (tools or instruments working roughly on the scissors principle).

These can be used in the plural (a pile of jeans, a box of scissors) but cannot be counted either in the singular or plural. To count them, you must say 'a pair of ... ' or 'two pairs of ... ' etc.

jeans pants trousers knickers tights breeches trunks briefs leggings long-johns

scissors shears tongs secateurs pliers pincers tweezers

Mmarg's profile says he has fairly basic English, escoville, so it might help to repeat that in German (or better, Russian!)...

CM2DD und escoville, vielen Dank. Ich habe es verstanden.

escoville, stimmt das, dass wir mit "uncountable" in der Regel "Singular" meinen? Für mich sind uncountable nouns solche wie Wasser, Milch, Liebe etc, also die man mit "much" modifizieren kann (in Deutsch: "viel"), countables hingegen mit "many"/"viele"...?

If I go shopping for jeans and tell my wife or whoever that the reason for my shopping is that "I need jeans," it doesn't automatically mean "one pair." It could be several pairs that I'm going to buy. Of course, I could also say I'm going to buy "some jeans."

Selms

I don't quite understand your question. Usually, when we say 'uncountable' we refer to words like advice, information, accommodation, progress (to name some examples that cause Germans trouble) which cannot (normally) be counted either in the singular (*an advice) or plural (*two advices), but which are grammatically singular.

My point was that 'uncountable' also applies to the sort of words under discussion in this thread which are equally uncountable, although not usually described as such. What they have in common is that they can't be used with a numeral or an indefinite article. But just as 'advice' (sing.) can refer to one piece of advice or many, so 'jeans' (plural) can refer to one pair or many.

These words should not be confused with those that are only plural, but can still be counted (two people).

okay, I got it. Grammatically speaking, these words are singular. Especially those which can be pluralised in German but not in English, like the ones you mentioned.
Was mich irritierte sind Wörter wie eben Wasser, Milch, Liebe, Hass, diese würde ich nicht als "Singular" bezeichnen, aber als "Uncountables". Obwohl sie, grammatisch gesehen, ein Verb im Singular benötigen.
Aber ich gerate off topic.

But there are people -- primarily young people, I think -- who do say "a jeans". Here are a couple of quotes harvested from the Internet; I don't think they're atypical.
(1) If you always wear dresses and like a lot of accessories, don't plan to wear a jeans and t-shirts.
(2) I too wear a jeans and a shirt when I visit a temple.
(3) You have to settle for something that bags on your waist crushing your dreams to wear a jeans with a snug fit.
(4) However I would wear a jeans to church rather than that.
(5) I wear a jeans, a hoodie and a t-shirt.

Also (off topic), some people do say "a scissors".

But you're certainly safe going with "a pair of jeans" and "a pair of scissors."

re #9: Surely those are all non-native speakers? The internet is full of them ...

Maybe you're right, hm--us -- it's hard to say. To me, the language seems native, and (unlike LEO) most blogs don't ask their posters to fill out a profile indicating their language competence. The reason I posted here, though, is because I can recall people saying things like "I like to wear a jeans to school". I then went to the Internet for some examples.

It's not what I would say, which is why the phrase made an impression. Similarly with "I'm looking for a scissors to cut this with."

(OT - I personally say "a pliers" or "a tweezers", but "a pair of scissors". But please don't ask me why.)

Another case of synchronic language variation, reflecting diachronic change?

I confess to saying "a scissors" sometimes, but "a jeans" sounds quite unusual to me. Like hm, I wonder if those who wrote that are native speakers. I could believe they are; I just haven't heard anyone saying "a jeans," at least not as far as I'm aware.

Once again Martin--cal hears a lot of bad English that the rest of us don't hear.

I never say (or hear) a jeans, a scissors or a pliers. Possibly a tweezers.

You never heard anyone say "a scissors" (or "a scissor")? It seems to me that these are such common turns of phrase. (Can California be so different from the rest of the country?)

Well, I lived in northern California for eleven years (admittedly a while ago) and my son has lived there for the last five years, both in circles that include foreigners and technical (non-language) types, although admittedly for the most part well educated. I've had little experience in a long time with the street language of uneducated immigrants or natives except handymen (-persons?), cleaning services, and other household (and workplace) help. I'm not sure if the topic of scissors has ever come up.

In any case, I wouldn't suggest to anyone reading LEO forums that such terms would be something they would want to know about, unless they are doing scientific research for a descriptive dictionary. (For that, there are plenty of examples of nonstandard English available by internet search.)

I can imagine someone saying "a scissors", but I would notice it. Not a scissor, though. Maybe: "Do you have scissors?" (but I would also notice that.)

Jurist, to the contrary -- I think this is the sort of thing that a person learning English would want to know about: namely, that although the standard terms are "a pair of jeans", "a pair of scissors", and "a pair of pliers", there are people (--not just "uneducated immigrants"--) who say "a jeans" (I think I heard that), "a scissors" (I'm sure I heard that) and "a pliers" (I say that myself.)

People who want to speak nonstandard English have plenty of resources to find examples of most anything, but might not be interested in those examples. Why would anyone here seek confirmation that indeed somebody, somewhere says something, even though it is nonstandard? To win a bar bet? To plead for grading credit on homework? To write a screenplay or dialog for a play? It's not like standard English here sounds stilted or should be avoided for any reason.

In sum, I fail to see why LEO forum readers would/should/might be very interested in knowing that, yes, some native speakers say some things that native speakers in general might well find strange. We aren't constantly bombarded here with Germans saying, "But I've heard such-and-such said!" (when it admittedly isn't standard German), absent wide-spread regional differences.

Maybe you could tell us more about the background of the people who say these things and the context in which they are said. Lots of us say things casually that we wouldn't say when we are paying attention.

Here are a couple of quotes harvested from the Internet; I don't think they're atypical.

Just to take one example at random from #9:

(5) I wear a jeans, a hoodie and a t-shirt.
http://www.busuu.com/p/15325246

This comes from the busuu language learning website. On that site, users have to write sentences and other users tell them their mistakes in the language they are learning. In this case, the question is "What clothes are you wearing now?" and the user, a Spanish speaker learning English, has written this answer. Below that, someone else has corrected his mistakes, crossing out 'a' (but forgetting to correct the use of the present simple!).

I think his use of English is atypical.

I support Martin.

This is plain rude, Jurist, #13: Once again Martin--cal hears a lot of bad English that the rest of us don't hear.

Martin is a valued and valuable contributor to this forum.

As to supporting Martin in "a jeans", yes people say that in certain circles sometimes. Martin's other examples also show that there are varied ways in the USA to say things. USA = big place.

Your tone is frequently condescending, Jurist, for what it's worth. If you don't associate with the masses in your circles, then don't pretend to know what normal folk in the USA say. It's misleading, and as Martin says, a poster here in this forum may want to know what people on the street say.

--double post--

Posters may indeed want to know what users on the street say; in that respect I disagree with Jurist when he says that forum readers are uninterested in non-standard forms. If I am translating something and a non-standard spelling or structure comes up, it helps to know that German speakers commonly put it that way, and why (e.g. if it's a spelling mistake, or it's a deliberate misspelling used by rappers).

On the other hand, I would be a bit pissed off if someone here said that German speakers often used a non-standard form, and gave me some 'not atypical' examples - but when I checked those examples they turned out not to be written by German speakers at all. I would then have no idea if German speakers really did say it that way, and would lose trust in the forum as a helpful way of finding that sort of information out.

I agree that I am not the best source for what some people might say. For those who want to know what nonstandard English cryme (whose language background hasn't been disclosed to us) seems to hear on some street or another, please feel free to follow his lead. For those who, for whatever reason, want to improve their standard English, feel free to disregard all contributions from cryme that seem to be in any way doubtful.

In general, I have no objection to contributions from foreigners or nonstandard English speakers who mark their contributions as such or from anyone whose contribution is clearly marked as nonstandard.

But Jurist, how do you know if your English is non-standard? I've only just discovered that not everyone pronounces 'pause' differently to 'paws', as I do! :-)

I'm not sure there is such a thing as standard pronunciation, even within regions. I say the same thing for Mary, marry, and merry. Many don't. I certainly don't claim that my version is standard.

Of course, even as to grammar, there is no standard English or even standard AE that is as standard as standard German or especially French. But there are some aspects of AE that are a lot more generally accepted than some "street" grammar that some post here.

Jurist, You have some sort of chip on your shoulder, and you don't have a tolerance for what may be necessary in interpreting a query. It's pretty much black and white, for you, and you must be right. You verge on self-righteousness.

That's (your behavior/input) not helpful to language learners since you offer up a cut-and-dried, high-brow version of American English which doesn't reflect reality. So, take it down a notch, get off your high-horse, and live amongst the living.

I am as American as you can get, and have spoken American English since my birth (except for 10 years when I lived in Germany, and mostly spoke German, since I didn't associate with native English speakers).

Should that answer you dying to know what my language background is. !?!

P.S. Stop stalking me, Jurist.

(#25 - psst: cryme, you're the one who joined this thread specially to attack Jurist. When I saw that I was about to say 'who's the stalker now?' !)

Oh, no, it's a pattern. Jurist consistently attacks me for not being a "reliable" source for American English. Just ask him/her per PM.

I encourage all LEO contributors to fill in their language profiles, not that is always a rock-solid indication of their reliability when it comes to the fine points of language use.

In any case, indication of language register for any given contribution can avoid misunderstanding and confusion.

OT: cryme, I had indeed correctly guessed part of your language background, at least as to one parent.

#27 I must have missed the phase where it was just Jurist attacking you, as all I remember is you and Jurist picking at each other or, as in this thread, you appearing and attacking him. If you don't want to get muddy, don't wrestle with a pig, as they say, roughly. On that note...

In fairness, it's true that I have suggested more than once that cryme is not necessarily a reliable source for standard AE, just as I suggested that the contributions of Martin--cal (who has filled out his profile) don't always reflect best AE.

CM2DD, I feel Jurist was rude to Martin. So I stated my humble opinion in #19.

Jurist, You're obsessed with the "finer" points of language while missing the bigger picture.

Schade eigentlich, weil Deine Beiträge oft stören, und noch dazu, sie sind irreführend. Wenn das Dein Ziel ist ... bist Du in dem Sinne erfolgreich.

Bin ganz Ohr. Du hast richtig geschätzt, wo ein Elternteil von mir herkommt ... übrigens woher war das, nach der Schätzung? Und zweitens, wo kommt der zweite Elternteil her?

We are all waiting with bated breath, Jurist.

I have very little interest in (and almost always refrain from) reading German from non-native speakers, except occasionally in CC.

Edit: I suppose many of us have a mental picture of those who participate here. Often wrong. I was at least partly correct in your case, cryme, but it wouldn't be advisable for me to reveal in public anything beyond that in your case or in that of other participants here.

How were you "partly correct"?

Your #32 is cryptic. Do tell what you are trying to tell the world, Jurist, because this is the age of the Internet, in case you didn't get the memo.

Reread #32. I'm not trying to tell the world anything. If you disclose more, I will tell you to what extent I was wrong. Honest.

Or, for starters, you could fill in your profile.

Just as well cryme and martin-cal were never in my classes, they would probably have failed. But I will take the latter's remarks seriously: No, martin, I have never heard anyone, BE or AE, say 'a scissors', and if a learner said it, or wrote it in an exam, I would correct it. What your comments do draw attention to, however, is that these words are anomalous, and anomalies in language have a hard time of it. There is constant pressure for regularization. And conversely, constant resistance to this pressure from those who have mastered the irregularities, because it is a shibboleth that sets them apart. It would not worry me in the slightest if we all went around saying 'a jeans' or 'a scissors', because it would not impede communication. I would correct non-natives who used these forms because it marks them out as non-natives, not because they would be misunderstood.

Zu #25:

cryme schrieb: "I (...) have spoken American English since my birth."

Donnerwetter, das ist ja mirakulös! Normale Kinder brauchen anderthalb bis zwei Jahre, um erste Schritte in ihrer Muttersprache zu machen. Hier haben wir aber den Fall eines Wunderkindes, das schon als AE native speaker zur Welt kam...

;-)

escoville, I'd have guessed you have more important things to tend to. I still agree with Martin-cal.

Absolutely: a scissors

Really, MiMo? That's kind of cute, but trite.

MiMo, die muttersprachliche Prägung beginnt schon im Mutterleib - auch wenn das im engeren Wortsinn noch nichts mit 'Sprechen' zu tun hat, so doch im weiteren metaphorischen.

MiMo won't respond. It's a pattern.

I'd have guessed you have more important things to tend to

Shouldn't that be: I'd have guessed you had more important things to (at-)tend to?

So, my post is incorrect, Jurist?

Yes

#42: I would have guessed you have more important things to tend to.

Wrong also?

Reread #40

Getting back to the original post...

CM2DD's post in #1 is a clear representation of correct, standard English.

Martin--cal's post #9 contains a mixed bag of examples. #1 and 4 appear to be from native speakers of AE. #3 is from India, where the rules are known to diverge from standard AE/BE. The origin of the person who wrote #2 isn't clear. Based on what CM2DD wrote, #5 is from someone who is learning English. Even if some native speakers of AE do say "a jeans," it is clear that standard BE and AE both require "pair" to make a plural: Sam bought two pairs of jeans.

I won't insist on having heard "a jeans", but I am certain about having heard "a scissors."

Jurist (#13) said "I never say (or hear) a jeans, a scissors or a pliers." And escoville (#35) said "No, martin, I have never heard anyone, BE or AE, say 'a scissors', and if a learner said it, or wrote it in an exam, I would correct it.".

So out of curiosity, I looked up "scissors" in my dictionary (Websters 3rd) and found that their usage citation was indeed of the phrase "a scissors". On the web, I found the whole original sentence in a New Yorker story of November 1, 1952. Here it is:

"Mrs. Dolson sent him upstairs as a punishment and he took a scissors, cut the bedspread, a table scarf, and a plant." By Croswell Bowen (1905-1971; born in Toledo, Ohio)

@Martin: I was trying to stay on topic (a jeans), but I agree with you that there is more variation with some of the other terms. I admitted to saying "a scissors."

The perfect opportunity to observe my language usage of this particular term happened just Friday when a colleague, who is being transferred to another building, asked whether she should return office supplies to the high school office or take them with her to the new building. I told her that in my opinion she should take things with her, unless she had a lot of any particular item, in which case she should take what she will need to get started next year and return the rest to the supply office. She asked about scissors. I replied, "Oh, you can take them with you. Well, how many do you have?" She replied "8." I wish I could remember whether I said "How many pairs of scissors?" or "How many scissors?"

My husband insists that "a scissors" sounds ludicrous, and nobody says that. I'm not so sure. I still think "a pair of scissors" is standard, but then again, who can argue with the New Yorker? *gg*

@45

The origin of the person who wrote #2 isn't clear.

He was brought up in a working-class suburb of London, went on a scholarship to a 'public school' [i.e. independent boarding school] in the south of England, and has degrees from Cambridge, where he also lived for a number of years. He has two bilingual daughters living in England whom he consults on modern usage.

#48 - #45 was referring to the #2 in #9 :-)

Well, that escalated quickly...

An opinion from Connecticut (further east than NY even), I've never heard a scissors or a jeans in my life (or the other similar words). I have heard these words without "a pair of", but never with "a".

"Do you have scissors I can borrow?"

Would have been more surprising if it had escalated slowly...

Just my two-penneth: This (Scot.) BE speaker cannot recall ever hearing "a scissors", "a jeans", "a trousers", "a spectacles/glasses", or "a compasses" for that matter.

What you can do with these words is things like this:

"He bought jeans." (no article or adjective) (Much the same as "He bought some jeans")

"She lost her spectacles." (possessive adjective)

"I need new glasses." (adjective) (cf. "I lost my new blue glasses")

"Do you have a pair of compasses." ("pair of") ("I bought a new pair of compasses")

I need some scissors ("some"). ("I need some new scissors")

Give me those trousers (demonstrative) ("Give me a pair of those hip new red trousers, daddy-o!")

Isn't this more fun than feuding?

Würde mich interessieren, wie ihr das hier einordnet:

Life cycle of a jean


http://www.levistrauss.com/sustainability/pro...


Über "a jean" bin ich schon mal gestolpert, kommt im Designer-Umfeld vor.

It's common in the garment industry to speak of "a trouser".

File under jargon.

#53 If by a native speaker, I would say it is meant to sound pretentious, possibly for purposes of humour. Using the singular where a plural is normal is a well-known sign of pretentiousness in the fashion world: http://plainjane-plainjanestyle.blogspot.de/2...

Zu # 54: Ach soooo! Danke!

The fashion industry's pretentious attitude aside, "jean" can be used as a replacement term for "denim", the material of jeans (like a jean jacket). Perhaps while in production these articles of clothing could maintain a singular until finished?

Ah, I agree with Graeme (54)!

One can imagine Rowan Atkinson in one of his obsequious salesman's roles: Yes sir, this is a really delightful trouser, sir.

(Or possibly the lamented John Inman ditto.)

Dass ein Angelsachse seine eine Hose immer doppelt sieht und zählt, liegt ja doch nur am Whisky...

*duck*

"Mein Mann ist etwas voll in den Hüften, mit kurzem Arm." (da fragt auch keiner, ob er denn nicht zwei hätte!)

Ich finde, dieser Thread wäre unvollständig ohne die folgende Erläuterung, warum man im Deutschen "ein Paar Hosen" sagen kann, obwohl man doch nur eine Hose trägt, und warum man kein/e "Short" tragen kann:

http://www.sprachforschung.org/forum/show_com...

Es gibt eine einfachere Erklärung: Hosen waren ursprünglich die Dinge, die wir heute als Beinlinge bezeichnen, also bis zum Schritt hinauf reichende, röhrenförmige (hose!) Strümpfe. Als diese ab dem 15. Jh. zur modernen Hose zusammengenäht wurden, kapierten auch die stumpfsinnigeren Germanen nach und nach, dass sie nur noch ein Kleidungsstück anzogen - außer, maßbierbedingt, den Bayern, die noch heute die Hosen voll haben, und den Angelsachsen.

Restitutus, Du verwechselst da was. Eine "Hose" ist im Bairschen immer "a Hosn" (vgl. Lederhosn), der Blutalkoholspiegel spielt dabei keine Rolle.

Zu #62/63:

Obwohl ich Franke bin, sehe ich mich genötigt, die Baiern gegen die in #62 vorgebrachten Behauptungen in Schutz zu nehmen. Eine Hose, die im Fränkischen übrigens "a Hûsn" heißt, ist im Bairischen "a Hôsn", und in beiden Fällen ist das Wort Femininum Singular.

Äußerungen über stumpfsinnige "Bayern", die "maßbierbedingt (...) die Hosen voll haben", sagen nichts über diesen Volksstamm, aber sehr viel über die geistige Verfassung desjenigen, der solchen Vorstellungen huldigt.

;-)

MiMo, über volle Hosen kann sich nur jemand wundern, der das gar nicht anders kennt, als dass er selbst nichts in der Hose hat - tote Hose, sozusagen ;-)

OT/@Lady Grey: re #60 Is the "Mann" in question Berta's Hermann (Loriot) by any chance?/OT

Hallo Anne, ich weiß nicht, ob es gerade Hermann ist, aber der Satz ist aus einem Loriot-Sketch, ja. :-)