The plural of 'stomach"The plural of “conch”?Does “syllabus” derive from Greek or Latin?Word for nouns with multiple plural formsGeneral Term for Offsets Pluralplural form of “thematic”Plural for surnames derived from other words?Why is it carriage and pair when you have 2 horsesWhat is the plural of “sir”?Can 'go' be pluralized as 'gos'?What is the plural for “Egg in a hole”?Why is the plural 'oxen'? Is it acceptable to use 'oxes'?
How does Loki do this?
Unreliable Magic - Is it worth it?
How do I rename a Linux host without needing to reboot for the rename to take effect?
I'm in charge of equipment buying but no one's ever happy with what I choose. How to fix this?
Term for the "extreme-extension" version of a straw man fallacy?
Crossing the line between justified force and brutality
How can I kill an app using Terminal?
India just shot down a satellite from the ground. At what altitude range is the resulting debris field?
Why are there no referendums in the US?
How do I go from 300 unfinished/half written blog posts, to published posts?
Avoiding estate tax by giving multiple gifts
How to run a prison with the smallest amount of guards?
You cannot touch me, but I can touch you, who am I?
How to pronounce the slash sign
Why not increase contact surface when reentering the atmosphere?
Different result between scanning in Epson's "color negative film" mode and scanning in positive -> invert curve in post?
Applicability of Single Responsibility Principle
Is the destination of a commercial flight important for the pilot?
Is there a good way to store credentials outside of a password manager?
CREATE opcode: what does it really do?
Why escape if the_content isnt?
Was Spock the First Vulcan in Starfleet?
Gears on left are inverse to gears on right?
Is `x >> pure y` equivalent to `liftM (const y) x`
The plural of 'stomach"
The plural of “conch”?Does “syllabus” derive from Greek or Latin?Word for nouns with multiple plural formsGeneral Term for Offsets Pluralplural form of “thematic”Plural for surnames derived from other words?Why is it carriage and pair when you have 2 horsesWhat is the plural of “sir”?Can 'go' be pluralized as 'gos'?What is the plural for “Egg in a hole”?Why is the plural 'oxen'? Is it acceptable to use 'oxes'?
Words ending in ch usually take es in the plural form. However, the word stomach is an exception to this paradigm. Its plural form is stomachs. My question is, why does it take only s in the plural form?
irregular-plurals
asked yesterday
Mido MidoMido Mido
622919
|
show 2 more comments
Words ending in ch usually take es in the plural form. However, the word stomach is an exception to this paradigm. Its plural form is stomachs. My question is, why does it take only s in the plural form?
irregular-plurals
asked yesterday
Mido MidoMido Mido
622919
16
Because English is a very weird and funny language, and never tends to follow the rules most of the times? Yup. :)
– Bella Swan
yesterday
11
@BellaSwan Not really. Try to say "branchs" and you'll see why it's "branches"; try to pronounce "stomachs" and then wonder if "stomaches" would rhyme with "headaches".
– David Richerby
yesterday
14
The rule is not abut spelling but about sound.
– Mitch
yesterday
4
Necessary [humorous] poem regarding sound in English The Chaos.
– Dan
yesterday
Actually, the plural of "stomach" should have probably been "stomachia".
– Mike Nakis
17 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
Words ending in ch usually take es in the plural form. However, the word stomach is an exception to this paradigm. Its plural form is stomachs. My question is, why does it take only s in the plural form?
irregular-plurals
asked yesterday
Mido MidoMido Mido
622919
Words ending in ch usually take es in the plural form. However, the word stomach is an exception to this paradigm. Its plural form is stomachs. My question is, why does it take only s in the plural form?
irregular-plurals
irregular-plurals
asked yesterday
Mido MidoMido Mido
622919
asked yesterday
Mido MidoMido Mido
622919
asked yesterday
Mido MidoMido Mido
622919
asked yesterday
Mido MidoMido Mido
622919
asked yesterday
Mido MidoMido Mido
622919
622919
16
Because English is a very weird and funny language, and never tends to follow the rules most of the times? Yup. :)
– Bella Swan
yesterday
11
@BellaSwan Not really. Try to say "branchs" and you'll see why it's "branches"; try to pronounce "stomachs" and then wonder if "stomaches" would rhyme with "headaches".
– David Richerby
yesterday
14
The rule is not abut spelling but about sound.
– Mitch
yesterday
4
Necessary [humorous] poem regarding sound in English The Chaos.
– Dan
yesterday
Actually, the plural of "stomach" should have probably been "stomachia".
– Mike Nakis
17 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
16
Because English is a very weird and funny language, and never tends to follow the rules most of the times? Yup. :)
– Bella Swan
yesterday
11
@BellaSwan Not really. Try to say "branchs" and you'll see why it's "branches"; try to pronounce "stomachs" and then wonder if "stomaches" would rhyme with "headaches".
– David Richerby
yesterday
14
The rule is not abut spelling but about sound.
– Mitch
yesterday
4
Necessary [humorous] poem regarding sound in English The Chaos.
– Dan
yesterday
Actually, the plural of "stomach" should have probably been "stomachia".
– Mike Nakis
17 hours ago
16
16
Because English is a very weird and funny language, and never tends to follow the rules most of the times? Yup. :)
– Bella Swan
yesterday
Because English is a very weird and funny language, and never tends to follow the rules most of the times? Yup. :)
– Bella Swan
yesterday
11
11
@BellaSwan Not really. Try to say "branchs" and you'll see why it's "branches"; try to pronounce "stomachs" and then wonder if "stomaches" would rhyme with "headaches".
– David Richerby
yesterday
@BellaSwan Not really. Try to say "branchs" and you'll see why it's "branches"; try to pronounce "stomachs" and then wonder if "stomaches" would rhyme with "headaches".
– David Richerby
yesterday
14
14
The rule is not abut spelling but about sound.
– Mitch
yesterday
The rule is not abut spelling but about sound.
– Mitch
yesterday
4
4
Necessary [humorous] poem regarding sound in English The Chaos.
– Dan
yesterday
Necessary [humorous] poem regarding sound in English The Chaos.
– Dan
yesterday
Actually, the plural of "stomach" should have probably been "stomachia".
– Mike Nakis
17 hours ago
Actually, the plural of "stomach" should have probably been "stomachia".
– Mike Nakis
17 hours ago
|
show 2 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
The use of the spelling "-ches" in plural forms of words that end in "-ch" is based on the presence of a vowel sound before the final /z/ sound. After the sound /t͡ʃ/, the plural suffix is pronounced as /ɪz/ (or /əz/ in some accents).
But stomach does not end in the sound /t͡ʃ/: it ends in the sound /k/, and the plural ends in /ks/, with no vowel sound sound before the final /s/. This is why it is not spelled with "-es".
Compare the two spellings of the plural of conch that correspond to the two pronunciation variants.
The regular plural suffix has the pronunciation /ɪz~əz/ and the spelling "-es" after any sibilant consonant sound: /s z ʃ ʒ t͡ʃ d͡ʒ/. Words ending in these sounds can be spelled in a variety of ways, so it's simpler to think of this rule as being based on pronunciation, not on spelling.
answered yesterday
sumelicsumelic
50.3k8120226
2
It is usually obvious if a word ends in a sibilant. ch is unusual in the large number of options, resulting from this digraph being used for a range of different purposes in different languages that we have borrowed, and using it in English in different ways for words of different origins. E.g. sandwich is of Norse origin, but loch and quaich are of Scots Gaelic origin. I once looked this rule up in the OED and it said it depended on if the ch was "soft" or "hard". Given the range of possibilities, I looked up these words, but, ironically, it did not define them in this sense!
– David Robinson
yesterday
I had seen quaiches and suspected it was wrong. I have just looked it up here /ˈkweɪx/ and here /-eɪx/ and I was very surprised as I have only ever heard /ˈkweɪç/. The extra confusion with the IPA here is that both x and ç are usually used for sibilant sounds, but in IPA they represent non-sibilants. For anyone not familiar with these sounds, /x/ is the ch in Gaelic/Scots loch or German Bach, and /ç/ is what you end up with if you try to pronounce this next to an e or i (quaich, dreich or German ich).
– David Robinson
yesterday
add a comment |
If the -ch is pronounced like 'k', there is no 'e' before a plural final 's'. The lochs of Scotland are beautiful, also the mountains called the Trossachs. In music, there will be no more Bachs. Eunuchs cannot beget monarchs, and also cannot become patriarchs or, probably, the husbands of matriarchs.
answered yesterday
Michael HarveyMichael Harvey
6,60911120
4
We Richerbys aren't convinced that proper nouns are good examples of how plurals work in English. On the other hand, I suspect there won't be any more Shostakoviches, either, so maybe they aren't bad examples in this case.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Not only are all these examples proper nouns, they're also none of them English. (Nor is Shostakovich for that matter).
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
4
Loch is not a proper noun, any more than 'lake', although individual lochs may use the word as part of their name, e.g Loch Ness, and the word is definitely English.
– Michael Harvey
yesterday
It's a borrowed word in English, but it comes from the Irish/Gaelic/Scots word for "lake". Otherwise, what is the difference between a "loch" and a "lake"? The only possible answer is whether it's in Scotland or not.
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
1
What about sassenach? I guess that reveals what TV show I've been watching....
– Lambie
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
There are at least two reasons, one is the end sound 'k' in English words, but the other one is the plural of foreign words like stomach or Bach. The meaning of the name of the composers Bach (a family) is German for creek and the pronunciation of 'ch' is not 'k' at all but IPA 'x'. The English and German plural for the name 'Bach' is 'Bachs' (the plural of the word bach [= creek] is in fact Bäche 'ch' is IPA ç).
answered 7 hours ago
fiveyearsfiveyears
11
New contributor
fiveyears is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Stomach is English for "Stomachus" a Greek word.
As such, it can take any plural form you like as it was translated through the ages.
In Greek it has the plural: "Stomachoi"
In Latin it would be "Stomachi" and so on...
answered 9 hours ago
dimachaerusdimachaerus
1
New contributor
dimachaerus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491372%2fthe-plural-of-stomach%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The use of the spelling "-ches" in plural forms of words that end in "-ch" is based on the presence of a vowel sound before the final /z/ sound. After the sound /t͡ʃ/, the plural suffix is pronounced as /ɪz/ (or /əz/ in some accents).
But stomach does not end in the sound /t͡ʃ/: it ends in the sound /k/, and the plural ends in /ks/, with no vowel sound sound before the final /s/. This is why it is not spelled with "-es".
Compare the two spellings of the plural of conch that correspond to the two pronunciation variants.
The regular plural suffix has the pronunciation /ɪz~əz/ and the spelling "-es" after any sibilant consonant sound: /s z ʃ ʒ t͡ʃ d͡ʒ/. Words ending in these sounds can be spelled in a variety of ways, so it's simpler to think of this rule as being based on pronunciation, not on spelling.
answered yesterday
sumelicsumelic
50.3k8120226
2
It is usually obvious if a word ends in a sibilant. ch is unusual in the large number of options, resulting from this digraph being used for a range of different purposes in different languages that we have borrowed, and using it in English in different ways for words of different origins. E.g. sandwich is of Norse origin, but loch and quaich are of Scots Gaelic origin. I once looked this rule up in the OED and it said it depended on if the ch was "soft" or "hard". Given the range of possibilities, I looked up these words, but, ironically, it did not define them in this sense!
– David Robinson
yesterday
I had seen quaiches and suspected it was wrong. I have just looked it up here /ˈkweɪx/ and here /-eɪx/ and I was very surprised as I have only ever heard /ˈkweɪç/. The extra confusion with the IPA here is that both x and ç are usually used for sibilant sounds, but in IPA they represent non-sibilants. For anyone not familiar with these sounds, /x/ is the ch in Gaelic/Scots loch or German Bach, and /ç/ is what you end up with if you try to pronounce this next to an e or i (quaich, dreich or German ich).
– David Robinson
yesterday
add a comment |
The use of the spelling "-ches" in plural forms of words that end in "-ch" is based on the presence of a vowel sound before the final /z/ sound. After the sound /t͡ʃ/, the plural suffix is pronounced as /ɪz/ (or /əz/ in some accents).
But stomach does not end in the sound /t͡ʃ/: it ends in the sound /k/, and the plural ends in /ks/, with no vowel sound sound before the final /s/. This is why it is not spelled with "-es".
Compare the two spellings of the plural of conch that correspond to the two pronunciation variants.
The regular plural suffix has the pronunciation /ɪz~əz/ and the spelling "-es" after any sibilant consonant sound: /s z ʃ ʒ t͡ʃ d͡ʒ/. Words ending in these sounds can be spelled in a variety of ways, so it's simpler to think of this rule as being based on pronunciation, not on spelling.
answered yesterday
sumelicsumelic
50.3k8120226
2
It is usually obvious if a word ends in a sibilant. ch is unusual in the large number of options, resulting from this digraph being used for a range of different purposes in different languages that we have borrowed, and using it in English in different ways for words of different origins. E.g. sandwich is of Norse origin, but loch and quaich are of Scots Gaelic origin. I once looked this rule up in the OED and it said it depended on if the ch was "soft" or "hard". Given the range of possibilities, I looked up these words, but, ironically, it did not define them in this sense!
– David Robinson
yesterday
I had seen quaiches and suspected it was wrong. I have just looked it up here /ˈkweɪx/ and here /-eɪx/ and I was very surprised as I have only ever heard /ˈkweɪç/. The extra confusion with the IPA here is that both x and ç are usually used for sibilant sounds, but in IPA they represent non-sibilants. For anyone not familiar with these sounds, /x/ is the ch in Gaelic/Scots loch or German Bach, and /ç/ is what you end up with if you try to pronounce this next to an e or i (quaich, dreich or German ich).
– David Robinson
yesterday
add a comment |
The use of the spelling "-ches" in plural forms of words that end in "-ch" is based on the presence of a vowel sound before the final /z/ sound. After the sound /t͡ʃ/, the plural suffix is pronounced as /ɪz/ (or /əz/ in some accents).
But stomach does not end in the sound /t͡ʃ/: it ends in the sound /k/, and the plural ends in /ks/, with no vowel sound sound before the final /s/. This is why it is not spelled with "-es".
Compare the two spellings of the plural of conch that correspond to the two pronunciation variants.
The regular plural suffix has the pronunciation /ɪz~əz/ and the spelling "-es" after any sibilant consonant sound: /s z ʃ ʒ t͡ʃ d͡ʒ/. Words ending in these sounds can be spelled in a variety of ways, so it's simpler to think of this rule as being based on pronunciation, not on spelling.
answered yesterday
sumelicsumelic
50.3k8120226
The use of the spelling "-ches" in plural forms of words that end in "-ch" is based on the presence of a vowel sound before the final /z/ sound. After the sound /t͡ʃ/, the plural suffix is pronounced as /ɪz/ (or /əz/ in some accents).
But stomach does not end in the sound /t͡ʃ/: it ends in the sound /k/, and the plural ends in /ks/, with no vowel sound sound before the final /s/. This is why it is not spelled with "-es".
Compare the two spellings of the plural of conch that correspond to the two pronunciation variants.
The regular plural suffix has the pronunciation /ɪz~əz/ and the spelling "-es" after any sibilant consonant sound: /s z ʃ ʒ t͡ʃ d͡ʒ/. Words ending in these sounds can be spelled in a variety of ways, so it's simpler to think of this rule as being based on pronunciation, not on spelling.
answered yesterday
sumelicsumelic
50.3k8120226
edited 7 hours ago
answered yesterday
sumelicsumelic
50.3k8120226
answered yesterday
sumelicsumelic
50.3k8120226
answered yesterday
sumelicsumelic
50.3k8120226
50.3k8120226
2
It is usually obvious if a word ends in a sibilant. ch is unusual in the large number of options, resulting from this digraph being used for a range of different purposes in different languages that we have borrowed, and using it in English in different ways for words of different origins. E.g. sandwich is of Norse origin, but loch and quaich are of Scots Gaelic origin. I once looked this rule up in the OED and it said it depended on if the ch was "soft" or "hard". Given the range of possibilities, I looked up these words, but, ironically, it did not define them in this sense!
– David Robinson
yesterday
I had seen quaiches and suspected it was wrong. I have just looked it up here /ˈkweɪx/ and here /-eɪx/ and I was very surprised as I have only ever heard /ˈkweɪç/. The extra confusion with the IPA here is that both x and ç are usually used for sibilant sounds, but in IPA they represent non-sibilants. For anyone not familiar with these sounds, /x/ is the ch in Gaelic/Scots loch or German Bach, and /ç/ is what you end up with if you try to pronounce this next to an e or i (quaich, dreich or German ich).
– David Robinson
yesterday
add a comment |
2
It is usually obvious if a word ends in a sibilant. ch is unusual in the large number of options, resulting from this digraph being used for a range of different purposes in different languages that we have borrowed, and using it in English in different ways for words of different origins. E.g. sandwich is of Norse origin, but loch and quaich are of Scots Gaelic origin. I once looked this rule up in the OED and it said it depended on if the ch was "soft" or "hard". Given the range of possibilities, I looked up these words, but, ironically, it did not define them in this sense!
– David Robinson
yesterday
I had seen quaiches and suspected it was wrong. I have just looked it up here /ˈkweɪx/ and here /-eɪx/ and I was very surprised as I have only ever heard /ˈkweɪç/. The extra confusion with the IPA here is that both x and ç are usually used for sibilant sounds, but in IPA they represent non-sibilants. For anyone not familiar with these sounds, /x/ is the ch in Gaelic/Scots loch or German Bach, and /ç/ is what you end up with if you try to pronounce this next to an e or i (quaich, dreich or German ich).
– David Robinson
yesterday
2
2
It is usually obvious if a word ends in a sibilant. ch is unusual in the large number of options, resulting from this digraph being used for a range of different purposes in different languages that we have borrowed, and using it in English in different ways for words of different origins. E.g. sandwich is of Norse origin, but loch and quaich are of Scots Gaelic origin. I once looked this rule up in the OED and it said it depended on if the ch was "soft" or "hard". Given the range of possibilities, I looked up these words, but, ironically, it did not define them in this sense!
– David Robinson
yesterday
It is usually obvious if a word ends in a sibilant. ch is unusual in the large number of options, resulting from this digraph being used for a range of different purposes in different languages that we have borrowed, and using it in English in different ways for words of different origins. E.g. sandwich is of Norse origin, but loch and quaich are of Scots Gaelic origin. I once looked this rule up in the OED and it said it depended on if the ch was "soft" or "hard". Given the range of possibilities, I looked up these words, but, ironically, it did not define them in this sense!
– David Robinson
yesterday
I had seen quaiches and suspected it was wrong. I have just looked it up here /ˈkweɪx/ and here /-eɪx/ and I was very surprised as I have only ever heard /ˈkweɪç/. The extra confusion with the IPA here is that both x and ç are usually used for sibilant sounds, but in IPA they represent non-sibilants. For anyone not familiar with these sounds, /x/ is the ch in Gaelic/Scots loch or German Bach, and /ç/ is what you end up with if you try to pronounce this next to an e or i (quaich, dreich or German ich).
– David Robinson
yesterday
I had seen quaiches and suspected it was wrong. I have just looked it up here /ˈkweɪx/ and here /-eɪx/ and I was very surprised as I have only ever heard /ˈkweɪç/. The extra confusion with the IPA here is that both x and ç are usually used for sibilant sounds, but in IPA they represent non-sibilants. For anyone not familiar with these sounds, /x/ is the ch in Gaelic/Scots loch or German Bach, and /ç/ is what you end up with if you try to pronounce this next to an e or i (quaich, dreich or German ich).
– David Robinson
yesterday
add a comment |
If the -ch is pronounced like 'k', there is no 'e' before a plural final 's'. The lochs of Scotland are beautiful, also the mountains called the Trossachs. In music, there will be no more Bachs. Eunuchs cannot beget monarchs, and also cannot become patriarchs or, probably, the husbands of matriarchs.
answered yesterday
Michael HarveyMichael Harvey
6,60911120
4
We Richerbys aren't convinced that proper nouns are good examples of how plurals work in English. On the other hand, I suspect there won't be any more Shostakoviches, either, so maybe they aren't bad examples in this case.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Not only are all these examples proper nouns, they're also none of them English. (Nor is Shostakovich for that matter).
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
4
Loch is not a proper noun, any more than 'lake', although individual lochs may use the word as part of their name, e.g Loch Ness, and the word is definitely English.
– Michael Harvey
yesterday
It's a borrowed word in English, but it comes from the Irish/Gaelic/Scots word for "lake". Otherwise, what is the difference between a "loch" and a "lake"? The only possible answer is whether it's in Scotland or not.
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
1
What about sassenach? I guess that reveals what TV show I've been watching....
– Lambie
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
If the -ch is pronounced like 'k', there is no 'e' before a plural final 's'. The lochs of Scotland are beautiful, also the mountains called the Trossachs. In music, there will be no more Bachs. Eunuchs cannot beget monarchs, and also cannot become patriarchs or, probably, the husbands of matriarchs.
answered yesterday
Michael HarveyMichael Harvey
6,60911120
4
We Richerbys aren't convinced that proper nouns are good examples of how plurals work in English. On the other hand, I suspect there won't be any more Shostakoviches, either, so maybe they aren't bad examples in this case.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Not only are all these examples proper nouns, they're also none of them English. (Nor is Shostakovich for that matter).
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
4
Loch is not a proper noun, any more than 'lake', although individual lochs may use the word as part of their name, e.g Loch Ness, and the word is definitely English.
– Michael Harvey
yesterday
It's a borrowed word in English, but it comes from the Irish/Gaelic/Scots word for "lake". Otherwise, what is the difference between a "loch" and a "lake"? The only possible answer is whether it's in Scotland or not.
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
1
What about sassenach? I guess that reveals what TV show I've been watching....
– Lambie
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
If the -ch is pronounced like 'k', there is no 'e' before a plural final 's'. The lochs of Scotland are beautiful, also the mountains called the Trossachs. In music, there will be no more Bachs. Eunuchs cannot beget monarchs, and also cannot become patriarchs or, probably, the husbands of matriarchs.
answered yesterday
Michael HarveyMichael Harvey
6,60911120
If the -ch is pronounced like 'k', there is no 'e' before a plural final 's'. The lochs of Scotland are beautiful, also the mountains called the Trossachs. In music, there will be no more Bachs. Eunuchs cannot beget monarchs, and also cannot become patriarchs or, probably, the husbands of matriarchs.
answered yesterday
Michael HarveyMichael Harvey
6,60911120
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
Michael HarveyMichael Harvey
6,60911120
answered yesterday
Michael HarveyMichael Harvey
6,60911120
answered yesterday
Michael HarveyMichael Harvey
6,60911120
6,60911120
4
We Richerbys aren't convinced that proper nouns are good examples of how plurals work in English. On the other hand, I suspect there won't be any more Shostakoviches, either, so maybe they aren't bad examples in this case.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Not only are all these examples proper nouns, they're also none of them English. (Nor is Shostakovich for that matter).
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
4
Loch is not a proper noun, any more than 'lake', although individual lochs may use the word as part of their name, e.g Loch Ness, and the word is definitely English.
– Michael Harvey
yesterday
It's a borrowed word in English, but it comes from the Irish/Gaelic/Scots word for "lake". Otherwise, what is the difference between a "loch" and a "lake"? The only possible answer is whether it's in Scotland or not.
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
1
What about sassenach? I guess that reveals what TV show I've been watching....
– Lambie
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
4
We Richerbys aren't convinced that proper nouns are good examples of how plurals work in English. On the other hand, I suspect there won't be any more Shostakoviches, either, so maybe they aren't bad examples in this case.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Not only are all these examples proper nouns, they're also none of them English. (Nor is Shostakovich for that matter).
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
4
Loch is not a proper noun, any more than 'lake', although individual lochs may use the word as part of their name, e.g Loch Ness, and the word is definitely English.
– Michael Harvey
yesterday
It's a borrowed word in English, but it comes from the Irish/Gaelic/Scots word for "lake". Otherwise, what is the difference between a "loch" and a "lake"? The only possible answer is whether it's in Scotland or not.
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
1
What about sassenach? I guess that reveals what TV show I've been watching....
– Lambie
yesterday
4
4
We Richerbys aren't convinced that proper nouns are good examples of how plurals work in English. On the other hand, I suspect there won't be any more Shostakoviches, either, so maybe they aren't bad examples in this case.
– David Richerby
yesterday
We Richerbys aren't convinced that proper nouns are good examples of how plurals work in English. On the other hand, I suspect there won't be any more Shostakoviches, either, so maybe they aren't bad examples in this case.
– David Richerby
yesterday
Not only are all these examples proper nouns, they're also none of them English. (Nor is Shostakovich for that matter).
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
Not only are all these examples proper nouns, they're also none of them English. (Nor is Shostakovich for that matter).
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
4
4
Loch is not a proper noun, any more than 'lake', although individual lochs may use the word as part of their name, e.g Loch Ness, and the word is definitely English.
– Michael Harvey
yesterday
Loch is not a proper noun, any more than 'lake', although individual lochs may use the word as part of their name, e.g Loch Ness, and the word is definitely English.
– Michael Harvey
yesterday
It's a borrowed word in English, but it comes from the Irish/Gaelic/Scots word for "lake". Otherwise, what is the difference between a "loch" and a "lake"? The only possible answer is whether it's in Scotland or not.
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
It's a borrowed word in English, but it comes from the Irish/Gaelic/Scots word for "lake". Otherwise, what is the difference between a "loch" and a "lake"? The only possible answer is whether it's in Scotland or not.
– Darrel Hoffman
yesterday
1
1
What about sassenach? I guess that reveals what TV show I've been watching....
– Lambie
yesterday
What about sassenach? I guess that reveals what TV show I've been watching....
– Lambie
yesterday
|
show 9 more comments
There are at least two reasons, one is the end sound 'k' in English words, but the other one is the plural of foreign words like stomach or Bach. The meaning of the name of the composers Bach (a family) is German for creek and the pronunciation of 'ch' is not 'k' at all but IPA 'x'. The English and German plural for the name 'Bach' is 'Bachs' (the plural of the word bach [= creek] is in fact Bäche 'ch' is IPA ç).
answered 7 hours ago
fiveyearsfiveyears
11
New contributor
fiveyears is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
There are at least two reasons, one is the end sound 'k' in English words, but the other one is the plural of foreign words like stomach or Bach. The meaning of the name of the composers Bach (a family) is German for creek and the pronunciation of 'ch' is not 'k' at all but IPA 'x'. The English and German plural for the name 'Bach' is 'Bachs' (the plural of the word bach [= creek] is in fact Bäche 'ch' is IPA ç).
answered 7 hours ago
fiveyearsfiveyears
11
New contributor
fiveyears is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
There are at least two reasons, one is the end sound 'k' in English words, but the other one is the plural of foreign words like stomach or Bach. The meaning of the name of the composers Bach (a family) is German for creek and the pronunciation of 'ch' is not 'k' at all but IPA 'x'. The English and German plural for the name 'Bach' is 'Bachs' (the plural of the word bach [= creek] is in fact Bäche 'ch' is IPA ç).
answered 7 hours ago
fiveyearsfiveyears
11
New contributor
fiveyears is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
There are at least two reasons, one is the end sound 'k' in English words, but the other one is the plural of foreign words like stomach or Bach. The meaning of the name of the composers Bach (a family) is German for creek and the pronunciation of 'ch' is not 'k' at all but IPA 'x'. The English and German plural for the name 'Bach' is 'Bachs' (the plural of the word bach [= creek] is in fact Bäche 'ch' is IPA ç).
answered 7 hours ago
fiveyearsfiveyears
11
New contributor
fiveyears is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 7 hours ago
fiveyearsfiveyears
11
New contributor
fiveyears is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 7 hours ago
fiveyearsfiveyears
11
answered 7 hours ago
fiveyearsfiveyears
11
11
New contributor
fiveyears is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
fiveyears is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
fiveyears is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Stomach is English for "Stomachus" a Greek word.
As such, it can take any plural form you like as it was translated through the ages.
In Greek it has the plural: "Stomachoi"
In Latin it would be "Stomachi" and so on...
answered 9 hours ago
dimachaerusdimachaerus
1
New contributor
dimachaerus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Stomach is English for "Stomachus" a Greek word.
As such, it can take any plural form you like as it was translated through the ages.
In Greek it has the plural: "Stomachoi"
In Latin it would be "Stomachi" and so on...
answered 9 hours ago
dimachaerusdimachaerus
1
New contributor
dimachaerus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
Stomach is English for "Stomachus" a Greek word.
As such, it can take any plural form you like as it was translated through the ages.
In Greek it has the plural: "Stomachoi"
In Latin it would be "Stomachi" and so on...
answered 9 hours ago
dimachaerusdimachaerus
1
New contributor
dimachaerus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Stomach is English for "Stomachus" a Greek word.
As such, it can take any plural form you like as it was translated through the ages.
In Greek it has the plural: "Stomachoi"
In Latin it would be "Stomachi" and so on...
answered 9 hours ago
dimachaerusdimachaerus
1
New contributor
dimachaerus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 9 hours ago
dimachaerusdimachaerus
1
New contributor
dimachaerus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 9 hours ago
dimachaerusdimachaerus
1
answered 9 hours ago
dimachaerusdimachaerus
1
1
New contributor
dimachaerus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
dimachaerus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
dimachaerus is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491372%2fthe-plural-of-stomach%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
16
Because English is a very weird and funny language, and never tends to follow the rules most of the times? Yup. :)
– Bella Swan
yesterday
11
@BellaSwan Not really. Try to say "branchs" and you'll see why it's "branches"; try to pronounce "stomachs" and then wonder if "stomaches" would rhyme with "headaches".
– David Richerby
yesterday
14
The rule is not abut spelling but about sound.
– Mitch
yesterday
4
Necessary [humorous] poem regarding sound in English The Chaos.
– Dan
yesterday
Actually, the plural of "stomach" should have probably been "stomachia".
– Mike Nakis
17 hours ago