EPTpeople can interpret it anyway they want, but that doesn't mean they're right.
A pair of twins? - Page 10
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Divinek
Canada4045 Posts
people can interpret it anyway they want, but that doesn't mean they're right. | ||
|
Engineer
22 Posts
| ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
| ||
|
Lemonwalrus
United States5465 Posts
| ||
|
Masamune
Canada3401 Posts
On October 02 2009 08:41 Divinek wrote: people can interpret it anyway they want, but that doesn't mean they're right. Actually, I spoke to a Professor with their PhD in English and they said that it does depend on the context, however, it is more correct to refer to two siblings born on the same day as a pair of twins. Yeah, I clicked on four people on inpulse today as well, but I guess it can be either/or, but two people is more correct, I think. | ||
|
sith
United States2474 Posts
| ||
|
Ganfei
Taiwan1439 Posts
| ||
|
Varn
United States33 Posts
On October 01 2009 10:29 sith wrote: Me and my friends On topic, my vote was for 4, simply because it is never necessary to use the syntax "a pair of" when referring to two individuals who are twins. The phrase a pair of twins could be seen as a "pair of twin(s)," where twin is pluralized out of necessity because two are present, or as "a pair of twins," where the word twins itself is used as a collective noun referring to two people. | ||
|
Moletrap
United States1297 Posts
4 would be "2 sets of twins" | ||
|
shidonu
United States50 Posts
The only way you could take it to mean 4 people is if you, incorrectly, define twins as a singular noun meaning two people, which has nothing to do with context. | ||
Mystlord
United States10264 Posts
| ||
|
Varn
United States33 Posts
On October 02 2009 11:22 shidonu wrote: The context does not matter! You will not find the word "twins" in a dictionary, just like you wont find "trucks", "trees", or "cows", rather you will find "twin" the plural being twins. Twins does not inherently mean two, it means more than one twin! The only way you could take it to mean 4 people is if you, incorrectly, define twins as a singular noun meaning two people, which has nothing to do with context. If I say "trucks," "trees," or "cows," what number do you associate with them? If I say "twins," what number do you associate with that? Most plural nouns do not natively imply their existence in groups of a specific size. This is not the case with twins. That is why a pair of twins is ambiguous, while a pair of trucks is not. There is no circumstance in which you can pluralize the word truck and inherently refer to two trucks. There are overwhelming circumstances in which you can do this with twin. | ||
| ||
