The herd of cattle had grown to 30 head. Why didn't the writer write 30 heads?
Why is "30 head" singular instead of plural in this sentence? Can you explain more about it?
grammar
edited Nov 17 '13 at 12:29
TimLymington
32.5k875143
|
show 1 more comment
Why is "30 head" singular instead of plural in this sentence? Can you explain more about it?
grammar
edited Nov 17 '13 at 12:29
TimLymington
32.5k875143
Extremely related and possibly counting as a duplicate: english.stackexchange.com/questions/119843/…
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 11:45
Please use capital letters and spaces between words in your question. This is an English language site after all.
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 11:48
@Andrew: I don't think it's a duplicate. The duplicate would explain that people also say "five dozen" instead of "five dozens", "four score" instead of "four scores", and used to say "three pair" instead of "three pairs". I think there's a question like that, but I can't find it. Tangentially related Google Ngram.
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:15
@PeterShor Perhaps it's this one then. But head refers to a single animal; using a different word like unit doesn't work the same way. Perhaps this question is the root question that the other one will be a duplicate of.
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 12:33
1
“30 head” isn't singular, it's plural. Perhaps you mean to ask why there's no s after head
– James Waldby - jwpat7
Nov 17 '13 at 17:21
|
show 1 more comment
Why is "30 head" singular instead of plural in this sentence? Can you explain more about it?
grammar
edited Nov 17 '13 at 12:29
TimLymington
32.5k875143
Why is "30 head" singular instead of plural in this sentence? Can you explain more about it?
grammar
grammar
edited Nov 17 '13 at 12:29
TimLymington
32.5k875143
edited Nov 17 '13 at 12:29
TimLymington
32.5k875143
edited Nov 17 '13 at 12:29
TimLymington
32.5k875143
edited Nov 17 '13 at 12:29
TimLymington
32.5k875143
edited Nov 17 '13 at 12:29
TimLymington
32.5k875143
32.5k875143
asked Nov 17 '13 at 11:42
user57550
Extremely related and possibly counting as a duplicate: english.stackexchange.com/questions/119843/…
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 11:45
Please use capital letters and spaces between words in your question. This is an English language site after all.
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 11:48
@Andrew: I don't think it's a duplicate. The duplicate would explain that people also say "five dozen" instead of "five dozens", "four score" instead of "four scores", and used to say "three pair" instead of "three pairs". I think there's a question like that, but I can't find it. Tangentially related Google Ngram.
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:15
@PeterShor Perhaps it's this one then. But head refers to a single animal; using a different word like unit doesn't work the same way. Perhaps this question is the root question that the other one will be a duplicate of.
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 12:33
1
“30 head” isn't singular, it's plural. Perhaps you mean to ask why there's no s after head
– James Waldby - jwpat7
Nov 17 '13 at 17:21
|
show 1 more comment
Extremely related and possibly counting as a duplicate: english.stackexchange.com/questions/119843/…
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 11:45
Please use capital letters and spaces between words in your question. This is an English language site after all.
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 11:48
@Andrew: I don't think it's a duplicate. The duplicate would explain that people also say "five dozen" instead of "five dozens", "four score" instead of "four scores", and used to say "three pair" instead of "three pairs". I think there's a question like that, but I can't find it. Tangentially related Google Ngram.
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:15
@PeterShor Perhaps it's this one then. But head refers to a single animal; using a different word like unit doesn't work the same way. Perhaps this question is the root question that the other one will be a duplicate of.
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 12:33
1
“30 head” isn't singular, it's plural. Perhaps you mean to ask why there's no s after head
– James Waldby - jwpat7
Nov 17 '13 at 17:21
Extremely related and possibly counting as a duplicate: english.stackexchange.com/questions/119843/…
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 11:45
Extremely related and possibly counting as a duplicate: english.stackexchange.com/questions/119843/…
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 11:45
Please use capital letters and spaces between words in your question. This is an English language site after all.
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 11:48
Please use capital letters and spaces between words in your question. This is an English language site after all.
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 11:48
@Andrew: I don't think it's a duplicate. The duplicate would explain that people also say "five dozen" instead of "five dozens", "four score" instead of "four scores", and used to say "three pair" instead of "three pairs". I think there's a question like that, but I can't find it. Tangentially related Google Ngram.
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:15
@Andrew: I don't think it's a duplicate. The duplicate would explain that people also say "five dozen" instead of "five dozens", "four score" instead of "four scores", and used to say "three pair" instead of "three pairs". I think there's a question like that, but I can't find it. Tangentially related Google Ngram.
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:15
@PeterShor Perhaps it's this one then. But head refers to a single animal; using a different word like unit doesn't work the same way. Perhaps this question is the root question that the other one will be a duplicate of.
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 12:33
@PeterShor Perhaps it's this one then. But head refers to a single animal; using a different word like unit doesn't work the same way. Perhaps this question is the root question that the other one will be a duplicate of.
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 12:33
1
1
“30 head” isn't singular, it's plural. Perhaps you mean to ask why there's no s after head
– James Waldby - jwpat7
Nov 17 '13 at 17:21
“30 head” isn't singular, it's plural. Perhaps you mean to ask why there's no s after head
– James Waldby - jwpat7
Nov 17 '13 at 17:21
|
show 1 more comment
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Dave
Phillips
says: In BrE we would always say a head of cattle (meaning the whole
herd) but we wouldn't give a number of those head/heads.
While I would concede that the usage "X head" is not unknown here, the use of 'head' as a synonym of the collective noun 'herd' is probably more common in the UK.
........
Because 'cattle' is a plural noun with no singular (though it almost grades into a mass noun notionally in constructions such as 'raising cattle costs a lot of money' – cf clothing, furniture, and especially poultry – which, however, take singular concord), there is the problem of what to call a single – er, beast. Neat. The very familiar cow doesn't always work. Perhaps because of the notional massness of cattle, we don't say 'three cattle' etc either – it doesn't accept all normal quantifiers.
This is probably one reason why the term 'head of cattle' has been drafted into use. 'x head of' is then a compound quantifier usable with 'cattle'; the variant 'a single head of cattle' is also available.
Though this is a strange construction even for a quantifier, other more familiar quantifiers are known to take zero plurals (30 dozen ...).
answered Nov 17 '13 at 15:46
Edwin AshworthEdwin Ashworth
48.9k987153
2
'Ten head of cattle' means a heard of ten animals, but 'Ten heads of cattle' would mean ten (severed) heads.
– Mario Elocio
Nov 17 '13 at 21:15
add a comment |
My grandmother used to call head of cattle describing each mother but not the calf.. I asked why not the calf she said it’s not considered cattle until it’s over 1-2 years old... she had 200-300 head,with almost as many calves...
answered 2 mins ago
user332481user332481
1
New contributor
user332481 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 |
Why don't you check your dictionary.
For example, the Merriam-Webster dictionary says the plural form for this definition is "head".
head noun meaning #4b
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/head
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:09
243243
3381715
1
But note that it's "thirty head of cattle" but "thirty heads of lettuce".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:13
Maybe you need check in a dictionary too. 30 head of cattle is grammatical. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cattle
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 12:21
1
But this metonymic usage in the dictionary link given offers no explanation of why it is never used in the singular (one head of cattle???) and always with an unusual plural form. Which is what OP is asking for.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:23
@Edwin: If you only have one head of cattle, you can always call it a "cow", a "steer", a "bull", or a "calf".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 20:39
@Peter: If YOU want to get that close ... The genderless 'neat' has been used, but doesn't seem very idiomatic.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 18 '13 at 11:21
add a comment |
Both heads and head are correct. It's simply more common to say head. Look up the term Isogloss as it explains this a bit more.
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:41
ryanryan
3
Why would the term ‘isogloss’ explain this? What does this have to do with isoglosses in any possible way? I for one have never heard of this as any kind of dialectal distinguisher.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Nov 17 '13 at 14:07
Why do you say "thirty heads of cattle" is grammatical? Do you have a justification for this?
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 14:45
Thirty head of cattle will have thirty heads. One hopes.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:26
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');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
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%2f138042%2fthe-herd-of-cattle-had-grown-to-30-head-why-didnt-the-writer-write-30-heads%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
Dave
Phillips
says: In BrE we would always say a head of cattle (meaning the whole
herd) but we wouldn't give a number of those head/heads.
While I would concede that the usage "X head" is not unknown here, the use of 'head' as a synonym of the collective noun 'herd' is probably more common in the UK.
........
Because 'cattle' is a plural noun with no singular (though it almost grades into a mass noun notionally in constructions such as 'raising cattle costs a lot of money' – cf clothing, furniture, and especially poultry – which, however, take singular concord), there is the problem of what to call a single – er, beast. Neat. The very familiar cow doesn't always work. Perhaps because of the notional massness of cattle, we don't say 'three cattle' etc either – it doesn't accept all normal quantifiers.
This is probably one reason why the term 'head of cattle' has been drafted into use. 'x head of' is then a compound quantifier usable with 'cattle'; the variant 'a single head of cattle' is also available.
Though this is a strange construction even for a quantifier, other more familiar quantifiers are known to take zero plurals (30 dozen ...).
answered Nov 17 '13 at 15:46
Edwin AshworthEdwin Ashworth
48.9k987153
2
'Ten head of cattle' means a heard of ten animals, but 'Ten heads of cattle' would mean ten (severed) heads.
– Mario Elocio
Nov 17 '13 at 21:15
add a comment |
Dave
Phillips
says: In BrE we would always say a head of cattle (meaning the whole
herd) but we wouldn't give a number of those head/heads.
While I would concede that the usage "X head" is not unknown here, the use of 'head' as a synonym of the collective noun 'herd' is probably more common in the UK.
........
Because 'cattle' is a plural noun with no singular (though it almost grades into a mass noun notionally in constructions such as 'raising cattle costs a lot of money' – cf clothing, furniture, and especially poultry – which, however, take singular concord), there is the problem of what to call a single – er, beast. Neat. The very familiar cow doesn't always work. Perhaps because of the notional massness of cattle, we don't say 'three cattle' etc either – it doesn't accept all normal quantifiers.
This is probably one reason why the term 'head of cattle' has been drafted into use. 'x head of' is then a compound quantifier usable with 'cattle'; the variant 'a single head of cattle' is also available.
Though this is a strange construction even for a quantifier, other more familiar quantifiers are known to take zero plurals (30 dozen ...).
answered Nov 17 '13 at 15:46
Edwin AshworthEdwin Ashworth
48.9k987153
2
'Ten head of cattle' means a heard of ten animals, but 'Ten heads of cattle' would mean ten (severed) heads.
– Mario Elocio
Nov 17 '13 at 21:15
add a comment |
Dave
Phillips
says: In BrE we would always say a head of cattle (meaning the whole
herd) but we wouldn't give a number of those head/heads.
While I would concede that the usage "X head" is not unknown here, the use of 'head' as a synonym of the collective noun 'herd' is probably more common in the UK.
........
Because 'cattle' is a plural noun with no singular (though it almost grades into a mass noun notionally in constructions such as 'raising cattle costs a lot of money' – cf clothing, furniture, and especially poultry – which, however, take singular concord), there is the problem of what to call a single – er, beast. Neat. The very familiar cow doesn't always work. Perhaps because of the notional massness of cattle, we don't say 'three cattle' etc either – it doesn't accept all normal quantifiers.
This is probably one reason why the term 'head of cattle' has been drafted into use. 'x head of' is then a compound quantifier usable with 'cattle'; the variant 'a single head of cattle' is also available.
Though this is a strange construction even for a quantifier, other more familiar quantifiers are known to take zero plurals (30 dozen ...).
answered Nov 17 '13 at 15:46
Edwin AshworthEdwin Ashworth
48.9k987153
Dave
Phillips
says: In BrE we would always say a head of cattle (meaning the whole
herd) but we wouldn't give a number of those head/heads.
While I would concede that the usage "X head" is not unknown here, the use of 'head' as a synonym of the collective noun 'herd' is probably more common in the UK.
........
Because 'cattle' is a plural noun with no singular (though it almost grades into a mass noun notionally in constructions such as 'raising cattle costs a lot of money' – cf clothing, furniture, and especially poultry – which, however, take singular concord), there is the problem of what to call a single – er, beast. Neat. The very familiar cow doesn't always work. Perhaps because of the notional massness of cattle, we don't say 'three cattle' etc either – it doesn't accept all normal quantifiers.
This is probably one reason why the term 'head of cattle' has been drafted into use. 'x head of' is then a compound quantifier usable with 'cattle'; the variant 'a single head of cattle' is also available.
Though this is a strange construction even for a quantifier, other more familiar quantifiers are known to take zero plurals (30 dozen ...).
answered Nov 17 '13 at 15:46
Edwin AshworthEdwin Ashworth
48.9k987153
edited Nov 17 '13 at 16:35
answered Nov 17 '13 at 15:46
Edwin AshworthEdwin Ashworth
48.9k987153
answered Nov 17 '13 at 15:46
Edwin AshworthEdwin Ashworth
48.9k987153
answered Nov 17 '13 at 15:46
Edwin AshworthEdwin Ashworth
48.9k987153
48.9k987153
2
'Ten head of cattle' means a heard of ten animals, but 'Ten heads of cattle' would mean ten (severed) heads.
– Mario Elocio
Nov 17 '13 at 21:15
add a comment |
2
'Ten head of cattle' means a heard of ten animals, but 'Ten heads of cattle' would mean ten (severed) heads.
– Mario Elocio
Nov 17 '13 at 21:15
2
2
'Ten head of cattle' means a heard of ten animals, but 'Ten heads of cattle' would mean ten (severed) heads.
– Mario Elocio
Nov 17 '13 at 21:15
'Ten head of cattle' means a heard of ten animals, but 'Ten heads of cattle' would mean ten (severed) heads.
– Mario Elocio
Nov 17 '13 at 21:15
add a comment |
My grandmother used to call head of cattle describing each mother but not the calf.. I asked why not the calf she said it’s not considered cattle until it’s over 1-2 years old... she had 200-300 head,with almost as many calves...
answered 2 mins ago
user332481user332481
1
New contributor
user332481 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 |
My grandmother used to call head of cattle describing each mother but not the calf.. I asked why not the calf she said it’s not considered cattle until it’s over 1-2 years old... she had 200-300 head,with almost as many calves...
answered 2 mins ago
user332481user332481
1
New contributor
user332481 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 |
My grandmother used to call head of cattle describing each mother but not the calf.. I asked why not the calf she said it’s not considered cattle until it’s over 1-2 years old... she had 200-300 head,with almost as many calves...
answered 2 mins ago
user332481user332481
1
New contributor
user332481 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
My grandmother used to call head of cattle describing each mother but not the calf.. I asked why not the calf she said it’s not considered cattle until it’s over 1-2 years old... she had 200-300 head,with almost as many calves...
answered 2 mins ago
user332481user332481
1
New contributor
user332481 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 mins ago
user332481user332481
1
New contributor
user332481 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 mins ago
user332481user332481
1
answered 2 mins ago
user332481user332481
1
1
New contributor
user332481 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
user332481 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
user332481 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 |
Why don't you check your dictionary.
For example, the Merriam-Webster dictionary says the plural form for this definition is "head".
head noun meaning #4b
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/head
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:09
243243
3381715
1
But note that it's "thirty head of cattle" but "thirty heads of lettuce".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:13
Maybe you need check in a dictionary too. 30 head of cattle is grammatical. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cattle
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 12:21
1
But this metonymic usage in the dictionary link given offers no explanation of why it is never used in the singular (one head of cattle???) and always with an unusual plural form. Which is what OP is asking for.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:23
@Edwin: If you only have one head of cattle, you can always call it a "cow", a "steer", a "bull", or a "calf".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 20:39
@Peter: If YOU want to get that close ... The genderless 'neat' has been used, but doesn't seem very idiomatic.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 18 '13 at 11:21
add a comment |
Why don't you check your dictionary.
For example, the Merriam-Webster dictionary says the plural form for this definition is "head".
head noun meaning #4b
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/head
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:09
243243
3381715
1
But note that it's "thirty head of cattle" but "thirty heads of lettuce".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:13
Maybe you need check in a dictionary too. 30 head of cattle is grammatical. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cattle
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 12:21
1
But this metonymic usage in the dictionary link given offers no explanation of why it is never used in the singular (one head of cattle???) and always with an unusual plural form. Which is what OP is asking for.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:23
@Edwin: If you only have one head of cattle, you can always call it a "cow", a "steer", a "bull", or a "calf".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 20:39
@Peter: If YOU want to get that close ... The genderless 'neat' has been used, but doesn't seem very idiomatic.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 18 '13 at 11:21
add a comment |
Why don't you check your dictionary.
For example, the Merriam-Webster dictionary says the plural form for this definition is "head".
head noun meaning #4b
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/head
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:09
243243
3381715
Why don't you check your dictionary.
For example, the Merriam-Webster dictionary says the plural form for this definition is "head".
head noun meaning #4b
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/head
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:09
243243
3381715
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:09
243243
3381715
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:09
243243
3381715
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:09
243243
3381715
3381715
1
But note that it's "thirty head of cattle" but "thirty heads of lettuce".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:13
Maybe you need check in a dictionary too. 30 head of cattle is grammatical. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cattle
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 12:21
1
But this metonymic usage in the dictionary link given offers no explanation of why it is never used in the singular (one head of cattle???) and always with an unusual plural form. Which is what OP is asking for.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:23
@Edwin: If you only have one head of cattle, you can always call it a "cow", a "steer", a "bull", or a "calf".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 20:39
@Peter: If YOU want to get that close ... The genderless 'neat' has been used, but doesn't seem very idiomatic.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 18 '13 at 11:21
add a comment |
1
But note that it's "thirty head of cattle" but "thirty heads of lettuce".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:13
Maybe you need check in a dictionary too. 30 head of cattle is grammatical. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cattle
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 12:21
1
But this metonymic usage in the dictionary link given offers no explanation of why it is never used in the singular (one head of cattle???) and always with an unusual plural form. Which is what OP is asking for.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:23
@Edwin: If you only have one head of cattle, you can always call it a "cow", a "steer", a "bull", or a "calf".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 20:39
@Peter: If YOU want to get that close ... The genderless 'neat' has been used, but doesn't seem very idiomatic.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 18 '13 at 11:21
1
1
But note that it's "thirty head of cattle" but "thirty heads of lettuce".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:13
But note that it's "thirty head of cattle" but "thirty heads of lettuce".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:13
Maybe you need check in a dictionary too. 30 head of cattle is grammatical. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cattle
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 12:21
Maybe you need check in a dictionary too. 30 head of cattle is grammatical. en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cattle
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 12:21
1
1
But this metonymic usage in the dictionary link given offers no explanation of why it is never used in the singular (one head of cattle???) and always with an unusual plural form. Which is what OP is asking for.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:23
But this metonymic usage in the dictionary link given offers no explanation of why it is never used in the singular (one head of cattle???) and always with an unusual plural form. Which is what OP is asking for.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:23
@Edwin: If you only have one head of cattle, you can always call it a "cow", a "steer", a "bull", or a "calf".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 20:39
@Edwin: If you only have one head of cattle, you can always call it a "cow", a "steer", a "bull", or a "calf".
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 20:39
@Peter: If YOU want to get that close ... The genderless 'neat' has been used, but doesn't seem very idiomatic.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 18 '13 at 11:21
@Peter: If YOU want to get that close ... The genderless 'neat' has been used, but doesn't seem very idiomatic.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 18 '13 at 11:21
add a comment |
Both heads and head are correct. It's simply more common to say head. Look up the term Isogloss as it explains this a bit more.
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:41
ryanryan
3
Why would the term ‘isogloss’ explain this? What does this have to do with isoglosses in any possible way? I for one have never heard of this as any kind of dialectal distinguisher.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Nov 17 '13 at 14:07
Why do you say "thirty heads of cattle" is grammatical? Do you have a justification for this?
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 14:45
Thirty head of cattle will have thirty heads. One hopes.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:26
add a comment |
Both heads and head are correct. It's simply more common to say head. Look up the term Isogloss as it explains this a bit more.
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:41
ryanryan
3
Why would the term ‘isogloss’ explain this? What does this have to do with isoglosses in any possible way? I for one have never heard of this as any kind of dialectal distinguisher.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Nov 17 '13 at 14:07
Why do you say "thirty heads of cattle" is grammatical? Do you have a justification for this?
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 14:45
Thirty head of cattle will have thirty heads. One hopes.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:26
add a comment |
Both heads and head are correct. It's simply more common to say head. Look up the term Isogloss as it explains this a bit more.
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:41
ryanryan
3
Both heads and head are correct. It's simply more common to say head. Look up the term Isogloss as it explains this a bit more.
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:41
ryanryan
3
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:41
ryanryan
3
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:41
ryanryan
3
answered Nov 17 '13 at 12:41
ryanryan
3
3
Why would the term ‘isogloss’ explain this? What does this have to do with isoglosses in any possible way? I for one have never heard of this as any kind of dialectal distinguisher.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Nov 17 '13 at 14:07
Why do you say "thirty heads of cattle" is grammatical? Do you have a justification for this?
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 14:45
Thirty head of cattle will have thirty heads. One hopes.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:26
add a comment |
Why would the term ‘isogloss’ explain this? What does this have to do with isoglosses in any possible way? I for one have never heard of this as any kind of dialectal distinguisher.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Nov 17 '13 at 14:07
Why do you say "thirty heads of cattle" is grammatical? Do you have a justification for this?
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 14:45
Thirty head of cattle will have thirty heads. One hopes.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:26
Why would the term ‘isogloss’ explain this? What does this have to do with isoglosses in any possible way? I for one have never heard of this as any kind of dialectal distinguisher.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Nov 17 '13 at 14:07
Why would the term ‘isogloss’ explain this? What does this have to do with isoglosses in any possible way? I for one have never heard of this as any kind of dialectal distinguisher.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
Nov 17 '13 at 14:07
Why do you say "thirty heads of cattle" is grammatical? Do you have a justification for this?
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 14:45
Why do you say "thirty heads of cattle" is grammatical? Do you have a justification for this?
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 14:45
Thirty head of cattle will have thirty heads. One hopes.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:26
Thirty head of cattle will have thirty heads. One hopes.
– Edwin Ashworth
Nov 17 '13 at 15:26
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');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
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%2f138042%2fthe-herd-of-cattle-had-grown-to-30-head-why-didnt-the-writer-write-30-heads%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');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
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');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
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');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
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
Extremely related and possibly counting as a duplicate: english.stackexchange.com/questions/119843/…
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 11:45
Please use capital letters and spaces between words in your question. This is an English language site after all.
– Mari-Lou A
Nov 17 '13 at 11:48
@Andrew: I don't think it's a duplicate. The duplicate would explain that people also say "five dozen" instead of "five dozens", "four score" instead of "four scores", and used to say "three pair" instead of "three pairs". I think there's a question like that, but I can't find it. Tangentially related Google Ngram.
– Peter Shor
Nov 17 '13 at 12:15
@PeterShor Perhaps it's this one then. But head refers to a single animal; using a different word like unit doesn't work the same way. Perhaps this question is the root question that the other one will be a duplicate of.
– Andrew Leach♦
Nov 17 '13 at 12:33
1
“30 head” isn't singular, it's plural. Perhaps you mean to ask why there's no s after head
– James Waldby - jwpat7
Nov 17 '13 at 17:21