1028. This week, we look at the weird situation when you want to add a suffix (such as "-less") to a plural-only noun such as "pants" or "scissors" — with a fun detour for some pants-related idioms. Then, with a new "Beetlejuice" in theaters, we look at the fascinating origin of the name and its role in mythology throughout the ages.
1028. This week, we look at the weird situation when you want to add a suffix (such as "-less") to a plural-only noun such as "pants" or "scissors" — with a fun detour for some pants-related idioms. Then, with a new "Beetlejuice" in theaters, we look at the fascinating origin of the name and its role in mythology throughout the ages.
The "pantless" segment is by Jim Norrena, MFA, who has been writing and editing for more than thirty-five years. He’s the founder and principal editor at TypoSuction.com, an independent editing/writing service. He taught grammar and copyediting intensives and professional proofreading workshops at Media Alliance and served as events coordinator for Bay Area Editors’ Forum (BAEF). Visit Linkedin.com/in/jimnorrena/ for his complete work history and highlighted projects.
The "Beetlejuice" segment was written by Samantha Enslen who runs Dragonfly Editorial. You can find her at DragonflyEditorial.com.
🔗 Share your familect recording in a WhatsApp chat.
🔗 Watch my LinkedIn Learning writing courses.
🔗 Subscribe to the newsletter.
🔗 Take our advertising survey.
🔗 Get the edited transcript.
🔗 Get Grammar Girl books.
🔗 Join Grammarpalooza. Get ad-free and bonus episodes at Apple Podcasts or Subtext. Learn more about the difference.
| HOST: Mignon Fogarty
| VOICEMAIL: 833-214-GIRL (833-214-4475).
| Grammar Girl is part of the Quick and Dirty Tips podcast network.
| Theme music by Catherine Rannus.
| Grammar Girl Social Media Links: YouTube. TikTok. Facebook.Threads. Instagram. LinkedIn. Mastodon.
Grammar Girl here. I’m Mignon Fogarty, your friendly guide to the English language. We talk about writing, history, rules, and other cool stuff. Today, we're going to talk about whether you are pantless or pantsless in your Zoom calls and about the origin of Betelgeuse.
by Jim Norrena
Some weird English nouns are only plural, and they're called "plurale tantum," which fittingly, is Latin for “plural only.” (Its plural is "pluralia tantum.") They’re also called binary nouns. According to The Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar, these unique nouns typically—but not always — end with the letter “s,” and the items themselves commonly consist of two parts like “pants,” “scissors,” “glasses,” “leggings,” “pliers,” “jeans,” and so forth, although “clothes” and “folk,” each a true plurale tantum, frequently represent more than two things.
But even though these plurale tantum are singular count nouns, the rule is that they always take a plural verb—wild, right?
Well, even Richard Lederer in his book "Crazy English" asks, “Doesn’t it seem just a little loopy that we can make amends but never just one amend; that no matter how carefully we comb through the annals of history, we can never discover just one annal; that we can never… be in a doldrum, or get a jitter, a willy… a jimjam, or a heebie-jeebie?” (1)
While the word “pants” seems easy enough to define, how it’s treated grammatically, especially considering how it’s evolved, can raise pesky issues for even the most accomplished writer, editor, or reader.
Let’s look at two examples of these quirky nouns: “pants” and “scissors.”
Aardvark’s pants are brand-new. (We don’t say Aardvark’s pants is brand-new because “pants” takes a plural verb. And it just sounds awkward.)
Squiggly’s scissors are in his backpack. (We wouldn’t say Squiggly’s scissors is in his backpack because, again, it’s incorrect and sounds dreadful.)
Remember — a plurale tantum never takes a singular verb. But if you rely on your intuition based on how the sentence sounds, you’ll almost certainly get it right every time.
There are trickier situations we’ll get to in a minute, but speaking of intuition, here’s a little aside:
Most of us have heard the expression “to fly by the seat of your pants,” which means to do or take action without a plan, to go by feel, or to make spontaneous decisions.
In other words, relying on intuition or instinct:
Because Squiggly didn’t know how to play chess, he had to fly by the seat of his pants to stay in the game. That is, he had to trust his intuition.
The saying can be traced back to World War II when planes often had limited reliable instrument panels, occasionally requiring pilots to trust the feel of the plane’s engine, located directly beneath their seats, to literally fly by the seat of their pants to navigate effectively. (2)
But notice how the expression changes when “to fly” is omitted so that you just have “… by the seat of your pants,” which means by a narrow margin:
Squiggly won the chess game by the seat of his pants. This means he narrowly won the game. The expressions are similar, but different.
We call such phrases idioms, which are sayings that have a figurative meaning that differs from their literal meaning.
Other “pants”-related idioms (3) include “ants in your pants” which describes someone who has become excitable or anxious; a “smartypants,” which is someone who shows off their knowledge; “Who wears the pants?” which means to ask who’s in charge; “Keep your pants on!” which is a way of saying, “Don’t rush me”; and “to be caught with your pants down,” which describes a person who is unprepared, or embarrassed, or both.
Idioms are fun and can add flavor to your writing, but to avoid sounding overly cliché, try not to overuse them: less is more.
Now let's return to our friends, those pluralia tantum nouns.
If relying on your instinct seems too unconventional, an effective workaround to form a standard singular noun-verb agreement is to just add the expression “a pair of” before “pants” or any other binary noun that ends in the letter “s.”
A pair of pants is necessary for Aardvark to attend his job interview.
Squiggly understands a pair of scissors is needed to complete his art project.
Notice the singular noun “pair” now agrees with the singular verb “is.” Problem solved. (And although “pair” can be either singular or plural, it’s singular in this usage.)
Alternatively, if you want to avoid sounding awkward or possibly confusing your readers, you can always rewrite the sentence:
Aardvark needs a pair of pants for his interview.
Squiggly needs a pair of scissors for his art project.
The rewrites are inarguably shorter and clearer. Again, problem solved.
(Want to learn more about pluralia tantum? Visit the “Quick and Dirty Tips” podcast “12 Nouns That Are Always Plural.”)
Now let’s go one step further: Not only are pluralia tantum exceptional nouns but also tricky adjectives when adding the suffix “-less” as in “pantless.” Do we write “pantless” or “pantsless?” And similarly, is it “scissorless” or “scissorsless?”
Clearly, “less” is more … more work, that is.
To answer this, let’s look at how we decide what makes a word correct in the first place.
We often start with a dictionary, but dictionaries can differ, and not all dictionaries have entries for pluralia tantum with the suffix “-less.” Merriam-Webster doesn’t list “pantless” or “pantsless,” for example, but the Oxford English Dictionary does list both “pantless” and “trouserless,” but not “pantsless.”
After dictionaries, we usually go to usage guides like The Chicago Manual of Style and the AP Stylebook, but neither of these guides have formal entries on how to add the "-less" suffix to these kinds of nouns.
This raises the question of whether “pantsless” is a valid word solely because it exists online. Because “pantsless” doesn’t exist in dictionaries or usage guides, do you risk getting caught with your pants down because it can be regarded as incorrect? Well, realistically, these words are so uncommon that readers are unlikely to have opinions about one over the other, and since they’re both used about equally online, “pantsless” is unlikely to jump out at people as wrong. It’s really just the word-loving nerds like us who may start to wonder.
And wonder we do! We know “pant leg” is perfectly acceptable, and so is “pants leg,” according to the late grammarian John Lawler, University of Michigan professor of English: “Both are common, and it doesn’t matter which one you use.”
Again, that leads to the conclusion that “pantless” and “pantsless” could each be correct, which Google N-Gram Viewer confirms as each has sharply risen in usage as of 1995.
“Well, this is all interesting,” you might say, “but what’s a writer to do?”
You have to pick one, and we come down slightly on the side of “pantless” since it’s the only one in the OED.
Further, we asked the editors at The Chicago Manual of Style and were thrilled when they answered our question almost immediately on their Q&A blog, actually beating us to publication. (If you remember my interview with them back in September [2024], they only answer a small number of the hundreds of questions they get every month.) They said:
“We can’t cite a rule [for adding the suffix '-less' to a plurale tantum], but we know that the suffix ‘-less’ almost always gets added to the singular form of a noun,” noting examples like “shoeless” and “toothless.” (4) Thanks, Richard!
To summarize, you can write either “pantless” or “pantsless,” which is also true for “scissorless” or “scissorsless.” But because “scissorsless” is somewhat awkward to say, “scissorless” is probably the better choice just like "pantless."
Finally, sometimes these adjectives are just easier to read by hyphenating them, like “goggles-less,” “pliers-less,” and, yes, “pant-less.” Or, as mentioned earlier, for best readability, you can always rewrite something that sounds awkward.
However you decide — dictionary, popular usage, or sound — you can make a rule by adding your preferred spelling to your in-house style guide. Doing so will uphold consistency, which we all love.
Because no hard-and-fast rules exist, at the end of the day you’ll just have to … you guessed it — fly by the seat of your pants — but know you’re in good company.
And finally, I have two more fun “pant”-related stories for you.
First, “pant” and “trouser” as standalone singular nouns didn’t exist until quite recently. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (5th ed.) adds: “The use of the singular pant is largely confined to the fields of design, textiles, and fashion.” Only in these industries is “a black pant” or “a wide-legged trouser” recognized. (Speculation has it that because garment names are said so often, repeatedly saying “a pair of” is cumbersome.) (5)
(On a sidenote, this is an excellent example of how language evolves.)
And second, since we’ve been so focused on “pants,” here’s a funny background story cited in Merriam-Webster about its parent word “pantaloons.” It can be traced back in time to a bumbling, dishonest stock figure by the name of Pantalone (or Pantaleone) who was involved in the commedia dell’arte, a form of Italian comic theater popular throughout Europe during the 16th to 18th centuries. He was known for wearing tight, red breeches and stockings, which were eventually replaced by long trousers.
Then during the Restoration in England, such trousers became known as “pantaloons,” based on Pantalone. By the early 20th century, Americans abandoned “trousers” in favor of “pants,” a shortened version of pantaloons, and this eventually led to “underpants” and “panties,” both of which are … you guessed it — pluralia tantum!
To this day, the British still get a giggle whenever they hear Americans use the word “pants,” because to them it means only undergarments. (6)
That segment was written by Jim Norrena, MFA, who has been writing and editing for more than thirty-five years. He’s the founder and principal editor at TypoSuction.com, an independent editing/writing service. He taught grammar and copyediting intensives and professional proofreading workshops at Media Alliance and served as events coordinator for Bay Area Editors’ Forum (BAEF). You can find him at LinkedIn.
By Samantha Enslen
The second volume of the movie "Beetlejuice" is in theaters. So with that in mind, we thought we'd look into the meaning of the word "Beetlejuice." Is it really just the name of a mischievous ghost?
Here’s the scoop.
The real Betelgeuse — spelled B-E-T-E-L-G-E-U-S-E — is a star. It forms the right shoulder of the constellation Orion, known as “the hunter” or “the giant.” It’s one of the brightest stars in the night sky and one of the largest. It’s some 10,000 times brighter than our sun and about 700 times as big. It has a reddish-orange glow. And it’s a “variable star,” which means its brightness changes in intensity over time.
For all these reasons, Betelgeuse was noticed by the earliest humans. And it’s been a part of many mythologies ever since.
For example, the ancient Egyptians put Betelgeuse in their constellation Osiris, named for the god of the underworld.
Australian Aborigines saw Betelgeuse as the right hand of the hunter Nyeeruna, holding a club that could fill up with “fire magic.” That fire waxed and waned over time as Nyeeruna fought his enemies — just as the star’s brightness fades and renews over time.
In Greek mythology, Betelgeuse again forms the shoulder of the great hunter Orion, killed by a great scorpion, usually identified with the constellation Scorpio. In fact, when Scorpio rises in the night sky, Orion sets.
And in some of the myths of the Americas, Betelgeuse was seen as a wound on Orion, which makes sense considering its red color.
The word “Betelgeuse” has a curious history involving mistranslations and typos in ancient manuscripts. The short version is that Betelgeuse comes from the Medieval Latin “Beldelgenze,” which comes from a misreading of the Arabic “yad al-jawzāʼ,” meaning "the hand of Orion."
And the star has another name too, given to it in the 1600s: Alpha Orionis, meaning the brightest star in Orion. Scientists still call it that, even though they now know that Rigel is actually the brightest star in Orion.
In any case, if you go see the movie "Beetlejuice," know that you’re just the latest in the long history of humans who have been fascinated by this mysterious star.
That segment was written by Samantha Enslen, who runs Dragonfly Editorial. You can find her at DragonflyEditorial.com.
Finally, I have a familect story from Dan.
Hey, Mignon. How's it going? It's Dan, the audio editor.
I always enjoy editing the Grammar Girl podcast. And one of my favorite parts is always the familect, getting to hear feedback from the listeners and their familect stories.
I thought I would leave you a voicemail here and tell you about one of the familects in our house.
When we bought our house, there was a promotion to get a $20 gift card after a soft-water equipment salesman came to visit. When he came to visit, part of his pitch was all about all of the rock in the water.
I assume he's talking about the calcium and all of the other things that hard water has in it, but it was just funny to hear him say rock in the water. He repeatedly used the phrase — how the rock in the water would destroy our appliances, our plumbing, our hair, our skin, our clothes, our teeth.
You name it.
Well, it's been 11 years, and if something breaks in the house, I always blame it on the rock in the water.
The toaster breaks, it's the rock in the water. Button falls off a T-shirt, rock in the water. $17,808 plumbing bill for a broken sewer line. You guessed it.
Anyways, thank you and look forward to editing more of the Grammar Girl podcast. Bye-bye.
Thanks Dan, that made me laugh out loud, and I love hearing familects from people on the team.
For you listeners, Dan was my very first audio producer, and he's been on the Quick and Dirty Tips team ever since, and I'm glad to be working with you again, Dan, after all these years. Eighteen years, can you believe it?
Thanks for sharing your story.
If you want to share your familect story to play on the show like Dan just did, give me a call at the voicemail line 83-321-4-GIRL.
I'll put it in the show notes and be sure to tell me the story because that's always the best part.
Grammar Girl is a Quick and Dirty Tips podcast. Thanks to Nat Hoopes and Davina Tomlin in marketing; Holly Hutchings in digital operations; Morgan Christianson in advertising; Brannan Goetschius, director of podcasts; and Dan Feierabend in audio, who says he's a political junkie (which is why I got the show to him a little earlier than usual this week).
And I'm Mignon Fogarty, better known as Grammar Girl and author of the tip-a-day book "The Grammar Daily." That's all. Thanks for listening.
**
The following references for the "pantless" segment did not appear in the audio but are included here for completeness.
REFERENCES
1. Pinker, Steven. Words and Rules: The Ingredients of Language. US: Basic Books (A Member of the Perseus Books Group), 1999.
2. “Aviation Innovation: Flying by the Seat…”. Smithsonian National Postal Museum. https://postalmuseum.si.edu/exhibition/fad-to-fundamental-airmail-in-america-airmail-flight-school-by-the-seat-of-your-pants-7 (accessed September 29, 2024).
3. “What does the saying 'Keep your pants on' mean?”. Flynn, Richard. Using English.com. https://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/keep+your+pants+on.html (accessed October 7, 2024).
4. The Chicago Manual of Style Online. The University of Chicago Press. https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/qanda/latest.html (subscription required; last accessed October 7, 2024).
5. Hendrickson, Robert. Word and Phrase Origins, 3rd ed. NY: Checkmark Books (an imprint of Facts on File, Inc.), 2004.
6. “Pants in British English: A Grammatical and Cultural Comparison Unveiled.” Derek Cupp. IASCE.net. https://iasce.net/british-pants-cultural-comparison/ (accessed September 29, 2024).
__________________________
ADDITIONAL RESOURCES
Chalker, Sylvia and Weiner, Edmund. Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar. NY: Oxford University Press, 1994.
Craig, Ruth Parlé and Hopper, Vincent F. 1001 Pitfalls in English Grammar, 3rd ed. US: Barron’s Educational Series, Inc.,1986.
Funk, Charles Earle. 2107 Curious Word Origins, Sayings & Expressions. NJ: Galahad Books (a division of BBS Publishing Corporation), 1986.
Stillman, Anne. Grammatically Correct: The Writer’s Essential Guide to Punctuation, Spelling, Style, Usage and Grammar. OH: Writer’s Digest Books (an imprint of F + W Publications, Inc.), 1997.
Thurman, Susan. The Everything Grammar and Style Book: All the Rules You Need to Know to Master Great Writing. Adams Media (an F + W Publications Company). MA: 2002.
**
The following references for the "Beetlejuice" segment did not appear in the audio but are included here for completeness.
Barbuzano, Javier. Aboriginal Australians Observed Red Giant Stars’ Variability. Sky & Telescope website. October 13, 2017.
Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Betelgeuse. Oct. 5, 2024
Etymology Online. Betelgeuse.
Gold, Chelsea. What is Betelgeuse? Inside the Strange, Volatile Star. NASA website. May 3, 2023.
Johnson, Daniel. Meet Betelgeuse, the Red Giant of Orion. Sky & Telescope website. June 1, 2018.
Merriam-Webster online. Betelgeuse.
Wilk, Stephen R. Further Mythological Evidence for Ancient Knowledge of Variable Stars. Journal of the American Association of Variable Star Observers, Vol. 27, 1999.