Why Is It Called Pants And Not Pant at Samuel Skeyhill blog

Why Is It Called Pants And Not Pant. Calling them a pair of pantaloons, or pants, as they were eventually known, made sense when there were two components. Pants is short for pantaloons, which had a similar plural trait. At this point, fashion takes over. The answer is actually fairly straightforward. But the word pants is rooted in comedy. Trousers is plural partly because of a fairly simple misunderstanding. Ie, it is possible to have 1 pant (half a pair), 55 pants. It's because pants is short for pantaloons. The word would be shortened to ‘pants’ by the mid 19th century. It's the most common term for that very common piece of clothing that covers the body from the waist to the ankle (give or take), with a separate part for each leg. According to this site , the reason why pantaloons was plural is because the garment. In us english, the word pants isn't a particularly funny one. We’re reminded that we once answered a reader who asked why his wife put on a “pair of panties” but not a “pair of. And single pantaloon is one pant leg, so a pair of pantaloons became a pair of pants. However, there doesn’t seem to be much evidence in reference sources to support this theory.

Trousers is plural partly because of a fairly simple misunderstanding. The word would be shortened to ‘pants’ by the mid 19th century. In us english, the word pants isn't a particularly funny one. Pants, in common use, are actually collections of pairs, not a plural of pant. Calling them a pair of pantaloons, or pants, as they were eventually known, made sense when there were two components. According to this site , the reason why pantaloons was plural is because the garment. However, there doesn’t seem to be much evidence in reference sources to support this theory. Pants is short for pantaloons, which had a similar plural trait. Ie, it is possible to have 1 pant (half a pair), 55 pants. But the word pants is rooted in comedy.

Difference Between Trousers and Pants

Why Is It Called Pants And Not Pant Trousers is plural partly because of a fairly simple misunderstanding. The word would be shortened to ‘pants’ by the mid 19th century. The answer is actually fairly straightforward. At this point, fashion takes over. Pants, in common use, are actually collections of pairs, not a plural of pant. In us english, the word pants isn't a particularly funny one. The phrasing was retained even after pants were made into one complete garment. Calling them a pair of pantaloons, or pants, as they were eventually known, made sense when there were two components. But the word pants is rooted in comedy. It's the most common term for that very common piece of clothing that covers the body from the waist to the ankle (give or take), with a separate part for each leg. We’re reminded that we once answered a reader who asked why his wife put on a “pair of panties” but not a “pair of. However, there doesn’t seem to be much evidence in reference sources to support this theory. Pants is short for pantaloons, which had a similar plural trait. According to this site , the reason why pantaloons was plural is because the garment. And single pantaloon is one pant leg, so a pair of pantaloons became a pair of pants. Ie, it is possible to have 1 pant (half a pair), 55 pants.