View Full Version : Grammar questions
Here's a tricky one, maybe.
The Ardman animation character Shaun the Sheep, if there are lots of them is it Shaun the Sheep or Shaun the Sheeps?
Obviously sheep is plural but if Shaun the Sheep is his name would Sheeps be correct?
Stryder5
21-10-2019, 19:20
If he's the only one it's Shaun the Sheep, if it belongs to Sean it's Sean the sheep's.:)
If there were many with the name Sean the Sheep, then it would still be Sean the Sheep?
:eek:
Gary
But in the context of lots of statues of said character?
Here's a tricky one, maybe.
The Ardman animation character Shaun the Sheep, if there are lots of them is it Shaun the Sheep or Shaun the Sheeps?
Obviously sheep is plural but if Shaun the Sheep is his name would Sheeps be correct?
No, because 'sheeps' is wrong in any context. You would simply state how many 'Shan the Sheep' characters there were.
For example, as in this sentence: 'There were twenty Shaun the Sheep characters at the fancy-dress party', or whatever... You wouldn't say: 'There were twenty Shaun the Sheeps at the fancy-dress party'.
Marco.
I'm not so sure.
As I said, if it's his name then the plural could properly be Sheeps.
For example a room full of people called John Smith would be a room full of John Smiths
Marco.. An expert sheep man, [emoji23]
Good grief, Marco's parties must be a riot with 20 sheep attending.
Hate to think of clearing up in the morning.
My brother kept sheep. He found it great therapy. And humbling as to how tough they are
Stryder5
21-10-2019, 20:43
I'm not so sure.
As I said, if it's his name then the plural could properly be Sheeps.
For example a room full of people called John Smith would be a room full of John Smiths
But Smith is not a plural 'per se ', unless it's a job function, but then it's not someone's name.
Gary
They taste good tooIndeed. My bro was not just keeping them for his health lol
As for plural of sheep, it's sheep in English. Although in middle German it was sheepe
Pigmy Pony
21-10-2019, 21:47
I'm not so sure.
As I said, if it's his name then the plural could properly be Sheeps.
For example a room full of people called John Smith would be a room full of John Smiths
Following that logic a field full of sheep called Shaun would be a field full of Shauns
Pigmy Pony
21-10-2019, 21:52
Good grief, Marco's parties must be a riot with 20 sheep attending.
Hate to think of clearing up in the morning.
Apparently the highlight of his parties are the "Shorn the sheep show". They clean up afterwards using the discarded wool.
Don't know what he does to them, but his guests always look a bit sheepish next morning
Picture taken from the 'mating ceremony' at my last party:
https://imagizer.imageshack.com/v2/1024x768q90/921/tYKB7U.jpg
I'm the dude at the end in his Xmas jumper getting a 'nice kiss' from Bessie.
Marco.
This is a daft discussion - if there were lots of sheep called Shaun then you wouldn’t even say Shaun the Sheep because nobody would know which one you were on about. The name only came into use because obviously there is, and can only be, one.
This is a daft discussion - if there were lots of sheep called Shaun then you wouldn’t even say Shaun the Sheep because nobody would know which one you were on about. The name only came into use because obviously there is, and can only be, one.Reminds me of the joke about the single mum who had many children with the same first name. When asked how she distinguishes between them she said "I use their surname of course."
§
Landloper
22-10-2019, 16:37
Here's a tricky one, maybe.
The Ardman animation character Shaun the Sheep, if there are lots of them is it Shaun the Sheep or Shaun the Sheeps?
Obviously sheep is plural but if Shaun the Sheep is his name would Sheeps be correct?
Obviously the plural of 'Shaun the Sheep' is 'Shauns the Sheep'.
Singular: Shaun
Plural: Shauns
Singular: Sheep
Plural: Sheep
What is the plural of 'Bob the Builder', or say Richard the Lionheart?
Bobs the builder? Etc pluralism the noun not the adjective
John the baptist is interesting. No idea but would go with baptists'john
Bobs the builder? Etc pluralism the noun not the adjective
It might be if "builder" was an adjectival noun as in 'Builder Bob'.
Light Dependant Resistor
23-10-2019, 03:32
What is the plural of 'Bob the Builder', or say Richard the Lionheart?
I think more than one, might be Bob the Builders, and Richard the Lionheart's the plural being inherited by their occupation, noting I
have not come across too many Lionheart's in recent times. I will have to get out more often, I suppose . :)
Obviously the plural of 'Shaun the Sheep' is 'Shauns the Sheep'.
Singular: Shaun
Plural: Shauns
Singular: Sheep
Plural: Sheep
Yup. As I said, "sheeps" is incorrect in ANY context. However, try using "Shauns the Sheep" in a context where the pluralisation (or even the subject itself) is immediately obvious, and that's where difficulties arise, such as within this sentence:
'There were forty Shauns the Sheep at the fancy-dress party'.
Your immediate reaction is to think 'Eh?:scratch:'. The capitalisation of the subject might be a giveaway, but otherwise the sentence is inelegant and rather confusing. Only after re-reading it, perhaps more than once, does the contextual relevance and pluralisation of "Shauns the Sheep" become apparent.
That's why adding a descriptive term (as below) and dropping the pluralisation of 'Shaun' and 'Sheep', however grammatically correct, clarifies matters. After all, if people can't understand what you mean, it's pointless simply being grammatically correct;)
'There were forty Shaun the Sheep TV characters at the fancy-dress party'. The required pluralisation is therefore handled by the use of the word 'characters', and 'TV' tells you what it is, so the whole thing instantly makes sense:)
Ultimately, it's about communicating effectively, not just being grammatically correct.
Marco.
yup, im of a mind that if it sounds, or even looks strange its probably not right
walpurgis
23-10-2019, 07:55
yup, im of a mind that if it sounds, or even looks strange its probably not right
You should meet my missus. :eek:
You should meet my missus. :eek:
:lolsign::lolsign:
It also depends on context. If I was just chatting to someone, and the subject of how many people were dressed as Shaun the Sheep at a fancy dress party, I'd probably say 'There were forty Shaun the Sheeps' to avoid a convoluted but grammatically correct sentence.
Correct grammar matters mainly to avoid ambiguity and clarify meaning, and, as George Orwell put it:
'But one can often be in doubt about the effect of a word or a phrase, and one needs rules that one can rely on when instinct fails. I think the following rules will cover most cases:
Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
Never use a long word where a short one will do.
If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
Never use the passive where you can use the active.
Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.'
The last of these is exemplified by Churchill's 'This is the sort of nonsense up with which I will not put' to demonstrate the ludicrous effect of following a rule of grammar (not ending a sentence with a preposition) too closely.
I would agree with your first paragraph. And this:
Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
...is spot on. It's a major bugbear of mine when folk do so, simply to act smart, score points or convey an 'air of superiority'. If it's unclear and you don't explain what you mean, you're not informing anyone, far less impressing them!
That happens often, for example, during technical discussions on forums about audio, where those who are scientifically and/or technically minded often take it for granted that the meaning of a certain word, or a piece of jargon [or worse a bloody graph!!:rolleyes:] will be automatically understood by everyone. It's not only presumptuous, but arrogant.
Worse though is when <insert any subject, word or phrase you like> is considered by someone as being 'common knowledge', often because they're too lazy to explain themselves properly. Well, whatever it is, is only 'common knowledge' if you've heard it mentioned or read about it somewhere!:doh:
What constitutes as 'common knowledge'? It's entirely subjective. However, you can't just presume that the people you're addressing are as well informed on any matter as you, or have the same interests. I have no time whatsoever for snooty, so-called 'know-it-alls'.
Marco.
walpurgis
23-10-2019, 08:43
I agree, some seem unable to speak or write plain English.
Indeed, and the possible reasons for that warrant a topic of their own!;)
Marco.
Stratmangler
23-10-2019, 16:20
How many sheeps?
dave2010
23-10-2019, 17:39
No, because 'sheeps' is wrong in any context. You would simply state how many 'Shan the Sheep' characters there were.
For example, as in this sentence: 'There were twenty Shaun the Sheep characters at the fancy-dress party', or whatever... You wouldn't say: 'There were twenty Shaun the Sheeps at the fancy-dress party'.
Marco.But in spoken, as opposed to written English, one might very well say something like "there were twenty Shaun the Sheeps", though on the other hand one might say "we all went as Shaun the Sheep - all twenty of us". You are right about putting the word "characters" in for clarity, but in spoken English we don't normally do that - do we?
Ewe wot?
Marco.Six sheep ewe thrunter headed twinter chaser. Lol
walpurgis
23-10-2019, 17:50
Baa to the lot of ewe.
Audio Al
23-10-2019, 17:56
Grammar is important , But hifi is importanter :)
Light Dependant Resistor
23-10-2019, 18:30
Baa to the lot of ewe.
To ram it home :lol:
walpurgis
23-10-2019, 18:31
it's all out muttony!
Six sheep ewe thrunter headed twinter chaser. Lol
Soz, dat's gobbledygook to moi.... Care to elaborate?:)
Marco.
Lawrence001
23-10-2019, 20:39
This reminds me of my old economics teacher at school who said that the plural of Trade Union is Trades Unions not Trade Unions as most said. I was always careful afterwards to use that, but I later realised that if they were a single "trade" (eg Teaching) then Trade Unions would probably be correct.
Sent from my POT-LX1 using Tapatalk
This reminds me of my old economics teacher at school who said that the plural of Trade Union is Trades Unions not Trade Unions as most said. I was always careful afterwards to use that, but I later realised that if they were a single "trade" (eg Teaching) then Trade Unions would probably be correct.
Sent from my POT-LX1 using Tapatalk
But since most large "Trade Unions" cater for those working in several trades, why isn't any one Union described as a Trades Union?
Pigmy Pony
23-10-2019, 21:47
But since most large "Trade Unions" cater for those working in several trades, why isn't any one Union described as a Trades Union?
Yes, you can have several trades in one union, but surely not several unions for one trade. Would make a nonsense of the word 'union'. I think this teacher was probably correct.
Well the TUC stands for Trades Union Congress - so that answers my question, and perhaps implies the plural of Trades Union is 'Trades Unions'.
Private Eye memorably translated the acronym for the (now defunct) printing union NATSOPA as National Association of Trained Strikers and Overpaid Piss-Artists.
Six sheep ewe thrunter headed twinter chaser. Lol
Soz, dat's gobbledygook to moi.... Care to elaborate?:)
Marco.
:popcorn::popcorn:
Yo Granty, could you explain what you were on about above?
Sounds like a foreign lingo to me!;)
Marco.
:popcorn::popcorn:
Yo Granty, could you explain what you were on about above?
Sounds like a foreign lingo to me!;)
Marco.A thrunter is a 3y old and a twinter is a younger 2y old.. [emoji23]
Lol... Never heard of that. Is it some form of Scottish lingo, or did you just make it up?
Marco.
Lol... Never heard of that. Is it some form of Scottish lingo, or did you just make it up?
Marco.
just sheep age terms, although not well used
A bit more context, a few years ago a number of Shaun the Sheep statues were placed around Bristol and were then auctioned off for charity, most were bought by local businesses for display purposes
Now on seeing one of those statues would you say "there's one of those Shaun the Sheep(s) " or another example "I've seen four Shaun the Sheep(s) today"
would probably add characters to end
just sheep age terms, although not well used
Ah I see, well that's a new one for me!:)
Marco.
Ah I see, well that's a new one for me!:)
Marco.
great words tho... anything that can play the imagination is good
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2026 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.