Comments for Jincy Willett

Comment on Why I Love Automatic Translation by Harriet Golding

Harriet Golding — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 07:07:22 +0000

Saw you today at Lit. Women. You were, by far, the best speaker. You came across as so REAL, in contrast to the previous slick presentation. You must be a great friend to know. I have just sent for 2 of your books.

Comment on Nouns That Can Only Be Plural by Rebecca Chekouras

Rebecca Chekouras — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 00:00:42 +0000

habeas corpus (just kidding)

Comment on Guter Kummer! II by Jincy

Jincy — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:25:28 +0000

Thanks, Tobias!

Comment on Guter Kummer! II by Tobias Hartung

Tobias Hartung — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:06:53 +0000

Just ignore it! I have sold ‘Die Dramaturgie des Totens’ well, I still think it’s one of the most original books of the last year! My favorite customers loved it too.. Snowy greetings from Germany!

Comment on Nouns That Can Only Be Plural by Siri Gottlieb

Siri Gottlieb — Sat, 23 Jan 2010 03:32:35 +0000

I read your book review in the NYT and sought you out on the internet. I’m a newcomer to this delicious site. Just feel I should mention, though, that “kudos” is not plural. It is a Greek word meaning honor, glory or acclaim, and is singular.
Correct: Much kudos to you for pulling it off.
Incorrect: Many kudos to you for pulling it off.
Most people aren’t aware of this, but it never hurts to do it right.

Comment on Two New Lists!! by Jane Grieve

Jane Grieve — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 12:15:57 +0000

Jincy – I love the name Jincy Willett – did you make it up? Fabulous. And I loved your book “The Writing Class”, which is the only one of yours I’ve read so far having just discovered it. If I lived in the US I would take one of your classes but I don’t, I’m an Aussie. I appreciate your use of words, it’s great. Of course, you Americans make up words and change the spelling -’pajamas’ – Ha! You mean ‘pyjamas’ – I could go on, but vive la difference and all that. I hate to have to admit that some Australians use the word “pant” to describe one pair of pants, so that blows that one. (They think it’s rather a posh thing to say.)
Anyway, you go girl; what a great mind! Best wishes Jane Grieve (tallish, short-real-life-story writer who will, apparently, never make big bucks WHAT A SHAME, DAMN DAMN DAMN. Oh well.)

Comment on Nouns That Can Only Be Plural by Jincy

Jincy — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:52:31 +0000

Thanks for binoculars, glasses, coveralls, tweezers, tongs, and tights. Not sure about nylons, though. I can imagine the singular of “nylons” being used, as in, “Nylons are cheaper than pantyhose, because if you get a run in one nylon, you can always substitute another.”

Comment on Nouns That Can Only Be Plural by Caitlin

Caitlin — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:40:18 +0000

Hmm–interesting!

I can think of a few other “things with two parts”-type words: binoculars, glasses.

More “things with legs”: tights, nylons, coveralls.

Other pointy scissors/pliers-like things: tweezers, tongs.

I can’t think offhand of others in the thanks/congratulations vein, but I’m going to ponder!

Comment on Nouns That Can Only Be Plural by Jincy

Jincy — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:41:51 +0000

I think cattle is a collective noun, like sheep, or populace…

What I’m looking for are nouns that end in “s” and can only be plural. The point is that if a plural ends in “s” it should logically be able to lose the “s” and be singular. But you can’t do that with pants, scissors, and thanks.

Hi, Meg!!

Comment on Nouns That Can Only Be Plural by Meg Baker

Meg Baker — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:35:20 +0000

More plural nouns:

cattle
mail

And yet some are determinedly singular:

hair
moose

I might add that cattle is the only generic word I can come up with for cows and bulls together, which has always frustrated me since it seems to refer to the meat version, but not the dairy variety. Why isn’t there a generic form like sheep, goats, chickens, turkeys, etc? Are there other animal words like this?