Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

12
  • 11
    Noyce answer!!!
    – Mitch
    Commented Jul 22, 2016 at 19:37
  • 1
    @V0ight Oops, good point. I don’t think there’s any doubt or lack of consensus that these words has plurals in -iz in Proto-Germanic—I just changed my mind halfway through about whether I wanted to give simple nominative plural forms (like I ended up doing for hūsō), or abstract plural stems (like mūsi-). Fixing now! Commented Jul 22, 2016 at 20:07
  • 3
    But the plural of house is not regular! Unlike spouses, the s becomes voiced in the plural: houzes.
    – TonyK
    Commented Jul 22, 2016 at 22:01
  • 2
    @TonyK That varies from speaker to speaker. Some say houzes, some say housez; some say spouzes, some say spousez. It’s true that that particular variation is not quite regular, but the plural ending itself is the most regular one available, and it was added on to make the plural regular. The dissimilative metathesis (if it really is dissimilative… not sure there) most likely came later than the addition of the plural marker. Added comment. Commented Jul 22, 2016 at 22:11
  • 2
    @tchrist The Italian state of affairs are actually more satisfactorily explained by assuming that their plural endings also come from the accusative (albeit with some interplay from lingering nominatives). I've heard that the same is true for Romanian, but I left it out because I don't know nearly enough about Romanian to be able to say. Commented Jul 23, 2016 at 6:02