[OT] "its" vs. "it's"

[Lew]

Well, I have my Oxford Dictionary if that counts ...
Says right there:
per·son, /noun/ (pl. people or, esp. in formal use, per·sons)

That /kind of/ settles that.

And "peoples" is the plural of "people".

 

[Wildemar Wildenburger]

[snip good evidence and vicious insults]
All three of those sources agree that "persons" is a valid plural, but
disagree as to whether "people" is a valid plural. This answers the
question as asked, when and whether "persons" is a valid plural - not
only is it valid, since the 13th century (i.e., the development of
modern English), but by some standards it is preferred.

OK, but now a question to you, and everybody else:

How and when do you (personally) use the word persons?

(not a challange, I just want to know)
/W

 

[Wildemar Wildenburger]

And "peoples" is the plural of "people".

Yes, for Christ's sake! We got that a long time ago.

How naggy ... ts-ts ...

Also, does this mean that peoples is sort of a super-plural of person?
Like several instances of several instances of a person?

/W

 

[Christian]

Yes, for Christ's sake! We got that a long time ago.

How naggy ... ts-ts ...

Also, does this mean that peoples is sort of a super-plural of person?
Like several instances of several instances of a person?

/W

In german peoples would mean something like "Völker"
so yes but you seldom have this multiple multiple relation..
as multiple multiple condense usually into multiple.

 

[Patricia Shanahan]

Yes, for Christ's sake! We got that a long time ago.

How naggy ... ts-ts ...

Also, does this mean that peoples is sort of a super-plural of person?
Like several instances of several instances of a person?

Babelfish English to German translates "peoples" to "Volker". It
translates "people" to "Leute". German to English maps both "Leute" and
"Volk" to people.

"People" seems to be used in two different ways, as a sort of plural of
person, and as a group of people somewhat like a nationality but not
quite (Volk?).

In the second sense: "All the peoples of the European Community have a
common interest in limiting European bureaucracy."

Patricia


Patricia

 

[RedGrittyBrick]

Also, does this mean that peoples is sort of a super-plural of person?
Like several instances of several instances of a person?

As in "the English speaking peoples"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_History_of_the_English-Speaking_Peoples.

 

[Wildemar Wildenburger]

In german peoples would mean something like "Völker"
so yes but you seldom have this multiple multiple relation..
as multiple multiple condense usually into multiple.

Urm ... how can I put this ...

JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!JOKE!


/W

 

[Wildemar Wildenburger]

Babelfish English to German translates "peoples" to "Volker".

No way? I mean John -> Johannes makes sense, as does William ->
Willhelm, but peoples -> Volker? No way am I gonna accept that!

(Note: Volker is a German(?) name. Well, how some people here are called
anyway. The word you mean is Völker)

It
translates "people" to "Leute". German to English maps both "Leute" and
"Volk" to people.

Babelfish knows quite a lot. To elaborate even more: "Leute" means
"bunch of humans", whereas "Volk" means ...

"People" seems to be used in two different ways, as a sort of plural of
person, and as a group of people somewhat like a nationality but not
quite (Volk?).

.... exactly that.

/W

 

[Mike Schilling]

[snip good evidence and vicious insults]
All three of those sources agree that "persons" is a valid plural, but
disagree as to whether "people" is a valid plural. This answers the
question as asked, when and whether "persons" is a valid plural - not
only is it valid, since the 13th century (i.e., the development of modern
English), but by some standards it is preferred.

OK, but now a question to you, and everybody else:

How and when do you (personally) use the word persons?

(not a challange, I just want to know)

Only in very formal contexts. Never in everyday speech.

 

[Almond]

The reference, and Merriam-Webster is pretty reliable,

Did you check it against the star calendar?
Or God himself wispered this in your elephant sized ears?

makes it sound like
"people" is an alternate plural for "person", not even the preferred one.
There is no, repeat, no special note under "person" on m-w.com

Seid hail!

--
The most powerful Usenet tool you have ever heard of.
NewsMaestro v. 4.0.5 - Way Too Cool has been released.

Automatic enablement of all buttons, checkboxes and fields
depending on operation.
Templates generator improvements.

Job list improvements for new installations having no jobs
to begin with.

In some previous releases some class files were missing.
As a result, the program would not run.
Sorry for the inconvenience.

Multi-job support and other important feature additions
and various improvements and optimizations.

Web page:
http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/

Download page:
http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/Download_Information.htm

Send any feedback to newsmaestroinfo \at/ mail.ru.
Your personal info will not be released and your privacy
will be honored.

 

[Almond]

All three of those sources agree that "persons" is a valid plural, but
disagree as to whether "people" is a valid plural. This answers the question
as asked, when and whether "persons" is a valid plural - not only is it valid,
since the 13th century (i.e., the development of modern English), but by some
standards it is preferred.

On your knees, mortals!!!

--
The most powerful Usenet tool you have ever heard of.
NewsMaestro v. 4.0.5 - Way Too Cool has been released.

Automatic enablement of all buttons, checkboxes and fields
depending on operation.
Templates generator improvements.

Job list improvements for new installations having no jobs
to begin with.

In some previous releases some class files were missing.
As a result, the program would not run.
Sorry for the inconvenience.

Multi-job support and other important feature additions
and various improvements and optimizations.

Web page:
http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/

Download page:
http://newsmaestro.sourceforge.net/Download_Information.htm

Send any feedback to newsmaestroinfo \at/ mail.ru.
Your personal info will not be released and your privacy
will be honored.

 

[Sabine Dinis Blochberger]

It could be a difference between British and American English.
Non-native English speakers are often, I expect, taught rather strict
Oxford English in school, and in this variant of the language the "one
person, many people" rule might hold?

Yep, that would be it. Answering "persons" to the question "what is the
plural of person?" would be zero points, error, sit down, failed