Kilt versu Kilts

[Tetley]

I work with kilts every day and I've never heard anyone (before this Wikipedia article) suggest that the plural should be "kilt."

My collegues in tartan academia say "kilts."

My collegues in the tartan industry say "kilts."

The people I correspond with in America say "kilts."

The people I correspond with in Canada say "kilts."

The people I correspond with in Scotland say "kilts."

The (many) books on Highland dress I have read all use the term "kilts."

So where does this suggestion arise that "kilt" is the proper plural? I just do not see it used that way at all. Regretably, my Concise Scots Dictionary is not at hand, or else I would see what it had to say on the matter. Perhaps "kilt" is an archaic plural, but I daresay it is not in common usage any longer.

I do not doubt that this is so. In common usage "kilts" is an accepted plural of "kilt". Nevertheless, the noun "kilt" is singular and plural, or it was when I was taught English many years ago, probably before you were born (I've always wanted to say that).

Nor do I doubt that it is in common usage any more, but you will hear me and others say it because in my opinion, new and commonly used is not always synonymous with "better".

You will not hear me saying a lot of things that are considered normal everyday phrases in common usage today either because that is not how I was taught to speak English and I'm afraid that I positively refuse to speak American, Australian, Canadian or any other English except British, or send those ridiculous text messages that take forever to decipher.

Nor will you see me wear trousers, a garment commonly worn by men today. Instead I wear a traditional garment called a kilt which is not in common usage any longer.

What I'm trying to point out, and failing miserably it seems, is that using kilt as a plural noun is not wrong. It might be uncommon to hear it used and to some it may sound wrong, nevertheless it is correct.

Reminds me of that quote oft attributed to Churchill: "This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put."

Grates on many ears, but it is not wrong.

Mark

Let the flaming continue....

[BoldHighlander]

Let the flaming continue....

No 'flaming' allowed!!


Actually, I wasn't aware that there was any flaming going on in this thread.
Looks more like a discussion to me

[The Wizard of BC]

1 single Kilt = Swoon.

Many Kilts = Riot.

[Southern Breeze]

1 single Kilt = Swoon.

Many Kilts = Riot.

Many Kilts =Riot. That may true where you live. Around here 1 Single Kilt = Rioting Ladies.

[mbhandy]

Many Kilts =Riot. That may true where you live. Around here 1 Single Kilt = Rioting Ladies.

Hardie, Har, Har, HAR!

MrBilli

[Nervous Jock]

Many Kilts =Riot. That may true where you live. Around here 1 Single Kilt = Rioting Ladies.

You sound like a Galway Bouncer :-)

[Carolina Kiltman]

Hadn't quite thought much about it before, so how about going back a bit in history: I seem to remember reading that Alex the Great met up with some "Keltoi" (Celts). Therefore would a group of people wearing kilti be properly referred to as Keltoi?

[Standard]

Moose, Meese, Mooses? ith:

[Southern Breeze]

You sound like a Galway Bouncer :-)

I'm not going to ask.....

[Ayin McFye]

I'm going to definitely agreed with Newsome on this one. I can't recall ever using "kilt" as a plural reference when talking to someone. And I also believe that the plural form of beer is "beers". Unless you've already pluralized it by saying things such as "Six pack of Beer".

To each their own. If someone came up to me and said "How many kilt do you own" I wouldn't correct them, I'd just answer the question. Personally I think it sounds weird though.