cause like, there're two, and a pair is two, so they get confused
cause usually if they say 3, or 4, they will say appropriately "pairs"
Hmmmm .... Wouldn't "4" imply 4 things (either the same or slightly different) and "2 pair" imply 2 matching things and 2 other matching things?
I could go in my closet and pull out 2 pairs of shoes or 4 shoes and end up with very different things.
It's as simple as this: "1 pair" is the only time you say "pair", singular; while when you have 2 or more pairs of something, you're supposed to say "pairs", not "2 pair" or "3 pair". For some reason this is a very commonly difficult concept to grasp for many people. I believe, as stated before, it is because when people think "pair", they think 2, and when they think they have 2 pairs of something it's as if it's already a singular pair, so they stupidly get confused. It's similar to how people get confused about "texted", past tense, thinking "text" is enough, because it already sounds like there's a past tense "ed" there to them.
cause like, there're two, and a pair is two, so they get confused
cause usually if they say 3, or 4, they will say appropriately "pairs"
Hmmmm .... Wouldn't "4" imply 4 things (either the same or slightly different) and "2 pair" imply 2 matching things and 2 other matching things?
I could go in my closet and pull out 2 pairs of shoes or 4 shoes and end up with very different things.
It's as simple as this: "1 pair" is the only time you say "pair", singular; while when you have 2 or more pairs of something, you're supposed to say "pairs", not "2 pair" or "3 pair". For some reason this is a very commonly difficult concept to grasp for many people. I believe, as stated before, it is because when people think "pair", they think 2, and when they think they have 2 pairs of something it's as if it's already a singular pair, so they stupidly get confused. It's similar to how people get confused about "texted", past tense, thinking "text" is enough, because it already sounds like there's a past tense "ed" there to them.
I was right about Tree’s hatred on this.
B, on the other hand, uses 2/10 as part of his rating system.
OK, so this is the first I've read or heard about this justification (below), and I find it completely moronic. Pair means a set of something. If you have multiple sets, then "pairs" makes more sense than "pair", inanimate or not. It's just being stupid and lazy.
GRAMMAR NOTES FOR PAIR
When used without a modifier, pairs is the only possible plural: Pairs of skaters glided over the ice. When modified by a number, pairs is the more common form, especially referring to persons: Six pairs of masked dancers led the procession. The unmarked plural pair is used mainly in reference to inanimate objects or nonhumans: He has three pair (or pairs ) of loafers. Two pair (or pairs ) of barn owls have nested on our property.
Pair signifying two individuals can take either a singular or plural verb, but it is usually followed by a plural verb and referred to by a plural pronoun: The guilty pair have not been seen since their escape.
In the sense “a set or combination of more than two objects forming a collective whole,” pair occurs chiefly in fixed phrases: a pair of beads; a pair of stairs. This use is now somewhat old-fashioned. See also collective noun, couple.
Here, think about it this way. Let's use the word "couple" instead of "pair". 1 couple, 2 couple, 3 couple? Or: 1 couple, 2 couples, 3 couples? Again, the only reason "3 pair" instead of "3 pairs" of something even became so common is because people are stupid.
