|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Pardon me if I light up a bit, but for us poor non-english speaking
fellows, here is some relief:
>>
>>We'll begin with box,
>>: The plural is boxes,
>>: But the plural of ox,
>>: Should be oxen, not oxes.
>>
>>: One fowl is a goose,
>>: And two are called geese,
>>: But the plural of mouse,
>>: Should never be meese.
>>
>>: You may find a lone mouse,
>>: Or a whole nest of mice,
>>: But the plural of house,
>>: Is houses, not hice.
>>
>>: If the plural of man,
>>: Is always called men,
>>: Why shouldn't the plural,
>>: Of pan be called pen?
>>
>>: Cows in the plural,
>>: May be called cows or kine,
>>: But a bow, if repeated,
>>: Is never called bine,
>>: And the plural of vow,
>>: Is vows, never vine.
>>
>>: If I speak of a foot,
>>: You show me two feet,
>>: But if I give you a boot,
>>: Would a pair be two beet?
>>
>>: If one is a tooth,
>>: And a whole set are teeth,
>>: Why shouldn't the plural,
>>: Of booth be called beeth?
>>
>>: If a singular's this,
>>: And the plural is these,
>>: Should the plural of kiss,
>>: Ever be keese?
>>
>>: And the one may be that,
>>: And the two may be those,
>>: Yet hat in the plural,
>>: Would never be hose,
>>: And the plural of cat,
>>: Is cats and not cose.
>>
>>: We speak of brother,
>>: And also of brethren,
>>: But the way we say mother,
>>: We never say methren.
>>
>>: Then the masculine pronouns,
>>: Are he, his and him,
>>: But are the feminine,
>>: She, shis and shim?
>>
>>: So English, I think,
>>: You will agree,
>>: Is the funniest language,
>>: You ever did see.
>>
>>: Author unknown
>>
>>Is the plural of spouse "spice?"
>>
>>
|