Re: "a Pair of Panties" ?????

On Friday or thereabouts, wugi asked ...

Op 4/07/2024 om 19:09 schreef Athel Cornish-Bowden:

On 2024-07-04 17:03:35 +0000, wugi said:
 

Op 1/07/2024 om 7:56 schreef Hibou:

Le 01/07/2024 à 04:44, HenHanna a écrit :

>
A pair of pants,    or    A pair of trousers
>
                  ... ok because each Pair kinda looks like  [2 pipes].
>
    ...but...
              "a Pair of Panties" ?????

>
There appears to be a class of things that exist only in the plural - a pair of tweezers, scissors, pliers, sunglasses... trousers, underpants, knickers, tights... - things that bifurcate or are made up of two bits. I suppose the briefer garments inherited the plural from longer ones (though a few minutes' searching yields no support for this; briefs were apparently in use in Ancient Egypt).

>
[...]
>
Why does English name all these things as pairs, being a single object?
Others like French have a few (lunettes, ciseaux).

 But pantalon is singular, though the English word derived from it, pantaloons,is plural.

>
Not an explanation, but it seems like a demonstration of how English likes to see things in "double" ;-)
>

Others like Dutch have none of it in plural or "dual".

>
Even twins are just one "tweeling".

What is term for each individual twin?

>

Any historic reason?

Nah, happened mostly in the quiet times.
/dps
--
You could try being nicer and politer

instead, and see how that works out.

     -- Katy Jennison