Posted on 03/03/2007 8:50:58 AM PST by Past Your Eyes
Last week on Car Talk, the "Puzzler" was thus: There is a word which, when pluralized, contains none of the letters of the singular version of the same word.
I listened to the program this morning hoping to find out the answer, after being unable to come up with it myself in a week of trying, only to find out that The Puzzler is taking the week off and the answer won't be revealed until next week.
So, how about it, all you wordsmiths? What could be the answer to this Puzzler?
Or "I" and "Us"?
You would be really disgusted if you knew that it only took me about 15 seconds to figure out (WITHOUT using the internet) after you spent a week on it...and I'm not that smart. :-)
I to We would also work
A quick web search revealed "kine" as the plural for "cow".
The words have to be nouns -- not pronouns. Here's the puzzler crux: "The singular form of this word however is a very common English word. But, here's the interesting part. The word in question is a plural noun but it has no letters-- none-- in common with the singular form. Not one single letter. The question is what are the two words?"
How about "cow" and "herd"?
That's got to be it.
How about porky and swine?
How did this become a Clinton thread?
LOL! Hog and swine would work, wouldn't it?
|
Great answer. Go to the Car Talk website and email it in. You might be the winner!
RAY: This puzzler was sent in by Paul Mulick.
As everyone knows, in English, most singular nouns can be made plural by simply adding an 's' or sometimes an 'es' to the end of the word. So, in most cases, every letter of the singular form of the noun will also be found in the plural form. Like, "shoe" and "shoes," or "bum" and "bums." There will be exceptions, of course. For example, the word "matrix" is the plural of matrices. And "bacterium," and "bacteria." But, even in those cases, just about every letter from the singular noun also appears in the plural form.
The other day, I was rereading one of my favorite books, 'The Lord of the Rings,' when an unusual word caught my eye. Of course, this book is full of all kinds of weird words from imaginary languages. But. this particular word is a bona fide English word-- and it's a plural noun. It's an old word and it's not used much nowadays, but you will find it in just about any English dictionary.
The singular form of this word however is a very common English word. But, here's the interesting part. The word in question is a plural noun but it has no letters-- none-- in common with the singular form. Not one single letter.
The question is what are the two words?
Here's a hint: you might guess that both of the words are rather short, or at least one of them is. Because the longer the word is, the better the chances that you would duplicate a letter.
After listening to the whole question on the audio link, I have to agree that OSHA nailed it here. They were talking about that it was used in the Lord of the Rings and that it isn't in very common usage today.
"I" "We".
"Me" "Us".
"one" "six"
strengths
|
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.