Why "children," not "childs"? (2016)
The article explores the historical reasons behind the pluralization of certain English nouns, specifically focusing on the use of the suffix '-en'. It explains that in Old English, some nouns formed their plurals with '-n' instead of the more common '-s'. Over time, this '-en' pluralization was extended to other words, leading to the modern usage of terms like 'children' and 'brethren'.
- ▪In Old English, nouns like 'oxen' and 'children' formed their plurals with '-n' rather than '-s'.
- ▪During the Middle English period, the '-en' pluralization was extended to words that originally did not have this ending.
- ▪The only original '-n' plural from Old English that has survived is 'oxen', while most others have been replaced by '-s' plurals.
Hacker News (Newest) files mainly under programming. We currently carry 5,306 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | Grammarphobia |
| Canonical URL | https://grammarphobia.com/blog/2016/03/en-plural.html |
| Publication time | Wed, 27 May 2026 20:25:04 +0000 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-05-27T20:38:04.826Z |
| Last seen | 2026-05-27T20:38:04.826Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | R36uiC_Oqqa1 |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Categories English English language Etymology Grammar Linguistics Spelling Usage Word origin Why “children,” not “childs”? Post author By Pat and Stewart Post date March 2, 2016 Q: Your recent post about why “chicken” is singular has left me wondering where “-en” plurals such as “oxen,” “brethren,” “children,” “men,” “women,” and the archaic eyen come from. A: In Old English, nouns that followed certain patterns formed their plurals with -n rather than –s. These included the one you mention, eyen (“eyes”), as well as earan (“ears”), tungan (“tongues”), fon (“foes”), housen (“houses”), shoen (“shoes”), treen (“trees”), and oxan (the original plural of “ox”).
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Grammarphobia.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Grammarphobia
