Let me try to bring some sunshine into these cold days.

I just read a text where someone used the term 'bikini bottoms' and found it strange that it should be plural when the text clearly referred to one single item.
My understanding of the term is this: a bikini consists of two parts; the top part and the bottom part - or simply the top and the bottom. (I don't see 'bottom' as an anatomic reference. It's mere coincidence that the bottom part covers the bottom of the wearer.)
I have never heard anybody talk about 'bikini tops' when talking about a single item. It was always 'bikini top' or simply 'top'. So why 'bikini bottoms'? Of course you could say, "Three women wearing colourful bikini tops," but then you would be talking about three of them.

Then it occurred to me that English words for garments which accommodate the two legs of a person are generally used as plural: trousers, breeches, jeans, pants, slacks, panties, knickers, briefs, drawers, shorts, leggings, tights. Also: Bermudas, dungarees, corduroys, and possibly some others I missed. The only exceptions I found are G-string and thong which are referred to in singular.
Is there too much material to a bikini bottom to let it fall in the same category as G-string and thong?
Gato Medio
1 2 3 4 5 6
Let me try to bring some sunshine into these cold days. I just read a text where someone used the ... there too much material to a bikini bottom to let it fall in the same category as G-string and thong?

No. I believe the plural usage you described was in error.
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Let me try to bring some sunshine into these cold ... let it fall inthe same category as G-string and thong?

No. I believe the plural usage you described was in error.

An error, maybe; but consistent with ordinary British usage for things with two leg-holes. Add to the list: track suit bottoms and pyjama bottoms.
Mike.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
Let me try to bring some sunshine into these cold ... plural when the text clearly referred to one single item.

(snip)
No. I believe the plural usage you described was in error.

"Bottoms" fits in with vague distant memories. I can find them described both ways. Here are some "bottoms" that are clearly one item:

Purple swimsuit has a floral print and yellow trim on the top. Bandana top is decorated with a little yellow bow on the back where the straps meet the
suit. Swimsuit bottoms have an elastic waist and
elastic around the leg holes.
Waist and leg holes on the swimsuit's bottoms, as
well as the hemline of the swimsuit's top, are all elasticized to help the suit stay in place.
(Photo} Description: Baby girl in smocked
pink top and swimsuit bottoms with floral leis.

Best Donna Richoux
Let me try to bring some sunshine into these cold ... Also: Bermudas, dungarees, corduroys, and possibly some others I missed.

Chaps, boxers, trunks, underpants, khakis, chinos, speedos, bloomers.
The only exceptions I found are G-string and thong which ... it fall in the same category as G-string and thong?

No. I believe the plural usage you described was in error.

I doubt it. "Bikini bottoms" sounds just fine to me, and there are 80,700 hits on the web. Singular "bikini bottom" sounds fashion- jargon-ish, like "pant" or "short".
I think that the above analysis is correct. Anything that's seen as essentially a pair of leggings, however short, is plural, even when (as with briefs, speedos, and bikini bottoms) the leggings have shortened enough to essentially disappear. (Originally, they would have been two separate pieces.)
Thongs and g-strings, by contrast (along with jock straps, athletic supporters, diapers, nappies, breechclouts, loincloths, chastity belts, and the like) are seen as essentially garments that go between the legs, and only incidentally join up around the waist, forming circles around the legs.
A men's "bathing suit" or swimsuit is a holdover from the days when it was a full-body garment, rather than essentially a pair of leggings. The more recent names (trunks, speedos) are plural.

Evan Kirshenbaum + HP Laboratories >Just sit right back
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 > and you'll hear a tale,Palo Alto, CA 94304 > a tale of the Stanford red

http://www.kirshenbaum.net /
Chaps, boxers, trunks, underpants, khakis, chinos, speedos, bloomers.

No. I believe the plural usage you described was in error.

I doubt it. "Bikini bottoms" sounds just fine to me, and there are 80,700 hits on the web. Singular "bikini ... it was a full-body garment, rather than essentially a pair of leggings. The more recent names (trunks, speedos) are plural.

OK, I have to concede that a "bikini bottom" can go either way, but I like the singular form. It suggests a smaller bottom, maybe.
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
No. I believe the plural usage you described was in error.

An error, maybe; but consistent with ordinary British usage for things with two leg-holes. Add to the list: track suit bottoms and pyjama bottoms.

An American dictionary cite for that last usage:
From the *Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary* entry for the noun "bottom" at http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=bottoms
"*d :* the pants of pajamas usually used in plural"

Raymond S. Wise
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA
E-mail: mplsray @ yahoo . com
Then it occurred to me that English words for
Chaps, boxers, trunks, underpants, khakis, chinos, speedos, bloomers.

Undies, grundies. (Latter is a term I came across at boarding school, but haven't heard of anywhere else. Looking it up, apparently it's rhyming slang "Reg Grundies". But then why, in contrast to other rhyming slang expressions, has the "Reg" rather than the "Grundies" disappeared?)
No. I believe the plural usage you described was in error.

I doubt it. "Bikini bottoms" sounds just fine to me, and there are 80,700 hits on the web. Singular "bikini bottom" sounds fashion- jargon-ish, like "pant" or "short".

As an aside, there's more material to a bikini than there is to a bikini bottom (or bikini bottoms, whatever). There's also more material to a typical one-piece swimsuit. So why is neither of these plural?
I think that the above analysis is correct. Anything that's seen as essentially a pair of leggings, however short, is ... speedos, and bikini bottoms) the leggings have shortened enough to essentially disappear. (Originally, they would have been two separate pieces.)

I've heard this about "trousers" but couldn't really imagine briefs of whatever sort to be the same.
In contrast, was a business suit once a one-piece garment? :-)
A men's "bathing suit" or swimsuit is a holdover from the days when it was a full-body garment, rather than essentially a pair of leggings. The more recent names (trunks, speedos) are plural.

As are "swimmers" (which I think I've occasionally come across, though according to CALD it's an Australianism) and Mr Bean's "bathers".

Stewart.

My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
I think that the above analysis is correct. Anything that's seen as essentially a pair of leggings, however short, is ... speedos, and bikini bottoms) the leggings have shortened enough to essentially disappear. (Originally, they would have been two separate pieces.)

Indeed, there are some vulgar US dialects in which "underwear" is used for "underpants" and it takes a plural verb!

Joe Fineman joe (Email Removed)
Teachers: We supply a list of EFL job vacancies
Show more