Why do we use the plural of movies in this phrase “We went to the movies last night.”? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowClauses wrong usagesDistinction between singular “like” and plural “likes”'Team' doesn't or don't'?Singular vs. plural in “interest rates and investment”Plural should be used on decimal quantities?Why did they use article in the phrase “a workers' cooperative”When exactly do we have to use the distributive plural?“Three eggs is plenty” Vs. “a number of boys were absent”?Singular vs. plural in the object of this sentenceDoes this noun phrase (a variable name) take a singular or plural verb?
How to count occurrences of text in a file?
Flying from Cape Town to England and return to another province
What connection does MS Office have to Netscape Navigator?
Reference request: Grassmannian and Plucker coordinates in type B, C, D
How many extra stops do monopods offer for tele photographs?
Is French Guiana a (hard) EU border?
Can we say or write : "No, it'sn't"?
Chain wire methods together in Lightning Web Components
Prepend last line of stdin to entire stdin
Find non-case sensitive string in a mixed list of elements?
Method for adding error messages to a dictionary given a key
How did people program for Consoles with multiple CPUs?
WOW air has ceased operation, can I get my tickets refunded?
What was the first Unix version to run on a microcomputer?
Legal workarounds for testamentary trust perceived as unfair
Is it my responsibility to learn a new technology in my own time my employer wants to implement?
Calculator final project in Python
Why don't programming languages automatically manage the synchronous/asynchronous problem?
Do I need to write [sic] when a number is less than 10 but isn't written out?
Is it convenient to ask the journal's editor for two additional days to complete a review?
Why do airplanes bank sharply to the right after air-to-air refueling?
Why isn't the Mueller report being released completely and unredacted?
How to write a definition with variants?
How I can get glyphs from a fraktur font and use them as identifiers?
Why do we use the plural of movies in this phrase “We went to the movies last night.”?
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowClauses wrong usagesDistinction between singular “like” and plural “likes”'Team' doesn't or don't'?Singular vs. plural in “interest rates and investment”Plural should be used on decimal quantities?Why did they use article in the phrase “a workers' cooperative”When exactly do we have to use the distributive plural?“Three eggs is plenty” Vs. “a number of boys were absent”?Singular vs. plural in the object of this sentenceDoes this noun phrase (a variable name) take a singular or plural verb?
I found this sentence:
We went to the movies last night.
at the following URL: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/movies
Why do they use the plural "movies", why not use the singular "movie"?
american-english singular-vs-plural
edited yesterday
Draken
1174
asked 2 days ago
b2okb2ok
318314
add a comment |
I found this sentence:
We went to the movies last night.
at the following URL: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/movies
Why do they use the plural "movies", why not use the singular "movie"?
american-english singular-vs-plural
edited yesterday
Draken
1174
asked 2 days ago
b2okb2ok
318314
2
Related/Duplicate question on English SE
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
add a comment |
I found this sentence:
We went to the movies last night.
at the following URL: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/movies
Why do they use the plural "movies", why not use the singular "movie"?
american-english singular-vs-plural
edited yesterday
Draken
1174
asked 2 days ago
b2okb2ok
318314
I found this sentence:
We went to the movies last night.
at the following URL: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/movies
Why do they use the plural "movies", why not use the singular "movie"?
american-english singular-vs-plural
american-english singular-vs-plural
edited yesterday
Draken
1174
asked 2 days ago
b2okb2ok
318314
edited yesterday
Draken
1174
asked 2 days ago
b2okb2ok
318314
edited yesterday
Draken
1174
edited yesterday
Draken
1174
edited yesterday
Draken
1174
1174
asked 2 days ago
b2okb2ok
318314
asked 2 days ago
b2okb2ok
318314
asked 2 days ago
b2okb2ok
318314
318314
2
Related/Duplicate question on English SE
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
add a comment |
2
Related/Duplicate question on English SE
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
2
2
Related/Duplicate question on English SE
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
Related/Duplicate question on English SE
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
In the very early days, movies were very short (about 10-15 minutes), so people watched several movies in a row. Even when feature films were developed, there was typically a newsreel, a short and the feature.
Also, they were originally called 'moving pictures', which quite naturally became 'movies'. 'A movie' came slightly later. (I think people referred to 'a film' before they referred to 'a movie'.)
answered 2 days ago
SydneySydney
5,0522816
5
Do you have a source for that? Just curious, as it's not the reason given in the Answer in this identical question which uses MacMillan as a source.
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
2
@BruceWayne From my own knowledge of history and language, I believe this answer to be entirely accurate, but you're right- sources are always appreciated. It should be noted, however, your linked answer essentially says "the dictionary definition is thus" whereas this answer says "the reason the word means this is thus". The two are complimentary, not contradictory. The MacMillian definition for "movie" even references the relation to "moving pictures' though it stops short of claiming it to be a contraction of the phrase.
– jmbpiano
yesterday
The OED has a citation for "movie" from 1913, which is sufficiently close to the earliest for "movies" (1909) that I'm not sure we can really say that the singular came later. At that time, the word seems to have been always written in quotes, suggesting that it was felt to be a very informal term that might be common in spoken English but was rarely written down, again making it hard to determine the relative age.
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
The first section in particular feels like a meaning added in retrospect. It definitely needs to be referenced if it's being stated as a true factor in the etymology. If no reference can be found, it may be best to move it second and make it clear that it's an interesting additional bit of trivia. There is currently no evidence that it influenced the plurality of the term "Movies".
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
Because, as that definition explained, "movies" in that context refers to the movie theater, which typically has several showings for a movie. If you want to refer to the showing you specifically attended, you would say "we went to a movie last night."
answered 2 days ago
pboss3010pboss3010
91415
2
Could you include a reference for this please?
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
Do you want to go to the movies tonight?
Do you want to go to the cinema tonight?
Both the movies (AmE) or the cinema (BrE) refer to a place where you can watch a movie (AmE) or a film (BrE). It is usually a movie theater (AmE) or a cinema (BrE).
Would you like to go and see a film tonight?
I thought we might get something to eat and then go to see a movie.
answered 2 days ago
Andrew TobilkoAndrew Tobilko
2,324624
7
"The cinema" and "a film" are certainly valid in AmE, they're just a bit formal for casual conversation.
– Kevin
2 days ago
3
You can also say "the pictures" in BrE although it may sound a bit old-fashioned.
– Richard
yesterday
4
@Kevin Ya, this answer is a bit weird in how hard of a distinction it makes between AmE and BrE. AmE speakers use "cinema" too. One of the largest theater chains is called Regal Cinemas. And "film" is extremely common to hear in AmE. It's interchangeable with "movie", although a bit less common. It's not like they call it "movie school".
– only_pro
yesterday
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "481"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f202874%2fwhy-do-we-use-the-plural-of-movies-in-this-phrase-we-went-to-the-movies-last-ni%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
In the very early days, movies were very short (about 10-15 minutes), so people watched several movies in a row. Even when feature films were developed, there was typically a newsreel, a short and the feature.
Also, they were originally called 'moving pictures', which quite naturally became 'movies'. 'A movie' came slightly later. (I think people referred to 'a film' before they referred to 'a movie'.)
answered 2 days ago
SydneySydney
5,0522816
5
Do you have a source for that? Just curious, as it's not the reason given in the Answer in this identical question which uses MacMillan as a source.
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
2
@BruceWayne From my own knowledge of history and language, I believe this answer to be entirely accurate, but you're right- sources are always appreciated. It should be noted, however, your linked answer essentially says "the dictionary definition is thus" whereas this answer says "the reason the word means this is thus". The two are complimentary, not contradictory. The MacMillian definition for "movie" even references the relation to "moving pictures' though it stops short of claiming it to be a contraction of the phrase.
– jmbpiano
yesterday
The OED has a citation for "movie" from 1913, which is sufficiently close to the earliest for "movies" (1909) that I'm not sure we can really say that the singular came later. At that time, the word seems to have been always written in quotes, suggesting that it was felt to be a very informal term that might be common in spoken English but was rarely written down, again making it hard to determine the relative age.
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
The first section in particular feels like a meaning added in retrospect. It definitely needs to be referenced if it's being stated as a true factor in the etymology. If no reference can be found, it may be best to move it second and make it clear that it's an interesting additional bit of trivia. There is currently no evidence that it influenced the plurality of the term "Movies".
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
In the very early days, movies were very short (about 10-15 minutes), so people watched several movies in a row. Even when feature films were developed, there was typically a newsreel, a short and the feature.
Also, they were originally called 'moving pictures', which quite naturally became 'movies'. 'A movie' came slightly later. (I think people referred to 'a film' before they referred to 'a movie'.)
answered 2 days ago
SydneySydney
5,0522816
5
Do you have a source for that? Just curious, as it's not the reason given in the Answer in this identical question which uses MacMillan as a source.
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
2
@BruceWayne From my own knowledge of history and language, I believe this answer to be entirely accurate, but you're right- sources are always appreciated. It should be noted, however, your linked answer essentially says "the dictionary definition is thus" whereas this answer says "the reason the word means this is thus". The two are complimentary, not contradictory. The MacMillian definition for "movie" even references the relation to "moving pictures' though it stops short of claiming it to be a contraction of the phrase.
– jmbpiano
yesterday
The OED has a citation for "movie" from 1913, which is sufficiently close to the earliest for "movies" (1909) that I'm not sure we can really say that the singular came later. At that time, the word seems to have been always written in quotes, suggesting that it was felt to be a very informal term that might be common in spoken English but was rarely written down, again making it hard to determine the relative age.
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
The first section in particular feels like a meaning added in retrospect. It definitely needs to be referenced if it's being stated as a true factor in the etymology. If no reference can be found, it may be best to move it second and make it clear that it's an interesting additional bit of trivia. There is currently no evidence that it influenced the plurality of the term "Movies".
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
In the very early days, movies were very short (about 10-15 minutes), so people watched several movies in a row. Even when feature films were developed, there was typically a newsreel, a short and the feature.
Also, they were originally called 'moving pictures', which quite naturally became 'movies'. 'A movie' came slightly later. (I think people referred to 'a film' before they referred to 'a movie'.)
answered 2 days ago
SydneySydney
5,0522816
In the very early days, movies were very short (about 10-15 minutes), so people watched several movies in a row. Even when feature films were developed, there was typically a newsreel, a short and the feature.
Also, they were originally called 'moving pictures', which quite naturally became 'movies'. 'A movie' came slightly later. (I think people referred to 'a film' before they referred to 'a movie'.)
answered 2 days ago
SydneySydney
5,0522816
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
SydneySydney
5,0522816
answered 2 days ago
SydneySydney
5,0522816
answered 2 days ago
SydneySydney
5,0522816
5,0522816
5
Do you have a source for that? Just curious, as it's not the reason given in the Answer in this identical question which uses MacMillan as a source.
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
2
@BruceWayne From my own knowledge of history and language, I believe this answer to be entirely accurate, but you're right- sources are always appreciated. It should be noted, however, your linked answer essentially says "the dictionary definition is thus" whereas this answer says "the reason the word means this is thus". The two are complimentary, not contradictory. The MacMillian definition for "movie" even references the relation to "moving pictures' though it stops short of claiming it to be a contraction of the phrase.
– jmbpiano
yesterday
The OED has a citation for "movie" from 1913, which is sufficiently close to the earliest for "movies" (1909) that I'm not sure we can really say that the singular came later. At that time, the word seems to have been always written in quotes, suggesting that it was felt to be a very informal term that might be common in spoken English but was rarely written down, again making it hard to determine the relative age.
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
The first section in particular feels like a meaning added in retrospect. It definitely needs to be referenced if it's being stated as a true factor in the etymology. If no reference can be found, it may be best to move it second and make it clear that it's an interesting additional bit of trivia. There is currently no evidence that it influenced the plurality of the term "Movies".
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
5
Do you have a source for that? Just curious, as it's not the reason given in the Answer in this identical question which uses MacMillan as a source.
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
2
@BruceWayne From my own knowledge of history and language, I believe this answer to be entirely accurate, but you're right- sources are always appreciated. It should be noted, however, your linked answer essentially says "the dictionary definition is thus" whereas this answer says "the reason the word means this is thus". The two are complimentary, not contradictory. The MacMillian definition for "movie" even references the relation to "moving pictures' though it stops short of claiming it to be a contraction of the phrase.
– jmbpiano
yesterday
The OED has a citation for "movie" from 1913, which is sufficiently close to the earliest for "movies" (1909) that I'm not sure we can really say that the singular came later. At that time, the word seems to have been always written in quotes, suggesting that it was felt to be a very informal term that might be common in spoken English but was rarely written down, again making it hard to determine the relative age.
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
The first section in particular feels like a meaning added in retrospect. It definitely needs to be referenced if it's being stated as a true factor in the etymology. If no reference can be found, it may be best to move it second and make it clear that it's an interesting additional bit of trivia. There is currently no evidence that it influenced the plurality of the term "Movies".
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
5
5
Do you have a source for that? Just curious, as it's not the reason given in the Answer in this identical question which uses MacMillan as a source.
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
Do you have a source for that? Just curious, as it's not the reason given in the Answer in this identical question which uses MacMillan as a source.
– BruceWayne
2 days ago
2
2
@BruceWayne From my own knowledge of history and language, I believe this answer to be entirely accurate, but you're right- sources are always appreciated. It should be noted, however, your linked answer essentially says "the dictionary definition is thus" whereas this answer says "the reason the word means this is thus". The two are complimentary, not contradictory. The MacMillian definition for "movie" even references the relation to "moving pictures' though it stops short of claiming it to be a contraction of the phrase.
– jmbpiano
yesterday
@BruceWayne From my own knowledge of history and language, I believe this answer to be entirely accurate, but you're right- sources are always appreciated. It should be noted, however, your linked answer essentially says "the dictionary definition is thus" whereas this answer says "the reason the word means this is thus". The two are complimentary, not contradictory. The MacMillian definition for "movie" even references the relation to "moving pictures' though it stops short of claiming it to be a contraction of the phrase.
– jmbpiano
yesterday
The OED has a citation for "movie" from 1913, which is sufficiently close to the earliest for "movies" (1909) that I'm not sure we can really say that the singular came later. At that time, the word seems to have been always written in quotes, suggesting that it was felt to be a very informal term that might be common in spoken English but was rarely written down, again making it hard to determine the relative age.
– David Richerby
yesterday
The OED has a citation for "movie" from 1913, which is sufficiently close to the earliest for "movies" (1909) that I'm not sure we can really say that the singular came later. At that time, the word seems to have been always written in quotes, suggesting that it was felt to be a very informal term that might be common in spoken English but was rarely written down, again making it hard to determine the relative age.
– David Richerby
yesterday
1
1
The first section in particular feels like a meaning added in retrospect. It definitely needs to be referenced if it's being stated as a true factor in the etymology. If no reference can be found, it may be best to move it second and make it clear that it's an interesting additional bit of trivia. There is currently no evidence that it influenced the plurality of the term "Movies".
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
The first section in particular feels like a meaning added in retrospect. It definitely needs to be referenced if it's being stated as a true factor in the etymology. If no reference can be found, it may be best to move it second and make it clear that it's an interesting additional bit of trivia. There is currently no evidence that it influenced the plurality of the term "Movies".
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
Because, as that definition explained, "movies" in that context refers to the movie theater, which typically has several showings for a movie. If you want to refer to the showing you specifically attended, you would say "we went to a movie last night."
answered 2 days ago
pboss3010pboss3010
91415
2
Could you include a reference for this please?
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
Because, as that definition explained, "movies" in that context refers to the movie theater, which typically has several showings for a movie. If you want to refer to the showing you specifically attended, you would say "we went to a movie last night."
answered 2 days ago
pboss3010pboss3010
91415
2
Could you include a reference for this please?
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
Because, as that definition explained, "movies" in that context refers to the movie theater, which typically has several showings for a movie. If you want to refer to the showing you specifically attended, you would say "we went to a movie last night."
answered 2 days ago
pboss3010pboss3010
91415
Because, as that definition explained, "movies" in that context refers to the movie theater, which typically has several showings for a movie. If you want to refer to the showing you specifically attended, you would say "we went to a movie last night."
answered 2 days ago
pboss3010pboss3010
91415
answered 2 days ago
pboss3010pboss3010
91415
answered 2 days ago
pboss3010pboss3010
91415
answered 2 days ago
pboss3010pboss3010
91415
91415
2
Could you include a reference for this please?
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
2
Could you include a reference for this please?
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
2
2
Could you include a reference for this please?
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
Could you include a reference for this please?
– Bilkokuya
yesterday
add a comment |
Do you want to go to the movies tonight?
Do you want to go to the cinema tonight?
Both the movies (AmE) or the cinema (BrE) refer to a place where you can watch a movie (AmE) or a film (BrE). It is usually a movie theater (AmE) or a cinema (BrE).
Would you like to go and see a film tonight?
I thought we might get something to eat and then go to see a movie.
answered 2 days ago
Andrew TobilkoAndrew Tobilko
2,324624
7
"The cinema" and "a film" are certainly valid in AmE, they're just a bit formal for casual conversation.
– Kevin
2 days ago
3
You can also say "the pictures" in BrE although it may sound a bit old-fashioned.
– Richard
yesterday
4
@Kevin Ya, this answer is a bit weird in how hard of a distinction it makes between AmE and BrE. AmE speakers use "cinema" too. One of the largest theater chains is called Regal Cinemas. And "film" is extremely common to hear in AmE. It's interchangeable with "movie", although a bit less common. It's not like they call it "movie school".
– only_pro
yesterday
add a comment |
Do you want to go to the movies tonight?
Do you want to go to the cinema tonight?
Both the movies (AmE) or the cinema (BrE) refer to a place where you can watch a movie (AmE) or a film (BrE). It is usually a movie theater (AmE) or a cinema (BrE).
Would you like to go and see a film tonight?
I thought we might get something to eat and then go to see a movie.
answered 2 days ago
Andrew TobilkoAndrew Tobilko
2,324624
7
"The cinema" and "a film" are certainly valid in AmE, they're just a bit formal for casual conversation.
– Kevin
2 days ago
3
You can also say "the pictures" in BrE although it may sound a bit old-fashioned.
– Richard
yesterday
4
@Kevin Ya, this answer is a bit weird in how hard of a distinction it makes between AmE and BrE. AmE speakers use "cinema" too. One of the largest theater chains is called Regal Cinemas. And "film" is extremely common to hear in AmE. It's interchangeable with "movie", although a bit less common. It's not like they call it "movie school".
– only_pro
yesterday
add a comment |
Do you want to go to the movies tonight?
Do you want to go to the cinema tonight?
Both the movies (AmE) or the cinema (BrE) refer to a place where you can watch a movie (AmE) or a film (BrE). It is usually a movie theater (AmE) or a cinema (BrE).
Would you like to go and see a film tonight?
I thought we might get something to eat and then go to see a movie.
answered 2 days ago
Andrew TobilkoAndrew Tobilko
2,324624
Do you want to go to the movies tonight?
Do you want to go to the cinema tonight?
Both the movies (AmE) or the cinema (BrE) refer to a place where you can watch a movie (AmE) or a film (BrE). It is usually a movie theater (AmE) or a cinema (BrE).
Would you like to go and see a film tonight?
I thought we might get something to eat and then go to see a movie.
answered 2 days ago
Andrew TobilkoAndrew Tobilko
2,324624
edited 2 days ago
answered 2 days ago
Andrew TobilkoAndrew Tobilko
2,324624
answered 2 days ago
Andrew TobilkoAndrew Tobilko
2,324624
answered 2 days ago
Andrew TobilkoAndrew Tobilko
2,324624
2,324624
7
"The cinema" and "a film" are certainly valid in AmE, they're just a bit formal for casual conversation.
– Kevin
2 days ago
3
You can also say "the pictures" in BrE although it may sound a bit old-fashioned.
– Richard
yesterday
4
@Kevin Ya, this answer is a bit weird in how hard of a distinction it makes between AmE and BrE. AmE speakers use "cinema" too. One of the largest theater chains is called Regal Cinemas. And "film" is extremely common to hear in AmE. It's interchangeable with "movie", although a bit less common. It's not like they call it "movie school".
– only_pro
yesterday
add a comment |
7
"The cinema" and "a film" are certainly valid in AmE, they're just a bit formal for casual conversation.
– Kevin
2 days ago
3
You can also say "the pictures" in BrE although it may sound a bit old-fashioned.
– Richard
yesterday
4
@Kevin Ya, this answer is a bit weird in how hard of a distinction it makes between AmE and BrE. AmE speakers use "cinema" too. One of the largest theater chains is called Regal Cinemas. And "film" is extremely common to hear in AmE. It's interchangeable with "movie", although a bit less common. It's not like they call it "movie school".
– only_pro
yesterday
7
7
"The cinema" and "a film" are certainly valid in AmE, they're just a bit formal for casual conversation.
– Kevin
2 days ago
"The cinema" and "a film" are certainly valid in AmE, they're just a bit formal for casual conversation.
– Kevin
2 days ago
3
3
You can also say "the pictures" in BrE although it may sound a bit old-fashioned.
– Richard
yesterday
You can also say "the pictures" in BrE although it may sound a bit old-fashioned.
– Richard
yesterday
4
4
@Kevin Ya, this answer is a bit weird in how hard of a distinction it makes between AmE and BrE. AmE speakers use "cinema" too. One of the largest theater chains is called Regal Cinemas. And "film" is extremely common to hear in AmE. It's interchangeable with "movie", although a bit less common. It's not like they call it "movie school".
– only_pro
yesterday
@Kevin Ya, this answer is a bit weird in how hard of a distinction it makes between AmE and BrE. AmE speakers use "cinema" too. One of the largest theater chains is called Regal Cinemas. And "film" is extremely common to hear in AmE. It's interchangeable with "movie", although a bit less common. It's not like they call it "movie school".
– only_pro
yesterday
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language Learners Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f202874%2fwhy-do-we-use-the-plural-of-movies-in-this-phrase-we-went-to-the-movies-last-ni%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
2
Related/Duplicate question on English SE
– BruceWayne
2 days ago