I believe “math” is a mass noun, like “fish.” Fish is never pluralized unless it’s used as a verb, as in “John fishes for trout.”
Yes, as “math,” it is already a plural.
1 Like
2 Likes
2 Likes
Boy howdy is that ever the truth! Almost understatement.
I thought it was an interesting book. I’d never read anything like it before. My favorite Brautigan book was In Watermelon Sugar. I don’t really remember it, just that it was my favorite book of his.
I haven’t thought of him in so long. Perhaps I’ll go back and re-read some of his books. They’re quick reads. Thanks for mentioning him.
2 Likes
there’s no accounting for idiots and as @mota said, there is plenty of precedent for math to be plural, deer, bear, etc. and it doesn’t sound like a mouthful of marbles saying it
edit: maybe bears is plural, i don’t know.
1 Like
I think it’s because they don’t understand the insanely crazy “rules” of the English language. 
1 Like
“Bears” is correct as a plural. “Deers,” however, is not. Deer is a mass noun. And if they are particularly large deer, it might even be a massive noun! HA!
Another nice mass noun is “piling,” as in the logs used to moor boats, log rafts (no longer a thing), etc in a river. No matter how many there are, it is still piling. Some might even say piling on, but I won’t.
Whatever sounds good to your ear(s) then I reckon 
What I meant was both offer up opportunities to make accidental sense
1 Like
Right! And so it is!!
Color me an over thinker. 
1 Like
Nah man, it’s all worth not overlookin
1 Like
