you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (9 children)

A lot of posts but no-one has yet to say.

They're named Trevors

Clears the whole thing up.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

    No one has said that because it wouldn't be correct. They are (both) named Trevor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (7 children)

    They're named Trevors

    It's clearly plural

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

    That's not how it works or each would be named Trevors.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

    What? If you saw them walking down the street together would you say

    There go the Trevors

    Or there go the Trevor?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 weeks ago (2 children)

    Different contexts. 'There go the Trevors' would be correct as you're referring to a group comprised of two people named Trevor. You're essentially saying 'there goes the people whose name is Trevor.'

    Saying 'they're named Trevors' is incorrect as neither individual is named Trevors. You're taking about the singular name that each possesses. A singular name doesn't become plural.

    You wouldn't say, for example, of two blue cars, 'both cars are painted blues.' You would say 'there goes the two blues' or 'the blues.'

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    It's perfectly correct. There are two people named Trevor.

    So the plural is named Trevors.

    Are you trying to suggest the correct plural of named Trevors is Trevi?

    They're named Trevi is completely wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago

    Nobody is suggesting Trevi but you.

    They're named Trevors will never be correct. The plural of Trevor is clearly Trevors, but the context of yours is referring to a singular name. Trevor functions as a singular name, not as a plural noun. The name doesn't change because multiple individuals possess it. It's the same reason we'd say, for example, two cities named Liverpool but two Liverpools.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 child)

    Why would either one of them be named the plural of Trevor?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    They're not. "They're named Trevors" is a correct but unbelievably clunky sentence no one would actually say. They are both named Trevor. So since there is two of them saying "They're named Trevors" is factually correct. As there are two people named Trevor there. Hence two named Trevors.

    I was just being stupid and having fun with the English language. Did get doubly funny when I created Trevi as the plural and then there was some daft point about the plural of Liverpool.

  • source
  • parent