Talk:Pants
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] DELETE THIS ARTICLE I LIVE IN OKLAHOMA AND IT IS AGAINST OUR RELIGION TO WEAR PANTS
"Based on the Bible, some Christians believe that women should not wear pants, but only skirts and dresses."
Yeah, weren't pants once considered exclusively male/masculine in Britain? 66.189.90.207 07:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
-- Which bit? -- Tarquin 11:08 Feb 21, 2003 (UTC)
- Well, obviously not literally, as breeches did not exist in the ancient world (in the Middle East, certainly), and were only latterly adopted by the Romans as a reaction to living conditions in the colder, wetter climes of Northern Europe. As Europe got progressively colder and wetter over the next two millennia, trousers eventually caught on everywhere. If europe starts to get noticeably hotter in the next two millennia, will the toga come back in style?
- Nuttyskin 04:18, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
What has happened?
About a month ago, the "Pants" entry was simply a redirect to "Trousers". Then I turned it into a disambiguation page. Now it's a different disambiguation page, and the page history now tells me that it was changed from a redirect on 28 Jul 2002, and that my version never existed.
OK, so the current version is more comprehensive than mine was. But does anyone know what happened? Did one of the admin staff just annul the recent edits, or what?
In British English, Pants is an "abbreviation of" underpants, not "refers to" underpants....discuss
Guinness2702 2005-07-21T01:15 BST
- It isn't an abbreviation. A short form, maybe, but not an abbreviation. Moreover, if that's the case then where did "underpants" come from? -- Smjg 10:38, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
-
- I suspect that historically "pantaloons" (and possibly "pants") would have been used in British English, which would be where the American English version originated. At some point it must have fallen out of use in Britain, in favour of "trousers" but not before "underpants" came into use. Subsequently, that was shortened (whether abbreviated, contracted or shortened) to just "pants". Guinness2702 2005-07-22T11:25 BST
[edit] British pants
Im a brit and i dont call my pants trousers? I call them pants!
formal pants are trousers, pants are pants and underwear is just underwear!
- Would I be right in saying you are from the North West sir/madam?!
I have already ammended this page accordngly, speaking as someone from Yorkshire who moved to the North-West to find this usage common there (I have since asked around alot, in England, the usage of "pants" for "trousers" does seem to be confined to Manchester/Merseyside/Lancashire........)BG 29/10/5
I agree, quite a few people in britain do call trousers pants. I didnt realise it was just the North West though.
[edit] Added a couple lines
Added a couple sentances of info. Got it from Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com got it from: The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms by Christine Ammer. Copyright © 1997 by The Christine Ammer 1992 Trust. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
[edit] anti-pants movement
Would it be suitable to mention the anti pants movement, and specifically No_Pants_Day?
It is unsatisfactory that the revolution is not mentioned here.
[edit] The worst sentence in human history
I vote for the second sentence of this article, which states that "the term is an abbreviation of pantaloons, a puzzling plurale tantum as it comes from the French pantalon, stemming via the buffoonish commedia dell'arte-character Pantalone from that Italian word'". A greater mixture of pretentiousness, stiltedness, snobbery and general awfulness I have yet to see. I would change it, but I think it is brilliant as it stands. Airport 1975 20:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] A photo would be nice
(At least of what Americans call "pants" I'm not sure we really want to see photos of what the Brits call pants.) Jon 20:42, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I happen to disagree on the latter point, if i'm understanding correctly.--The Sporadic Update 06:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Pants/Pant controversy
Have you noticed how the fashionistas are trying to foist the word "pant" as the singular for pants on us? Has a greater travesty occurred this week than this? Pants has always been the proper word until some marketing "genius" has tried to confuse the issue.
Shouldn't we include a section on this horrible series of events?
