Is it a UK thing to add the "s" to math? I see it pretty often but it never seems right. I've always used the word as an unchanging irregular plural similar to "sheep".
Edit: I was imprecise with my phrasing above, I really meant to say 'takes the form of (a regular plural)' instead of 'is' - I don't know if it is or is not technically a plural - the point was only that the shortened word 'Maths' follows the same form as the long version, which seems logically consistent.
The simple (linguistically obscure, but let's pretend) way to understand it is that there's an implied "the study of" before the word. So although you are studying multiple elements of a topic, the study itself is singular.
EDIT: also probably in a lot of European languages as well. I wonder to which extent this may be just a result of cultural exchange.
Which, when in the UK, becomes: "Also, 'math' sounds awkward and silly"
But math came from england via the oxford dictionary.
https://youtu.be/SbZCECvoaTA?t=50
Try this. Do you say "maths are fun" or "maths is fun"? What about physics. Do you say physics is difficult? Or physics are difficult.
Is it singular or plural?
That's the only justification. What other justification is there?
> it is just a different contraction of the word 'mathematics' than what you are used to.
Yes. Because the british mistakenly assumed mathematics was a "regular plural". For what reason would you keep the s at the end?
Do you shorten economics to econS or to econ? Do you takes ECONS 101?
The explanation was given here.
https://youtu.be/SbZCECvoaTA?t=50
Why are you so resistant to FACTS and HISTORY? I don't get people who argue even after given evidence.
That those who hear it can understand what the speaker is talking about -- I would say that is the only justification necessary (indeed, for any word), and is more than justified for the term "maths".
All I'm saying is that it was shortened to maths due to a misunderstanding of what mathematics is. And all I'm saying is that when british people saying the "correct" way to shorten mathematics is to shorten it to "maths", I'm saying their JUSTIFICATION is wrong. Because mathematics is not a regular plural.
Okay? I'm explaining it as simply as possible. Use maths if you want. If that is what is used in britain, fine. I'm just saying the JUSTIFICATION for why british people say it is "correct" is wrong. Okay?
I'm not. I don't care. I know the world will eventually choose "math" because that's the way america says it.
The only people who are obsessed are people justifying "maths".
I don't care if you say "maths". Just don't justify it as being "logical".
> As far as I can tell, there are no official rules for shortening words in English, so I don't think that 'maths' is in any more need of a justification than 'math'.
There is. You add an "s" for REGULAR PLURALS. Like STATISTIC is a noun. Statistics is a regular plural. So statistics becomes STATS rather than stat. It's a simple rule. It's why economics is shortened to ECON rather than econs... Because economic is not a noun. Economics is not a regular plural.
> Or 'stats' vs 'stat' for statistics, come to that.
Statistic is a noun. Statistics is a regular plural. Regular plurals you shorten with s. So statistics shortening to stats makes sense. Mathematic isn't a noun. Mathematics isn't a regular noun. I already explained this to you.
The fact that you think statistics supports your argument just goes to show that you really aren't getting it. Why you are so invested in pushing a lie even after people have corrected you, I'll never know.
No, mathematics is uncountable, not plural. I've always assumed it was because “math” is a distinct noun already, for a mowing of grass (were mathematics, and hence maths, plural rather than uncountable, there'd actually be more potential for confusion between “maths”, the short form of mathematics, and “maths”, the plural of “math”, which is avoided because uncountable nouns are grammatically treated as singular for most purposes, like subject/verb agreement; conversely, there is opportunity for such confusion with “math” as the short form. Admittedly, “math” for a mowing is rare enough in current usage outside of modified forms like “aftermath” that that's not big deal now.)
> You wouldn't shorten software to "softe" or equipment to "equipe"
Well, sure, because the long form of latter doesn't end with an “e” and equipt is already the related adjective form. Though shortening equipment as “equip’t” is something I've encountered (the apostrophe makes unambiguous that it's a shortening and minimizes confusion with the adjective.)
It's just like arguing that the German Mathematik is silly, or that the English mathematics is.
Sure there is. The british argument for maths is that mathematics is "regular plural". Which it is not. It is a "mass noun". The british say maths IS fun, not maths ARE fun.
Economics is another such word. Do british people go around saying econs 101?
So the british argument for maths doesn't make any sense. So there are plenty of argument AGAINST maths. No argument FOR maths. Plenty of argument for math. No argument against math.
Check out eg http://fine.me.uk/emonds
No. The reason why it was shortened to maths was because of the reasons stated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbZCECvoaTA
The sensible and correct shortening is math. That's how it was originally shortened to. The brits went off-kilter in the 1900s and added the s to math.
Everyone, including brits, say mathematics IS difficult. Nobody says mathematics ARE difficult.