2

As far as I know, in English, there is no number agreement when two nouns are used and the first one acts as a sort of adjective, just the last one goes in plural. For example I think that phrase in particular should be "weapon stocks" not "weapons stocks"

Quique
  • 602
  • 4
  • 12
  • It is indeed possible to pluralize the first element. I would have to think about whether there's a pattern to the cases where it's allowed or preferable. One example that comes to mind is "drinks order" (an order given at a restaurant for the drinks that the party wants). – Luke Sawczak Oct 25 '22 at 03:02
  • 2
    Your question isn't clear. Do you mean "started" instead of "stared"? Do you think that "weapons stocks" is incorrect? Are you asking about etymology (why the phrase changed from something else to "weapons stocks")? – MarcInManhattan Oct 25 '22 at 04:32
  • @MarcInManhattan I think the question is that in expressions like (1) book drive or (2) stamp collection, we don't pluralize the first word, although common sense suggests a plurality of books and stamps. Why do we pluralize the first word in (3) weapons stock? I note: we also do that for (4) systems analyst; and personally, I would say (5) drink order, apparently unlike Luke Sawczak. – Chaim Oct 25 '22 at 04:58
  • @Chaim Yes, I suspect that that is what OP meant, too, but it's really not clear. And that question has already been discussed on this site quite a few times. – MarcInManhattan Oct 25 '22 at 18:37
  • I think there are questions about this on ELU. It is sometimes done to prevent ambiguity (a "weapon stock" could refer to the back end of a rifle, which is often called a stock, as well as to a supply of a single weapon), or sometimes done when a noun is usually used in the plural or has a slightly different meaning in the plural ("arts faculty", maybe examples around "drinks" where the plural usually refers to alcohol or what's served in a bar). You just have to learn which version is more common, although it's not usually a serious error to get it wrong. – Stuart F Oct 26 '22 at 11:31

2 Answers2

1

You're right, there's never any number agreement between two nouns except when one is the other, like "They are doctors". "They" and "doctors" agree in number because they're the same thing.

In compound nouns, a plural noun can modify a singular one and vice-versa.

In most compound nouns, the first noun is singular. If the head noun is countable, then it can be plural:

classrooms
web pages
burger joints
bicycle stores

It's less common for the first noun to be plural, but it can be, and again, when it is, if it's countable, then it can be singular:

a weapons locker
our drinks order (from Luke Sawczak in the comments)

gotube
  • 49,596
  • 7
  • 72
  • 154
0

A noun being used as an adjective doesn't have to agree in number with the noun it modifies because they are referring to different things.

@gotube gave the example of "weapons locker". If one locker holds many weapons, that you should say "weapons locker". Weapons plural because there are many weapons, but locker singular because it is only one locker. If you had many such lockers, then they would be "weapons lockers".

Or if the noun only held one of the thing -- you've got weapons on my mind so consider "gun holster". Each holster only holds one gun, so it's a gun holster. If you had many of them, they would be gun holsters.

In your example, "weapon stocks" ... oh, do you mean stock as in the broad end of a rifle that goes against your shoulder, or stock as in a supply, like a stockpile? If you mean the part that goes against your shoulder, I'd say "weapon stock" or "weapon stocks", as each stock is only on one weapon. If you mean a stockpiles, I'd say "weapons stock" because there are presumably many weapons in your stockpile.

That said, sometimes we use the singular even when there are many because we are treating it as an uncountable noun. So I wouldn't be taken aback if someone said "weapon stockpile". I probably wouldn't say that myself, but.

Jay
  • 65,313
  • 1
  • 69
  • 142