Are you wearing a trouser?

No!

That is odd!

Originally trousers came in two pieces and each leg was put on separately which is why we call them a pair of trousers ......so I assume that from this catalogue you can buy just the one leg!

At the risk of being disrespectful, a lady I knew who was an amputee used to ask her carers to cut off one of the legs of her leggings. She used to call the amended garment her legging!

I believe that as far as "jeans" go, the fabric was actually "jean" so why the plural in this case? anyone know out of interest? But in answer to your question Annobel, No, it doesn't rankle me! But maybe now it does a little.

According to Wiki:

'^The word "jeans" comes from the French phrase bleu de Gênes, literally the blue of Genoa. Jeans fabric, or denim, originated in the French town of Nîmes, from which 'denim' (de Nîmes) gets its name.^'

What would we do without Wiki - right or wrong?

Obviously you can#t put a whole quotation in italics! Was trying to be clever...

Must have been La Redoute which is French where such things are singular, like the American math.

I hate pedantry, probably because my father was pedantry central. You can't stop language change; it's inexorable. Having said that, in this day and age, at this moment in time and short of blue sky ideas and thinking outside the box, I can get a bit annoyed.

No, not La Redoute. It was Cotton Traders which couldn't be more English in origin.

Anyone know why we don't call a Trouser Suit a Trousers Suit,and that good
old song ask's" Donald where's your Trouser's" not where's your Trouser.

Indeed. Cotton Traders, started by a rugby player, as I am informed by my other half, couldn't be more English. So much for my pedantry in assuming it must be French. Frank Cotton, what are you like!

Oh I klove this thread. fashion has gone all singluar. One buys a trouser, wears it with a court and Tee apparenlty. I blame Trinny and Susannah they started this nonsense on TV-look in all the fashion mags its all singluar - drives me mad!!!

On the subject of trousers , can I go slightly 'off thread' for a moment and ask why more and more women are now opting to wear trousers instead of skirts these days ?Do they not like to feel feminine anymore or is it that trousers are more practical ?

More practical indeed. In my experience, looking dignified or simply decent getting out of a car wearing a skirt with a length from just below the knee to shorter, is impossible (unless you are the Queen of course), a maxi skirt gets stuck in the door, and you drive off with half your clothing hanging out, not nice on a rainy day! Give me trousers every time.

I agree that practicality is the driving force. Also, it's not true that skirts are necessarily more feminine. In lots of cultures women have always worn trousers of one kind or another and, similarly, men have often worn skirts. For an example of utter feminity in trousers, think salwar kameez outfits. And what could be more attractively male than the kilt?

Ok olliesgran and Baggy , having thought it through I concede that you are right !.

Trousers much more practical. They can be elegant too, I wear black silk chiffon trousers for evening wear.

I love a frock! makes me feel feminine and sexy. Love Kirsty allsop who always wears frocks BUT trousers are more practical and warm so I do wear them as well but love my Monsoon and East frocks - eternal hippy I suppose!

Outfitters and tailors always refer to 'a trouser' - remember Ken and Kenneth in the Fast Show? "Ooh, Suit you Sir, The ladies like a gentleman in a trouser, don't they Sir?"

Struth, mate, I call 'em me strides...

Blimey feetle, you've trawled back a bit for this thread haven't you?

2011!

Yes I am, mind you my other leg is a bit cold

SA relatives talk about a 'speedo' for swimming trunks!

That would explain why the emotes in the original posts don't work on the mobile site

And the other gets cold, Jane 10???

Other ¥$??#
I tried to type 4 asterisks, but it came out blank