Why are panties plural and Bra Singular?
336303
For the same reason that pants is plural and shirt is singular.
900160
Because it is plural.  In spanish if you abbreviate something in plural you double the initial.
320868
the first is plural, the second singular.
951642
It's plural.\n\nCoach
1111457
In Latin, the plural is "fora", because the noun "forum" follows the second type of declension and has neutral gender. For this type of declension, you have a nominative singular neutral noun ending in "-um", and its corresponding nominative plural ends in "-a".\n\nHowever, if you actually mean the Present-Day English noun that is derived from the Latin noun, the regular plural "forums" is more frequently used than "fora", by adding the regular English plural ending "-s". "Fora" is also used, but less frequently.\n\n"Fori" is always incorrect, regardless of whether it's Latin or English.
906199
Never gave this one much thought until your question appeared....    "Please purchase three computer mice"  or "Please purchase three computer mouse units."  I think the meaning  is clear in both, so both the plural and the singular work in context.  Maybe an English language lecturer will provide a definitive answer.
1163976
why can't women go topless? Because America is so anal that's why. Breast's are seen as nothing but something sexual, when that wasn't the purpose for them. The purpose is a way to provide food for infants and baby's. I for one, think clothes suck. I would LOVE to be able to walk around free like those in African tribes and such. so freeing!
38343
It's timeouts.  The word is one word, not two - as in, timeout, not time out.  So hence, following English rules, the plural form would have the s at the end of the single word.  Plus, if you check out the closed captioning in football games, you'd hear (and read!) the announcers say timeouts several times in the closing minutes of each half.
122874
it does mean "reveal" - but unsure if it is plural
669867
It would be usual to say "equipment is".\n\nTheoretically we could say "equipments are" \nand the plural form is accepted in the Scrabble world.
33558
Pair, pare, pear. LOL....language is a mystery.\n\nPeople want to know why we don't say "a pair of bras." Also, it's strange that the phrase pair of pants is the only way to refer to one such item, since the word pants is always plural. This explains why the singular pant is sometimes used, especially by the clothing and fashion industry. Though jarring to some people, singular pant has been in use since the late 19th century. \n\nPants is an Americanism first recorded in 1840, and was considered a vulgar term for at least a century afterwards. It is a shortened form of pantaloons, from Pantalone, a stock character in Italian commedia dell'arte, who wore a combination of loose breeches and stockings. The term pantaloons is first recorded in English about 1600, and was applied at different periods to leg garments of different styles. \n\nSo why do we say "pair of pants/shorts/trousers/slacks?" Until the late 17th century, leg garments were made in two parts, one sleeve of fabric for each leg, so calling them a "pair" made perfect sense. The two pieces of woven cloth (or animal hides) were tied to a belt to hold them up. Supposedly the resulting indecent exposure made the "codpiece" a useful invention. From the Columbia Encyclopedia I learned the history of pants: After the Middle Ages, a loose trouser, bound at the ankle, was worn. Then the lower legs became more fitted, and these "breeches" were shortened to the knee and worn with fitted cloths called "hose." Breeches grew shorter and hose became longer; by about 1450 the hose reached the hips and were attached by points (laces) to the doublet. Later the breeches and hose formed one garment, like tights. As the upper part of the hose became more puffed out, a separation occurred: the upper part was called "trunk hose," and the leg coverings were called "stockings." Trousers grew longer and stockings shorter. In the early 17th century, men wore pantaloon breeches, but a tight-fitting trouser was introduced in the late 18th century, eventually superseding knee breeches, or knickers. The so called "trunk hose" evolved into what we now call "pants," and the so called "stockings" are what we now also call "hose."
946740
The plural of dessert is desserts. It can be in the plural. For instance if there were a number of different kinds of desserts in restaurant, they would be desserts.\n\nNone of the desserts was found.\n(The word 'none' is short for 'not one', and it always takes a singular verb).
375239
Because "man" and "woman" are originally of German origin, where plurals are often made by changing the ending to -en. English is a Germanic language, so we still retain some German rules for our spelling, especially of plurals (child > children) "Human," as the other writer indicated, is from Latin, so it follows the "regular" English rule for plurals, which is "add -s".
596721
Hmmm...no. It's not a sentence, so it's not clear what rules of grammar apply, but I don't think "a symbol" can be taken to refer grammatically to "burn their underpants"--so that makes the underpants themselves a symbol of throwing off their matriachal oppressors. You might want "to represent throwing off..."\n\nI am a matriarchal supporter but that doesn't make me any less a grammar queen.
208000
making it plural by adding "s" or "es"
309860
lingiere will be pronounced as lon-jaer\n but i think what u meant was LINGERIE meaning sensual clothings...and it is pronounced as lon-je-rae
171101
What?  I don't understand the question.\n\nDo you mean you want the Spanish word for "rules"?  I would usually use "reglas" (it's feminine, plural).