Poll: Lego vs Legos

[So]

Originally posted by: silverpig
They own the word. They can't control who says what, but they can dictate how it can be used. And they say that LEGOS should not exist.

People could walk around calling you Janet and you don't have any control over them doing it, but it doesn't make it your name.

And that is a completely different case. I'm sure coke, kleenex and xerox are all very unhappy about what has happened to their names. Lego cannot do anything about what has happened to their name, outside of their own documentation. Besides, the point is moot, as lego themselves confirm that LEGO is not the plural form of LEGO, as you assert in your post.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: silverpig
They own the word. They can't control who says what, but they can dictate how it can be used. And they say that LEGOS should not exist.

People could walk around calling you Janet and you don't have any control over them doing it, but it doesn't make it your name.

And that is a completely different case. I'm sure coke, kleenex and xerox are all very unhappy about what has happened to their names. Lego cannot do anything about what has happened to their name, outside of their own documentation. Besides, the point is moot, as lego themselves confirm that LEGO is not the plural form of LEGO, as you assert in your post.

I'm asserting that LEGOS is not the plural.

You can play with LEGO, you can play with LEGO bricks, but you can not play with LEGOS (or so say the inventors and owners of the word).

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: silverpig
They own the word. They can't control who says what, but they can dictate how it can be used. And they say that LEGOS should not exist.

People could walk around calling you Janet and you don't have any control over them doing it, but it doesn't make it your name.

And that is a completely different case. I'm sure coke, kleenex and xerox are all very unhappy about what has happened to their names. Lego cannot do anything about what has happened to their name, outside of their own documentation. Besides, the point is moot, as lego themselves confirm that LEGO is not the plural form of LEGO, as you assert in your post.

I'm asserting that LEGOS is not the plural.

You can play with LEGO, you can play with LEGO bricks, but you can not play with LEGOS (or so say the inventors and owners of the word).

Thank you, I couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[meltdown75]

never used the s

when i think of a kid saying legoS, i picture mike myers in that skit from snl, where he is chained to the jungle jim...

 

[So]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: silverpig
They own the word. They can't control who says what, but they can dictate how it can be used. And they say that LEGOS should not exist.

People could walk around calling you Janet and you don't have any control over them doing it, but it doesn't make it your name.

And that is a completely different case. I'm sure coke, kleenex and xerox are all very unhappy about what has happened to their names. Lego cannot do anything about what has happened to their name, outside of their own documentation. Besides, the point is moot, as lego themselves confirm that LEGO is not the plural form of LEGO, as you assert in your post.

I'm asserting that LEGOS is not the plural.

You can play with LEGO, you can play with LEGO bricks, but you can not play with LEGOS (or so say the inventors and owners of the word).

Thank you, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Okay, so we agree that despite what you say in your poll, it is 'Lego bricks' which got shortened to 'legos' in the vernacular. It may not be correct in the corporations eyes, but if you drop the 'bricks' you have to add an s to lego or it's completely wrong, not just in the eyes of the comany but in every gramatical sense.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: silverpig
They own the word. They can't control who says what, but they can dictate how it can be used. And they say that LEGOS should not exist.

People could walk around calling you Janet and you don't have any control over them doing it, but it doesn't make it your name.

And that is a completely different case. I'm sure coke, kleenex and xerox are all very unhappy about what has happened to their names. Lego cannot do anything about what has happened to their name, outside of their own documentation. Besides, the point is moot, as lego themselves confirm that LEGO is not the plural form of LEGO, as you assert in your post.

I'm asserting that LEGOS is not the plural.

You can play with LEGO, you can play with LEGO bricks, but you can not play with LEGOS (or so say the inventors and owners of the word).

Thank you, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Okay, so we agree that despite what you say in your poll, it is 'Lego bricks' which got shortened to 'legos' in the vernacular. It may not be correct in the corporations eyes, but if you drop the 'bricks' you have to add an s to lego or it's completely wrong, not just in the eyes of the comany but in every gramatical sense.

You're missing the entire point. It's Lego. No s. That word does not exist. You play with lego the toy or the lego bricks.

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: So

Originally posted by: silverpig
They own the word. They can't control who says what, but they can dictate how it can be used. And they say that LEGOS should not exist.

People could walk around calling you Janet and you don't have any control over them doing it, but it doesn't make it your name.

And that is a completely different case. I'm sure coke, kleenex and xerox are all very unhappy about what has happened to their names. Lego cannot do anything about what has happened to their name, outside of their own documentation. Besides, the point is moot, as lego themselves confirm that LEGO is not the plural form of LEGO, as you assert in your post.

I'm asserting that LEGOS is not the plural.

You can play with LEGO, you can play with LEGO bricks, but you can not play with LEGOS (or so say the inventors and owners of the word).

Thank you, I couldn't have said it better myself.

Okay, so we agree that despite what you say in your poll, it is 'Lego bricks' which got shortened to 'legos' in the vernacular. It may not be correct in the corporations eyes, but if you drop the 'bricks' you have to add an s to lego or it's completely wrong, not just in the eyes of the comany but in every gramatical sense.

While it may not be what they want, the majority of people just say 'legos'. I think the brand name has been lost in the mix, like kleenex or xerox.

I mean, someone mentioned Ford. Do you have to say, "I just bought two Ford automobiles." when you could just say, "I just bought two Fords."?

 

[ucdbiendog]

Originally posted by: silverpig
I say it's called lego. I play with lego. I had lego when I was a kid.

If you have 4 bricks in your hand you say: "Check out this lego," or "I have 4 lego blocks."

Saying I played with legos just sounds wrong.

First, you would only say the latter if they were called lego blocks. The toy is called lego. Second, not all legos are in the shape of a block, they hace all kinds of shapes now days. thats my 2 cents

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: ucdbiendog

Originally posted by: silverpig
I say it's called lego. I play with lego. I had lego when I was a kid.

If you have 4 bricks in your hand you say: "Check out this lego," or "I have 4 lego blocks."

Saying I played with legos just sounds wrong.

First, you would only say the latter if they were called lego blocks. The toy is called lego. Second, not all legos are in the shape of a block, they hace all kinds of shapes now days. thats my 2 cents

Sorry... LEGO bricks.

 

[Cobalt]

Originally posted by: silverpig
Do you also say: "I'm going out to drink some beers," or "I'm going out to drink some beer."

Do you also say: "I'm going out to have a couple of beer with the guys" instead of "I'm going out to have a couple of beers with the guys?"

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: cobalt

Originally posted by: silverpig
Do you also say: "I'm going out to drink some beers," or "I'm going out to drink some beer."

Do you also say: "I'm going out to have a couple of beer with the guys" instead of "I'm going out to have a couple of beers with the guys?"

Do you say "I played with a couple of legos?"

 

[Howard]

I'm going to have to side with silverpig, even though I say the plural form as the singular with an 's' appended.

 

[lavagirl669]

let go my legos

 

[callmesteve]

I myself definitely played with LEGOS

 

[So]

Originally posted by: silverpig

Originally posted by: cobalt

Originally posted by: silverpig
Do you also say: "I'm going out to drink some beers," or "I'm going out to drink some beer."

Do you also say: "I'm going out to have a couple of beer with the guys" instead of "I'm going out to have a couple of beers with the guys?"

Do you say "I played with a couple of legos?"

Well, yes. Simply because 'I played with a couple of lego bricks' sounds retarted.

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior

Originally posted by: notfred
1 block is a Lego. 4 blocks are Legos.

 

[PCboy]

Lego my leggos. Oh, that's a Eggo.

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: lavagirl669
let go my legos

Haha. :thumbsup:

 

[Schneider879]

I love legos.

 

[DeRusto]

Gah, silverpig.. So is correct on this matter. It isn't technically correct to refer to LEGO bricks as either "Lego" or "Legos".. they should ALWAYS be called "LEGO bricks" since the brand name is LEGO and the toy is a plastic building brick.. You can't use LEGO's own site to prove that "Lego" is both singular and plural since they do not condone the word's vernacular use. What you initially asked was how others spell the plural form of "Lego" as a vernacular term and, perhaps also, the actual gramatically correct way of doing so. Gramatically, "Legos" is correct and the poll overwhelmingly shows that most people say "Legos".

 

[bastula]

Originally posted by: Colt45
Plural of Lego is still "Lego"

saying legos makes you an incompetent fucktard.

Thank you amen. Stupid people from this country always want to change something to make it better, when it actually makes it worse.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: bastula

Originally posted by: Colt45
Plural of Lego is still "Lego"

saying legos makes you an incompetent fucktard.

Thank you amen. Stupid people from this country always want to change something to make it better, when it actually makes it worse.

read the thread. Anyone with half a mind agress that the plural of lego is NOT lego.

Either A: Lego has no plural form.
Or B: You accept that the plural form has become Legos.
Else C: You are dim.

 

[EmoHawk]

Why do americans have to screw with everyones language?? Europe was quite happy with the whole lego concept (singular and plural) until americans tried to change things. Lego is lego is lego is lego, nothing can be done to change that, end of story.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: EmoHawk
Why do americans have to screw with everyones language?? Europe was quite happy with the whole lego concept (singular and plural) until americans tried to change things. Lego is lego is lego is lego, nothing can be done to change that, end of story.

Not according to the lego website, end of story.

<I hate cheap rhetorical moves like that>

 

[EmoHawk]

Originally posted by: So

read the thread. Anyone with half a mind agress that the plural of lego is NOT lego.

Either A: Lego has no plural form.
Or B: You accept that the plural form has become Legos.
Else C: You are dim.

Is the plural of fish fishs? Maybe if your a 5 year old and don't know any better but after going to school people are expected to understand the concept of language, its forms and its origins. Just because it may sound the same doesn't mean its spelt that way, most people got past phonics a long time ago.