News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why “children,” not “childs”? (2016) by kpil on Monday May 28, 2018 @02:11AM (#17170819)
Must do, actual Old Norse is similar to Old English and have similar plural endings and a generally similar grammar. Many irregular verbs share a common ancestor and are similar even today.

Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian have kept more of the insanely complex rules for pluralisation actually.

Re:Why “children,” not “childs”? (2016) by drsim on Monday May 28, 2018 @02:57AM (#17170961)
> Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian have kept more of the insanely complex rules for pluralisation actually.

Danish isn't insanely complex to pluralise (native English speaker who recently learned Danish).

The choice is either add -e or -er with some exceptions.

https://www.duolingo.com/comment/6279406/Plural-Endings-in-D...

Re:Why “children,” not “childs”? (2016) by kpil on Monday May 28, 2018 @04:09AM (#17171221)
Well, the Danish are more relaxed about most things...

Swedish is a bit more complex with arbitrary assigned neutral or uterum gender and definite articles.

But you'd probably be understood using -er in spoken Swedish for a large group of words. Written Swedish is more tricky.

https://medium.com/@mailmyswedish/plurals-in-swedish-76f1de9...

Re:Why “children,” not “childs”? (2016) by kpil on Monday May 28, 2018 @07:53AM (#17171937)
... I must say I have never really thought about the complex rules - I had to compare and I'd say Swedish is more complex than the other Nordic languages.

Although they kept the cases - that there are only traces of left in Swedish - even Icelandic seems simpler.