24 ms·

I've always called them Lego. Not Legos. Is that an American thing? (UK citizen here). Just curious.

• koralatov 14y ago
  I'm in the UK too, and it's always been `Lego' for both singular and plural, so I suspect `Legos' is something they say Across the Pond. I'm pretty sure I've heard it used in American films in the past.
• dalke 14y ago
  It's a bit of an annoyance. The company really wants people to say "Lego", not "Legos", out of trademark concerns. Starting in the 1980s, "Susan Williams" from Lego included a message in the catalog saying that they don't use the name "Legos" but instead "Lego bricks or toys." As http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/10839/legos-not-lego/47223#47223 http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/10839/legos-not-l... says, it became a shibboleth; if someone said "Legos" then they weren't a true fan. This was in Miami in the 1980s. Others at that link tend to say that "Legos" is an Americanism. My information could easily be insular and outdated.
• Nursie 14y ago
  Lego is definitely, definitely a collective noun like 'sand'. You have a grain of sand or if you have a lot you just have sand. You have a Lego brick or if you have a lot of them you have Lego. I am also British
  • jmount 14y ago
    But wouldn't different types of sand taken as a collection be "sands?" Just as many types of fish are fishes?
    • shocks 14y ago
      Er, I'm pretty sure fishes is wrong... edit: I stand corrected! Thanks Google. :)
    • Nursie 14y ago
      I'm not sure 'fishes' is valid (British) English either TBH, maybe it's a pointer to a more general rift between UK and US language use. The OED does list 'fishes', but I've never heard it used except in jest or by people trying to be cute. Lolcat speak :) We would say 'The sands of the sahara' and 'different types of sand' or 'different sands' sound equally valid.
      • rhplus 14y ago
        See also formal versus notional agreement. British English tends to favor notional, prime example being sports commentary: "Liverpool are playing well" versus "Boston is playing well". Wikipedia highlights some other good examples: "The staff is busy" versus "The staff are busy", "The Rolling Stones are a classic band" versus "The Rolling Stones is a classic band". The differences sound stilted if you're not used to them. Except, of course, when they're poetic: "Oliver's Army are on their way/Oliver's Army is here to stay". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_collective_nouns#Metonymic_merging_of_grammatical_number http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_collective_nouns#Metony... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_differences#Formal_and_notional_agreement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_di...
• drv 14y ago
  I am from the midwestern US, and my friends and family all called them "Legos". We would say things like "play with Legos"; the alternative "play with Lego" sounds stilted to my ears. I guess the reasoning is that one block is "a Lego", so multiple blocks must be "Legos".
• nevster 14y ago
  In Australia it's definitely just Lego