Call us toll-free

Quick academic help

Don't let the stress of school get you down! Have your essay written by a professional writer before the deadline arrives.

Calculate the price

Pages:

275 Words

$19,50

Also, how can I miss 'Criterion'? What would be correct usage?

This is a decidedly practical post. Here you’ll find all the rules (and non-rules) for making nouns plural. This is an area of some complexity in English, and I hope you find this article helpful reference. If you would like a hard copy of this material, click here to download a PDF version, including a linked table of contents:

What is the plural of thesis? The plural of thesis is theses.

Research Proposals, Dissertation Titles and Personal Journals. A research proposal is like an "action plan" for your proposed piece of research. It shows what

Hypothesis: Bacterial growth may be affected by temperature.

Hypothesis: Chocolate may cause pimples

The unidirectionality hypothesis does not claim that linguisticchange will occur in any particular instance, only that ifit does occur, it will be in the direction of to and not the other way around.

In a hypothesis statement, students make a prediction about what they think will happen or is happening in their experiment. They try to answer their question or problem.

A better way to write a hypotheses is to use a formalized hypotheses

Some nouns don’t change at all between singular and plural forms.

The similarities between the Synoptic text and the Gospel of Thomas displays a paratactic construction and a repeating threefold structure of the main verbs. In Mark 4:4, the author uses "seed fell / birds came / ate it" and similarly, in Thomas 9, "some fell / birds came / gathered them up". This repeating pattern of three appears throughout the different versions of parable suggesting that the idiom of this Jesus parable was comprised of short, clipped sentences organized in a threefold structure (Crossan p. 43). Furthermore, the repetitive pattern of the initial verb, "fell" is typical of the oral tradition (Scott p. 351). Examining Mark 4:3-4, Matthew 13:3-4 and Luke 8:5 we find almost word for word agreement. There are minor differences in Matthew, which uses the plural of "seeds" throughout parable, whereas, the texts of Mark and Luke cling to the singular. Also, Luke 8:5 adds the word "his" seed and expands the image of the seed falling to the path with an additional phrase, "and was trodden under foot". Because there is no independent agreement for this variation, and noting that it breaks the triadic structure, it suggests a Lukan insertion. An analysis of the opening in Thomas 9:1 displays a stronger threefold structure, whereas the Synoptics have used a bridge, "And as he sowed," as its third component of the triad (Scott p. 352). There appears strong agreement between Mark and Thomas, but using our criteria for a genuine Jesus parable, I hypothesize that Thomas 9:1-2 has the most signifying marks of an oral tradition-a compressed, lean, threefold structure suggesting it is the more authentic version of the parable (Funk p. 17).

Furthermore, theoretically speaking, it seems implausible to say that a Chinese noun, say, 'horse' refers to a mereological horse-stuff whole in the way in which a genuine mass term like 'water' refers to water-stuff. There are two reasons. First, the horse-whole and the water-whole, for instance, have different ontological structures: the horse-whole, in fact, is a collection of many separate individual horses, while the water-whole is a collection of much inseparable and interpenetrating stuff. Why this difference is significant is to be seen below. Second, assuming that a whole is divisible into parts above the molecule level, one can find that the transitivity of the parthood would highlight the different part-whole structures of the horse-whole and of the water-whole. If a horse is a part of the horse-whole, then, since a horse-leg is a part of a horse, a horse-leg is also a part of the horse-whole because the parthood is transitive; however, it is obvious that the noun 'horse' is supposed to refer to the horse rather than to the horse-leg. Nevertheless, on the other hand, the genuine mass noun, say 'water', would not be confronted with the same problem when what it refers to is taken as a mereological object, so long as water is divisible above the molecule level. These two reasons suggest two difficulties with the mass-noun hypothesis in regard to its explanatory power.

The question is; What is the correct usage of punctuation in the word “horses” to show ownership?
Order now
  • UNMATCHED QUALITY

    As soon as we have completed your work, it will be proofread and given a thorough scan for plagiarism.

  • STRICT PRIVACY

    Our clients' personal information is kept confidential, so rest assured that no one will find out about our cooperation.

  • COMPLETE ORIGINALITY

    We write everything from scratch. You'll be sure to receive a plagiarism-free paper every time you place an order.

  • ON-TIME DELIVERY

    We will complete your paper on time, giving you total peace of mind with every assignment you entrust us with.

  • FREE CORRECTIONS

    Want something changed in your paper? Request as many revisions as you want until you're completely satisfied with the outcome.

  • 24/7 SUPPORT

    We're always here to help you solve any possible issue. Feel free to give us a call or write a message in chat.

Order now

Here is what the Scofield Study Bible Notes say:

In this paper, I suggest and argue for a collective-noun hypothesis. Its main ideas are these: (1) Chinese nouns typically function, semantically and syntactically, in the way collective-nouns function, and the folk semantics of Chinese nouns are like those of collective-nouns; (2) their implicit ontology is a mereological ontology of collection-of-individuals both with the part-whole structure and with the member-class structure, which does justice to the role of abstraction at the conceptual level; and, (3) encouraged and shaped by the folk semantics of Chinese nouns, the classical Chinese theorists of language take this kind of mereological nominalism for granted; as a result, the classical Platonic one-many problem in the Western philosophical tradition has not been consciously posed in the Chinese philosophical tradition, and the classical Chinese philosophers seem less interested in debating the relevant ontological issues. This mereological collection-of-individuals model of reality, I believe, would provide a more reasonable interpretation of the semantics of classical Chinese nouns and the classical Chinese ontological theory.

Consider what Jesus said about His relationshipto the Father.

What emerges is a more ‘believer-friendly’ version of the pluralist hypothesis, which in its present form is perceived by many as incompatible with genuine faith.

What is the plural of hypothesis? - WordHippo

In contrast to those typical common nouns, the so-called count nouns like 'person' and 'horse', in Indo-European languages such as Greek and English, the syntax of Chinese nouns appears strikingly similar to the syntax of those uncountable nouns either 'collective nouns' (such as 'people', 'cattle' and 'police') or 'mass nouns' (such as 'water' and 'snow'). The reason that nouns are so called is a semantic reason: their direct referents are countable separate individuals: one person, nine horses, five mountains. The grammatical representation of this semantic point is this: count nouns have their plural forms, or, they can be pluralized. In this way, when count nouns are used in Indo-European languages, they refer either to one single individual or to many separate individuals. By contrast, collective nouns and mass nouns do not take pluralization. For, when they stand alone, collective nouns and mass nouns are not supposed to stand for countable individuals but for a whole, either a collection-whole or a mass-whole. It seems that Chinese nouns do not typically function in a count-noun pattern but in some non-count-noun pattern. For, grammatically, classical Chinese nouns have no plural forms, and even the nouns in modern Chinese have no plural form at least in the sense of 'plural forms' in the Indo-European languages. This linguistic fact seems to reveal and reflect the following semantic point: a Chinese noun, when standing alone, typically denotes a whole of many things or a whole of much stuff rather than one individual.

What's the plural form of hypothesis

The steps I suggest in developing further the pluralist hypothesis are based on those criticisms that are valid and reveal genuine deficiencies in Hick’s thought.

Order now
  • You submit your order instructions

  • We assign an appropriate expert

  • The expert takes care of your task

  • We send it to you upon completion

Order now
  • 37 684

    Delivered orders

  • 763

    Professional writers

  • 311

    Writers online

  • 4.8/5

    Average quality score

Order now
  • Kim

    "I have always been impressed by the quick turnaround and your thoroughness. Easily the most professional essay writing service on the web."

  • Paul

    "Your assistance and the first class service is much appreciated. My essay reads so well and without your help I'm sure I would have been marked down again on grammar and syntax."

  • Ellen

    "Thanks again for your excellent work with my assignments. No doubts you're true experts at what you do and very approachable."

  • Joyce

    "Very professional, cheap and friendly service. Thanks for writing two important essays for me, I wouldn't have written it myself because of the tight deadline."

  • Albert

    "Thanks for your cautious eye, attention to detail and overall superb service. Thanks to you, now I am confident that I can submit my term paper on time."

  • Mary

    "Thank you for the GREAT work you have done. Just wanted to tell that I'm very happy with my essay and will get back with more assignments soon."

Ready to tackle your homework?

Place an order