Why can't we say "informations"?

Question

Why can't we use the word information in the plural form? "Give me all the informations you've got", even if it's wrong, sounds more beautiful to my non-native ear than "give me all the information you've got", and I don't know why.

Edit: This is not a duplicate question since I know that information is a mass noun; what I am asking is, why can't it be in plural like some other mass nouns can? Why is it like that when it seems more correct with s at the end?

You mean "all the information you've got"... What sounds good doesn't necessarily mean that it's right :( — itsols, Oct 03 '13 at 13:05
Information is a classic mass noun. Informations do exist, but only in a very specific context. — Andrew Leach, Oct 03 '13 at 13:08
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/65366/money-vs-monies/65427#65427 — Blessed Geek, Oct 03 '13 at 13:08
@AndrewLeach, can you give me an example where to use the word informations ? — Tech Support, Oct 03 '13 at 13:12
I can’t lay my hands on the reference, but David Crystal has reported an increase in the use of informations by native speakers, as a result of its use by non-native speakers. The OED has 59 citations showing its use. — Barrie England, Oct 03 '13 at 13:55
I see, I also used to say it a lot, as a non-native speaker. — Tech Support, Oct 03 '13 at 15:15
I actually tend to agree that the question is not quite a duplicate, but that's in no small part due to the fact that I don't understand what the question here is. In fact, as demonstrated by the accepted answer, even the OP agrees it's rhetorical at best. — RegDwigнt, Oct 04 '13 at 09:25
It's actually the comments on the best answer that i liked most, it made me understand that sometimes you just can't agree with the grammar, but that's what it is. — Tech Support, Oct 04 '13 at 10:04

score 24 · Answer 1 · edited Jul 25 '17 at 07:47

24

Because information is a mass noun, i.e. uncountable. In the same way you would say give me all the water in your bucket, rather than give me all the waters...

For discrete items of information, you could use facts.

edited Jul 25 '17 at 07:47

Dog Lover

6,445

answered Oct 03 '13 at 13:10

Chris H

21,709

1

Yes, you're correct about 'water in your bucket(s)' but we do use the plural like in 'trouble waters', don't we? – itsols Oct 03 '13 at 13:38
It's troubled waters, but yes we do. And many other phrases "still waters runs deep" for example. A decent dictionary definition will make clear those meanings. You could always substitute sand for water if you want a better example. – Chris H Oct 03 '13 at 14:07
@ Chris: Then someone would point to expressions like desert sands and the sands of time – FumbleFingers Oct 03 '13 at 14:26
@FumbleFingers I can't deny that - maybe "What's a perfect mass noun example" should be a question! Especially as (almost)anything food/drink related could be taken as portion of.... – Chris H Oct 03 '13 at 14:36
@ChrisH I don't think there are any instances where a mass noun cannot be countified. Air (as in what we breathe) is probably the nearest, but even then different planets would have different airs. [Airs and graces is not the same!] – Andrew Leach Oct 03 '13 at 14:41
My best example was knowledge, for which I can't think of a plural sense. But I agree in principle. – Chris H Oct 03 '13 at 14:43
@Chris: Nice try, but no cigar :) – FumbleFingers Oct 03 '13 at 15:01
1

@FumbleFingers I knew I'd failed - but didn't expect a simple google search to give such a solid example of the fact (I didn't test it myself as the internet has almost as many misspellings as cats). On a more serious note, I guess for any stuff there can be a set of varieties of stuff, i.e. a set of stuffs - it's just that some are more obscure than others. – Chris H Oct 03 '13 at 15:12
I've come across furnitures (Louis XIV, Louis XV ...) but not cutleries. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 03 '13 at 22:29
1

One could also use piece(s) of information to make it discrete and countable. – StevieP Jun 14 '16 at 09:22

score 8 · Accepted Answer · edited Sep 27 '17 at 11:44

8

Because we don't. I'm sorry, but that is the whole of the answer. Languages are as they are, not as anybody (native or foreign) wants them to be.

edited Sep 27 '17 at 11:44

Araucaria - Him

47,146

answered Oct 03 '13 at 17:23

Colin Fine

77,173

But Colin, we can't build a correct understanding of the language if we keep saying languages are as they are. – Tech Support Oct 03 '13 at 19:15
1

Why not? That's how children learn it. But seriously, I realise that this is a problem for learners of a language, but I don't think there is an answer. Whatever dictionary you use, it is wrong. Even if it is an online dictionary updated daily, there will be words and meanings that it hasn't got yet. And grammar books are worse, because they are nearly always incomplete, out of date, and sometimes plain wrong even at the time they're published, and get progressively more so as the language changes under them. – Colin Fine Oct 03 '13 at 20:08
1

Dictionary compilers have to decide on whether to 'endorse' (ie include) a string they've come across - from what I've seen of the process, a single example wouldn't convince most boards. That doesn't mean the string wouldn't be accepted a year later. Some 'words' are also removed as they fall out of use. Calling this process 'wrong' may not be the best description. But I agree that I've yet to meet a grammar I agree with totally. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 03 '13 at 22:34
1

@Tech Support I've upvoted Colin's depressing answer because I feel it's nearer the truth than the usual 'because it's a non-count noun' or (better) 'because it's usually a non-count noun'. When you think about it, giving it such a label doesn't explain why it isn't used in plural form (ie why it's non-count). In fact, modern usage is licensing countification, as Andrew Leach mentions above. It would be better to look at inherent nondiscreteness v divisiblity - but this doesn't give predictable results. "Furniture," which takes only singular verb forms, is etically discrete. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 03 '13 at 22:51
2

For another illustration of the principle that the count/non-count distinction lies not in an object but rather in the expression that refers to it, consider the English words "fruit" and "vegetables". The objects that these words describe are, objectively speaking, similar (that is, they're all edible plant parts); yet the word "fruit" is (usually) non-count, whereas "vegetables" is a plural count form. One can see that the difference is in the language, not in the reality of the objects. – Edwin Ashworth Oct 03 '13 at 22:52
Meanwhile, German has a general word for "vegetables" that, like English "fruit", is (usually) non-count: das Gemüse. British English has a slang word for "vegetables" that acts the same way: "veg" [rhymes with "edge"]. (Wikipedia: Mass Nouns) – Edwin Ashworth Oct 03 '13 at 22:52
This is the kind of answers i was looking for, and it's not a duplicate question since i was searching for the reason why, the other questions didn't provide that. I guess Mr Collin, and Mr Edwin, you made the thing totally clear. – Tech Support Oct 04 '13 at 08:20
3

This is the poorest answer to any question on this site. And it's certainly not the whole answer. – Arm the good guys in America Jul 23 '17 at 14:28

Why can't we say "informations"?

2 Answers2

Linked