Why do they call it a pair of pants when there is only one of them?

1. 78

   TheHoleStoryposted 3 years ago

   Why do they call it a pair of pants when there is only one of them?
   
   

   replyreport
2. 88

   Adventuretravelsposted 3 years ago

   Actually in the UK they're called a pair of trousers. The word comers from 'drawers' and the word pants comes from 'pantaloons' which is an Italian word. They used to be 2 garments one for the top and one for the legs - but now they're just one garment. that's all I know -am I right??

   replyreport
   1. 61

      ChristineVposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      well, this makes sense.

      replyreport
3. 69

   word55posted 3 years ago

   a pant is one leg. Each pant is one so, a pair of pants always equal a pair. Here's another controversial definition: PANT. 1 : an outer garment covering each leg separately and usually extending from the waist to the ankle —usually used in plural. 2 plural chiefly British : men's underpants. Furthermore, Where did the word, panties come from?

   replyreport
4. 60

   C.V.Rajanposted 3 years ago

   It is precisely based on the same "logic" behind calling scissors a pair of scissors!

   replyreport
5. 81

   peachpurpleposted 3 years ago

   a pair means two, since a ants and shorts has two legs, so it is a pair

   replyreport
6. 71

   The Examiner-1posted 3 years ago

   In the 16th century each leg was pulled on separate and then belted together at the top, which were eventually called a pair of pants and the usage stuck even after they became one piece.

   replyreport
   1. 91

      MizBejabbersposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I never heard that one. It does make sense to a question that has been asked for centuries without a straight answer.

      replyreport
   2. 94

      PAINTDRIPSposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I believe this is correct.  Costumers and anyone studying fashion through the ages knows this one.  They also developed a "cod piece" to cover the gap between the legs with ties so a man could have easy access.  Of course zippers changed all that!

      replyreport
7. 76

   Randall Guinnposted 3 years ago

   It looks like you have your answer already, but yes at one time pants were made of separate pieces, much like Native American leggings and breach clout.

   replyreport
8. 84

   alancaster149posted 3 years ago

   Earlier on in the northern lands, including Anglo-Saxon regions, they were known as 'breeks' (also 'breeches').
   A famed Danish Viking king named Ragnar 'Lothbrok' would have been known in modern English as 'Leather breeks', the nickname becoming the name 'Ladbroke', a well known chain of 'bookies' or 'turf accountants' (betting shops).
   Although it's only one item, we've got two legs. Most people in the north of England of working class descent call them breeches.
   In a play on words: 'I've burnt my breeches' (the original is '... burnt my bridges), i.e., can't go back. Back in the 60's and 70's we called them 'strides', remember? That seems to have gone the way of all things.   
   In Scotland they're called 'trews' or 'troosers' (as in Andy Stewart's song, 'Donald, weere's yer troosers?'), worn by the military in winter by some regiments instead of the kilt.

   replyreport
9. 29

   Venkatachari Mposted 3 years ago

   Very intelligent and may be difficult to explain. It is called so because of the reason that it covers waist and legs. In maths also there is one shape with three holes known as pair of pants. May be, due to that reason also the trousers are known as  pair of pants. But, nowadays, I do not think that anybody still call them as pair of pants.

   replyreport