Talk:cherubims

Surely we should note here that, irrespective of the fact that it was used in such an authoritative source, this plural-of-a-plural is incorrect. Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 23:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I thought I'd managed that by pointing out that the translators had chosen to add the -s even though they would have known (obviously!) that the word was already plural? If you want to improve it go ahead. But note that it wasn't a mistake. Robert Ullmann 11:46, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know that it is not a mistake, but intentional use is not correct use, no matter who uses it. Can you shed light on why they chose to add the superfluous s? Raifʻhār Doremítzwr 14:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure: to them, as to you and me, "cherubim and seraphim" are clearly plurals; we don't even think about it. But to the target audience of the Authorized Version, who did not (and mostly do not now ;-) know any Hebrew (or Latin), they chose to write it with -s so it would read as an English plural. There is a reasonable argument that since they borrowed the word into English, and chose to adapt it as with most borrowings, that in English the correct singular is cherubim and the plural cherubims. This is, after all, the origin of the English language word. Robert Ullmann 14:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Cherubim is sometimes used as a singular (see citations there) thus this can also be the plural of that singular term. Equinox ◑ 03:37, 4 March 2022 (UTC)