Why are pants called pants?

They are called trousers, America started calling the Pants for some reason.

a reply to: NeoSpace

The question ' do these pants make my fanny look big?' would mean something entirely different over here.

and "shorts"

originally posted by: NeoSpace
They are called trousers, America started calling the Pants for some reason.

Fine but it still has the "s".

The question wasn't why do we call trousers pants. The question was and is why we speak of pants as a set / plural.

It is one thing.

Why do we say pant S ?

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Oh, I don't know. I had an uncle that didn't wear underwear and his denim jeans that he always wore, as they aged, tended to show a particular wear spot. I never hear him complain.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Woodcarver
Because pant is what a dog does and you wouldn't want that on your legs.


a reply to: jafo1973

Especially if it is a leaky-tongued dog. All that dog saliva slobbering out.
Now cat fur.... that would make a nice pair of pants... fur facing in, of course.

Of course, but won't you leave bloody smears all over the place? I guess with comfy pants like that, some sacrifices are in order.

In italian they are called pantoloni which is also plural.
a reply to: jafo1973

a reply to: PorteurDeMort

Pants are short for pantaloons I believe. Our British members may have more information.

Well done.

Origin of pants, pantaloons

Pants is a shortened form of ‘pantaloons’. Pantaloons (kind of tights, trousers) derives from the French pantalon from the name of Pantaleone, a hero of comedia dell'arte (16th century), who used to wear such trousers.

The name Pantaleon is Greek and means "always a lion, in all things like a lion" [Panta- (always, all things) + -leon (lion)]. Source

a reply to: gimcrackery

In italian they are called pantoloni

‘Belonging to Pantaleone’.

a reply to: jafo1973
I've thought of a related question whcih may help find an answer to this one;
Why do we say "heads or tails", when each coin has just the one head and the one obverse?
"That's just for starters?".
"Spoilers?"
There may be something euphonic about adding the "s".

a reply to: DISRAELI

Why do we say "heads or tails", when each coin has just the one head and the one obverse?

For the same reason you say ‘black or white?’ or ‘red or white’?

By the way, the side with the head is the obverse of the coin. The ‘tails’ side is called the reverse.

‘For starters’ is a (probably American) derivative of the British ‘for a start’, which was common in an earlier generation. Another derivation was ‘for a kickoff’, which the Beatles liked to use, but which never really caught on.

‘Spoilers’ are aerodynamic devices.

originally posted by: Astyanax
For the same reason you say ‘black or white?’ or ‘red or white’?

My observation was about the apparent plural of "heads or tails", which appears illogical when there is only one coin. The was relevant to the similar query being raised in the OP.
Similarly the apparent plural of"starters", for a single starting event, and the apparent plural of "spoilers", the colloquial term (which I learned on ATS) for the single act of giving away the plot of a story.
The reason why something which is singular appears to be labelled in the plural. That was the question in hand.