Spoilers for Thursday 27th February 2020

[Tom S]

Great score by Ryan. Felt for Paul the returnee who would have beaten Ryan without doubt in some of his previous games.

[Graeme Cole]

Susie said you couldn't put the S on MUTTON, which surprised me. Perhaps restaurants don't serve it any more?

[Gavin Chipper]

Susie said you couldn't put the S on MUTTON, which surprised me. Perhaps restaurants don't serve it any more?

I heard that but wasn't sure if she'd said that you could or couldn't and was hoping someone would bring it up so I didn't have to check on All4 (which I might not have got round to doing anyway). I think she's just plain wrong.

[Thomas Carey]

Susie said you couldn't put the S on MUTTON, which surprised me. Perhaps restaurants don't serve it any more?

Happy birthday

[Ian Volante]

Needs 107 points today to take second seed spot. Certainly a strong chance of that. Also, he reminds me of the cameraman from Groundhog Day.

[Peter Mabey]

I don't think the restaurant sense really works - I can't imagine saying "I'll have a beef, and my friends are having muttons"

[David Williams]

But if you were ordering, perhaps you'd say "One beef and two muttons"? And them's the rules.

I think the restaurant rule does go too far, and you get some very contrived plurals. It was brought in because words like LAGER were only given as mass nouns, which is simply a deficiency of the dictionary. LAGER in the sense of 'glass of lager' is obviously a variant meaning, and a count noun. But the dictionary has changed, and the count noun meaning is given nowadays. LAGERS doesn't need a special rule to make it valid any more. Time to get rid of the rule?

[Ian Volante]

But if you were ordering, perhaps you'd say "One beef and two muttons"? And them's the rules.

I think the restaurant rule does go too far, and you get some very contrived plurals. It was brought in because words like LAGER were only given as mass nouns, which is simply a deficiency of the dictionary. LAGER in the sense of 'glass of lager' is obviously a variant meaning, and a count noun. But the dictionary has changed, and the count noun meaning is given nowadays. LAGERS doesn't need a special rule to make it valid any more. Time to get rid of the rule?

Bad example, lager is a verb anyway.

[Stewart Gordon]

Susie said you couldn't put the S on MUTTON, which surprised me. Perhaps restaurants don't serve it any more?

I don't get it either. Neither does it seem that the plural is something different. I thought the rule was that any noun denoting a kind of food or drink can be used as a count noun, denoting a portion of said food or drink, and therefore take a plural, and whether restaurants "serve it any more" is irrelevant. Besides, if it is releveant, how is the research conducted to determine whether restaurants "serve it any more"?

But POTEENS has been sometimes allowed and sometimes disallowed. I see both POTEENS and MUTTONS are allowed according to tcsquared at the moment.

[Stewart Gordon]

I think the restaurant rule does go too far, and you get some very contrived plurals.

Is "restaurant rule" the official name of this rule? I've always been inclined to call it the "portions rule", which I think reflects its scope more accurately.