Behalf: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
In modern usage, “behalf” is an [[invariable noun]], meaning it has no plural form. In the 15th and 16th century you did see “behalves” but it has fallen out of use, the theory being that the collected persons on whose behalf you are acting are indivisible. | {{pe}}In modern usage, “behalf” is an [[invariable noun]], meaning it has no plural form. In the 15th and 16th century you did see “behalves” but it has fallen out of use, the theory being that the collected persons on whose behalf you are acting are indivisible. | ||
But the [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]] in ''me'' thinks - is that so? A [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]] acts not on {{sex|her}} clients’ behalf, but on their ''[[behalves]]'' — and those individual behalf may conflict. | But the [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]] in ''me'' thinks - is that so? A [[Mediocre lawyer|lawyer]] acts not on {{sex|her}} clients’ behalf, but on their ''[[behalves]]'' — and those individual behalf may conflict. | ||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
No? | No? | ||
{{sa}} | |||
{{ | *[[Agency]] | ||
Revision as of 12:17, 23 March 2020
|
Towards more picturesque speech™
|
In modern usage, “behalf” is an invariable noun, meaning it has no plural form. In the 15th and 16th century you did see “behalves” but it has fallen out of use, the theory being that the collected persons on whose behalf you are acting are indivisible.
But the lawyer in me thinks - is that so? A lawyer acts not on her clients’ behalf, but on their behalves — and those individual behalf may conflict.
No?