Is foot acceptable in plural height?

[Bewlay Bros]

If somebody asked me how tall I am, I would say

"I am six foot one (6"1)"

However looking at it I am inclined to think 6 feet one may actually be the better option.

Can anybody please clarify?

[nonomaybe]

Isn't 1.85metres, 6'2"?

[Peter Pedant]

er can I extend this ?

I commonly hear, 6 stone and 15 stone from olds. The youngsters use meteric and say 60 kilograms -and use old as a noun.

horses and children, you can refer to as three year old.
and even - if they are young - six month old.
but if very young - six weeks old.

any ideas.

PP

[Quizmonster]

I have to visit hospital every six months and the first thing they do is weigh me. The nurse reads off a figure in kilograms, to which I invariably reply, "What's that in real weight?" After a 'tut', she'll tell me, just to humour the silly old devil.
However, when a baby is born in that same hospital, one or other proud parent or relative always tells me the child is "Seven pounds nine ounces" or some such figure and never, ever "Three point four three kilograms."

[Bewlay Bros]

I was taught metric at school (born after metrification) and then in the real world used Imperial some 10 years later!!!!

We are not European (in spirit) WE ARE ENGLISH and long long IMPERIALISM.

I can honesty say I would not have a clue what a litre of milk looks like, a kg of mince or driving at 50km's.

Pants to Europe.

[GGM]

Half a century ago, when still at school, I was taught it was one foot and two feet.. Three feet equals a yard. Seldom have I heard people refer to a yard being the same as three foot.

I was also taught that in weight, the plural of stone was stone.

[Goodsoulette]

QM, with both my boys born in the last 7 years I was informed of their weight in kilograms. In fact I wouldnt know thier weight in pounds off the top of my head. Under 6lbs I tink but Im not sure.

[Quizmonster]

It could be, Goodsoulette, that these people just "translate" kilos to pounds for my benefit, when they see my grey hairs and wrinkles...ie they know I won't have a clue what they're talking about otherwise. On the other hand, you've just admitted you couldn't carry out the process in reverse, so maybe not.

(It's of no great interest to anyone, I'm sure, but I couldn't let the moment pass utterly unrecorded...the above is my 10,000the answer here on AB.)

[Goodsoulette]

Yay........................... hazaar for you QM!

[New Judge]

Just a little contribution to this fascinating (!) debate.

Railway lines are four feet eight and a half inches apart. The space between them is known by railwaymen as the �four foot�. Where there are twin tracks the space between each track is a little over six feet and is known as the �six foot�.

BTW Bewlay B, you�ll be pleased to know that the UK has still not quite converted to metric measurements. Milk and beer are still sold in pints (although the milk carton shows the ridiculous and meaningless 568ml). Most people still ask for their loose groceries and greengroceries in pounds and ounces, even though the legislation says that they have to be priced in kilos. Lastly, it is actually illegal for local authorities to provide roadsigns in anything other than miles.

[Quizmonster]

GGM, from your response, it seems that you are a bit of an oldster, just as I am. Accordingly, I am sure that you must many times have seen printed claims such as, "Our boat was swamped by a twenty-foot wave." By the same token, I am virtually certain that you will never have seen, "Our boat was swamped by a twenty-feet wave." Anyone who insisted on using 'feet' there would almost certainly have altered the structure of the sentence to read, "Our boat was swamped by a wave twenty feet high."

As I said earlier, when a numeral word such as 'twenty' appears immediately before the measurement in the circumstances under discussion here, the word remains 'foot' and is not pluralised to 'feet' . Cheers

[fredpuli47]

Younger people now are 'dual standard' . We must have confused them! The reason must be cultural, in that the younger people still have to deal with the older and so some old everyday measurements are handed down and survive through generations. My daughter is 20. She cooks in metric and once asked what 'lub' was in an old recipe (it was lb). She had to learn from us what a stone was but now prefers to give and think of her weight in stones, not kilos (" stones sound less") She measures and thinks of short distances and length in metric but long ones in miles and sees fields in acres not hectares, even though she uses hectares officially at work. Fluids are in litres and cc for her, not pints and gallons (to her the pint is like the gill was for the old: used and recognised in the glass but that's all). Ask her how tall someone is and she'll first give feet and inches. But how far away are they ?!" Forty or fifty metres!".

How long will this duality survive? Well, you can still, just, find French people who speak of the quart, and 'livre' is still not just 'pound' but what is commonly used for half a kilo.

[Quizmonster]

Metric will never quite supplant imperial in language terms. I can't imagine anyone saying, "If you don't get your finger, out I'll come down on you like 1016 kilograms of bricks!" Or, "Give him 2.54 centimetres and he'll take 1.60934 kilometres." Or, "You can't get 0.864 litres into a 0.432 litre pot."