AUGH: An ethnicity cannot graduate from university.

[zingerella]

 So I'm proofreading an anthology of First Nations literature. Super cool. But I've once again come up against a linguistic snag I encounter inevery work on Aboriginal or First Nations or Native anything that crosses my desk: the term "people."

In contemporary English, the noun "people" has a couple of different meanings: it can mean (singular) an

Comments

[dagibbs]

I agree with you on a people and peoples.

I'm not sure I agree on persons vs people as the plural of person. I would quite happily say that I saw 3 people walking down the street -- but would find it awkward to say that I saw 3 persons walking down the street. Similarly, I would say that 3 people gave a speech. I think that persons tends to be used when the individuals involved are to be considered individually -- I think most commonly in a legal or formal context.

[zingerella]

Persons is an outmoded usage, it's true; hence the note about "people" being the commonly accepted plural of "person." We've lost the distinction between the countable and non-countable nouns, and I'm fine with that. I'm NOT fine with "peoples" being used to mean the plural of "person." That just doesn't make sense.

[dagibbs]

I agree, there is no way peoples can be a plural of person.