# 36 thousands or 36 thousand?

I'm almost sure it's 36 thousands, since we're talking about 36 not 1. But I'm in doubt because 36 already indicates that it's more than 1, so maybe, just maybe, it could be 36 thousand?

-
–  TimLymington Feb 4 '12 at 11:26

Oh, The grand old Duke of York,
He had ten thousand men;
He marched them up to the top of the hill,
And he marched them down again.

You can have thousands of soldiers, but when you are being exact, you have n thousand of them. same for hundreds, dozens or millions.

-
I am annoyed at the fact that Microsoft Word didn't correct me on this one. I'm a software developer and I have no idea how they let something as simple as this slide. Shame on them ::- ). Also, thanks on you. –  Axonn Feb 3 '12 at 23:04

To explain a bit: the word 'thousand' is part of the number, which is modifying the noun (whatever it is that you're counting). Because the number is greater than 1, the noun takes the plural form, but the number itself does not change form. Would you say "sixteens men" because sixteen is greater than one? I certainly hope not. "Sixteen thousand" is still a number, just like "sixteen" is; just because it's expressed in two words doesn't make you treat the individual words differently.

-
A good and valuable explanation. +1 and +thank you ::- D. –  Axonn Feb 4 '12 at 23:26

36 Thousand.

If it were some other noun, i.e. not just a number, then perhaps thousands would be appropriate — e.g. 36 pots of 'hundreds and thousands'.

But otherwise, thousand is the norm.

-

It's 36 thousand, because that is the naming convention in our number system. We do not say "two hundreds;" rather we say "two hundred."

-