I know that there is no plural words for sun, furnisher. There is a reason for that.
Why there is No plural Word for Some Words like Deer? What is the reason for that?
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
The English language has many anomalies which follow no rule or pattern. For instance, if the plural of goose is geese, why isn't the plural of moose, meese?
In the case of deer, you're only able to tell whether it is plural or singular by the context surrounding the word. Other examples of this include fish, sheep, and moose.
This question has been asked before by a member, and very well answered by StoneyB here:
English language learners would benefit from understanding that there is often no 'reason' or even generalised rule for singular and plural forms, and it is more a question of not why but how words evolve.
I quote our member and expert grammarian John Lawler's comment to the above linked question as a learned opinion that there may be no 'reason' for such things:
Why is not a question that can be answered about phenomena like this. All that can be said is that there is a class of animal words, including fish, salmon, deer, sheep, grouse, elk, and others, but not including minnow, cow, pig, boar, goat, chicken, turkey, and others, that have zero plural marking. There isn't any known reason why this is the case, but it is the case. – John Lawler Apr 25 '15 at 3:14
The same word is used for singular and plural in many languages, but the difference is indicated by the context, the choice of pronoun, and some other syntactic / grammatical clues embedded in the sentence. When the writer does not provide suffucient such clues, it can be uncertain if a word like 'deer' is used as singular or plural, as in my following (deliberate) snippet:
The tiger stalked the deer with patient determination. When he got close and finally charged, the deer took off in a flurry of hooves and ran headlong through the shallow stream. Within seconds the tiger brought down the deer he was chasing, which he suffocated with grim finality. All the other deer disappeared over the horizon in a cloud of dust.
Here deer has been used as singular only in the third sentence, and was employed as plural in the rest of the passage, but it is not clear right until the last sentence that the tiger was stalking and chasing a herd of deer rather than a single beast. It is usually recommended that the writer should take care to avoid ambiguity and construct the sentences so as to make such things very clear, unless there is some specific reason and conscious intention to mystify or mislead the reader.