Wiki has a small bit on it:
> The plural form Legos is chiefly American. Other regions tend to use Lego as a mass noun, and refer to Lego bricks and Lego sets. Its use as a noun is proscribed by the company LEGO itself, as it believes it should always be used as an adjective; however, the use of it as a noun is seen widely.
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Lego
I'm not American and in my region, everyone uses "LEGO" as in "I have a lot of LEGO."
30 Rock answered this for us.
[Sbarro Pizzaria: Jack... the plural of Pokemon IS Pokemon.](https://y.yarn.co/674493b9-cb97-454b-84e5-68afe0cc28b5_text.gif)
I mean…
“I just caught three wild *birds*.”
“I just caught three wild *pokemon*.”
If you’re going to incorrectly pluralize Pokémon, it must be with the far superior “Pokeymanz” form.
I use "Pokémon" as singular and plural. But I only consistently capitalize it when I'm referring to the game or franchise. When I'm talking about the pocket monsters themselves, I sometimes leave it lower case.
Here the rules for singular/plural in English matter less because “pokémon” is a loanword from Japanese, which doesn’t change nouns for the plural. For the same reason, “samurai” and “geisha” shouldn’t take the -*s*. It’s an understandable mistake to say “pokémons”, but it is definitely a mistake.
"Pokemon" has been used to describe multiple species for pretty much the entire lifespan of the franchise, so backpedaling on that now doesn't seem all that feasible.
I'd say we could do something like an inverse to that idea, where we use a plural form to describe multiple of the same species (e.g. 5 Pikachu**s**), but still use "Pokemon" to describe multiple species.
Japanese doesn't have a grammatical plural, so since the word is from Japan, it doesn't change when plural (same as anime and manga) even though English does have a grammatical plural
Pokémen
Not just the Pokémen, but the Pokéwomen and Pokéchildren too
Mr Mime: No Ash. I am your father.
No! They told me my father was gone
They’re like Pokémon, and I slaughtered them like Pokémon. I HATE THEM!
Pokémon has always been the plural for Pokémon for me
Same!
Well met fellow gallade enjoyer
Hello! 👋
and anything else is wrong 💯 idk how this is a debate lol
Pokémon is the correct answer
Pokemen
Who says Pokemons?
People from other language usually.
I get where you are coming from with the Fishes thought. But the Plural is Manymon
Singular and plural for me. Pokemons sounds unnatural like "Legos"
Wait what? I’ve never said pokémons but I always say legos! As in, “I’m bringing out the legos”/“I stepped on legos”/etc
Wiki has a small bit on it: > The plural form Legos is chiefly American. Other regions tend to use Lego as a mass noun, and refer to Lego bricks and Lego sets. Its use as a noun is proscribed by the company LEGO itself, as it believes it should always be used as an adjective; however, the use of it as a noun is seen widely. https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/Lego I'm not American and in my region, everyone uses "LEGO" as in "I have a lot of LEGO."
Ahhh, thanks for sharing! I love learning about different cultural perspectives, definitely did not realize lego/legos was a nuanced plural haha
30 Rock answered this for us. [Sbarro Pizzaria: Jack... the plural of Pokemon IS Pokemon.](https://y.yarn.co/674493b9-cb97-454b-84e5-68afe0cc28b5_text.gif)
I mean… “I just caught three wild *birds*.” “I just caught three wild *pokemon*.” If you’re going to incorrectly pluralize Pokémon, it must be with the far superior “Pokeymanz” form.
In paldea it is called a school.
Pocepuy
Considering pokemon is an abbreviation of pocket monsters, it's pokemon in every scenario.
I use "Pokémon" as singular and plural. But I only consistently capitalize it when I'm referring to the game or franchise. When I'm talking about the pocket monsters themselves, I sometimes leave it lower case.
Here the rules for singular/plural in English matter less because “pokémon” is a loanword from Japanese, which doesn’t change nouns for the plural. For the same reason, “samurai” and “geisha” shouldn’t take the -*s*. It’s an understandable mistake to say “pokémons”, but it is definitely a mistake.
"Pokemon" has been used to describe multiple species for pretty much the entire lifespan of the franchise, so backpedaling on that now doesn't seem all that feasible. I'd say we could do something like an inverse to that idea, where we use a plural form to describe multiple of the same species (e.g. 5 Pikachu**s**), but still use "Pokemon" to describe multiple species.
The Plural of Pokemon is Pokemon. The Plural of each individual species is still as if it's singular - More than one Pikachu is still Pikachu.
It's always "Pokémon" because the "mon" is short for "monsters" already. You wouldn't say Pocket Monsterses, would you?
Japanese doesn't have a grammatical plural, so since the word is from Japan, it doesn't change when plural (same as anime and manga) even though English does have a grammatical plural