Mixing
Is 'guts' singular or plural?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Is 'guts' singular or plural? Like, which is correct: "Guts are required for this" or "Guts is required for this"?
singular-vs-plural
edited 11 mins ago
Laurel
3,5971124
asked 7 hours ago
Dikshit Gautam
111
New contributor
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Is 'guts' singular or plural? Like, which is correct: "Guts are required for this" or "Guts is required for this"?
singular-vs-plural
edited 11 mins ago
Laurel
3,5971124
asked 7 hours ago
Dikshit Gautam
111
New contributor
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
noun [plural] informal macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/guts
– Ronald Sole
6 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Is 'guts' singular or plural? Like, which is correct: "Guts are required for this" or "Guts is required for this"?
singular-vs-plural
edited 11 mins ago
Laurel
3,5971124
asked 7 hours ago
Dikshit Gautam
111
New contributor
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Is 'guts' singular or plural? Like, which is correct: "Guts are required for this" or "Guts is required for this"?
singular-vs-plural
singular-vs-plural
edited 11 mins ago
Laurel
3,5971124
asked 7 hours ago
Dikshit Gautam
111
New contributor
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 11 mins ago
Laurel
3,5971124
asked 7 hours ago
Dikshit Gautam
111
New contributor
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 11 mins ago
Laurel
3,5971124
edited 11 mins ago
Laurel
3,5971124
edited 11 mins ago
Laurel
3,5971124
3,5971124
asked 7 hours ago
Dikshit Gautam
111
New contributor
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 7 hours ago
Dikshit Gautam
111
asked 7 hours ago
Dikshit Gautam
111
111
New contributor
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
noun [plural] informal macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/guts
– Ronald Sole
6 hours ago
add a comment |Â
noun [plural] informal macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/guts
– Ronald Sole
6 hours ago
noun [plural] informal macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/guts
– Ronald Sole
6 hours ago
noun [plural] informal macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/guts
– Ronald Sole
6 hours ago
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
It could be singular or plural depending on the context. "Gut" and "guts" have several different meanings which could be used in the OP's sentence.
If "guts" means "the entrails of an animal, removed by a butcher" or "personal courage or determination" then it is plural - "Guts are required for this".
IF "gut" is a mass noun meaning "Fibre made from the intestines of animals, used especially for violin or racket strings or for surgical use." then like all mass nouns it is singular - "Gut is required for this."
Reference for meanings of "gut(s)" : https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/gut #s 1.2, 3, and 4.
answered 6 hours ago
alephzero
1,510411
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Guts is used widely used informally especially in British English to mean fortitude, courage or determination:
guts [plural]
informal the courage and determination you need to do
something difficult or unpleasant
It takes guts to start a new business on your own.
have the guts (to do something)
No one had the guts to tell Paul what a mistake he was making.
Guts (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English)
The plural designation is also shown in the entries in Merriam-Webster, Collins, and Oxford Learner's dictionaries.
answered 5 hours ago
Michael Harvey
8,7031723
Yeah, but I think almost all native speakers (except grammatically-cowed "hypercorrectionists") would prefer singular Guts is what you need for this job over plural Guts are what you need for this job. Well, that's what I think off the top of my head anyway. Obviously I know which I prefer, but I might check out Google Books for the same syntactic issue with a more common "ambiguous plurality" noun... (Brains is what you need to solve a problem like this :)
– FumbleFingers
3 hours ago
I really think you might just take a leap and say AmE too. I am being slightly sarcastic there.....:) :) And why even bother with anything other than plural?
– Lambie
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
The cited use of guts is exactly paralleled by brains. We tend to think of the "idiomatic" senses (courage / intelligence) as only applying to the plural form, because we never use He has gut / brain to mean He's brave / clever.
But noting that many if not most native speakers would prefer Guts / brains is something he's never been short of, rather than ...are something..., I think it's reasonable to say that semantically, we think of the idiomatic plural usage as representing a singular quality / attribute.
It's almost meaningless to ask which version is "right", and Anglophones in general have a long history of ignoring pedants anyway (consider the data is vs the data are :). But unquestionably I personally would favour semantics over syntax in OP's case.
EDIT: Thanks to @Ronald Sole for the link to McMillan Dictionary..., wherein their example usage That’s what you need to be a referee – guts clearly uses a singular reference (that is what you need, not those are what you need).
It may not be directly relevant to OP's exact example, but when searching for relevant pronouncements on the usage, I came across this delightfully ambiguous example...
These animals have brains Semantics: A Reader (2004) - Page 420
...which could be literal - each of the animals actually does have at least some kind organ containing neurons. But it could also be figurative - some or all of them are [unusually] smart. And exactly the same ambiguity would apply with guts in that example (digestive organ / bravery).
answered 3 hours ago
FumbleFingers
42.4k150116
1
What is most definitely wrong is: Guts is required for this. No one would say that....
– Lambie
2 hours ago
@Lambie: As implied by my answer, you're a "prescriptive syntax-cowed" pedant. I say things like that, and so do many if not most native speakers.
– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago
1
Well, I say 'guts are needed for [whatever]' and I am definitely neither prescriptive nor syntax-cowed.
– Michael Harvey
2 hours ago
@FumbleFingers Not at all. I just say things that sound good, and not like tripe. Though I do enjoy properly prepared tripe.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
It could be singular or plural depending on the context. "Gut" and "guts" have several different meanings which could be used in the OP's sentence.
If "guts" means "the entrails of an animal, removed by a butcher" or "personal courage or determination" then it is plural - "Guts are required for this".
IF "gut" is a mass noun meaning "Fibre made from the intestines of animals, used especially for violin or racket strings or for surgical use." then like all mass nouns it is singular - "Gut is required for this."
Reference for meanings of "gut(s)" : https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/gut #s 1.2, 3, and 4.
answered 6 hours ago
alephzero
1,510411
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
It could be singular or plural depending on the context. "Gut" and "guts" have several different meanings which could be used in the OP's sentence.
If "guts" means "the entrails of an animal, removed by a butcher" or "personal courage or determination" then it is plural - "Guts are required for this".
IF "gut" is a mass noun meaning "Fibre made from the intestines of animals, used especially for violin or racket strings or for surgical use." then like all mass nouns it is singular - "Gut is required for this."
Reference for meanings of "gut(s)" : https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/gut #s 1.2, 3, and 4.
answered 6 hours ago
alephzero
1,510411
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
It could be singular or plural depending on the context. "Gut" and "guts" have several different meanings which could be used in the OP's sentence.
If "guts" means "the entrails of an animal, removed by a butcher" or "personal courage or determination" then it is plural - "Guts are required for this".
IF "gut" is a mass noun meaning "Fibre made from the intestines of animals, used especially for violin or racket strings or for surgical use." then like all mass nouns it is singular - "Gut is required for this."
Reference for meanings of "gut(s)" : https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/gut #s 1.2, 3, and 4.
answered 6 hours ago
alephzero
1,510411
It could be singular or plural depending on the context. "Gut" and "guts" have several different meanings which could be used in the OP's sentence.
If "guts" means "the entrails of an animal, removed by a butcher" or "personal courage or determination" then it is plural - "Guts are required for this".
IF "gut" is a mass noun meaning "Fibre made from the intestines of animals, used especially for violin or racket strings or for surgical use." then like all mass nouns it is singular - "Gut is required for this."
Reference for meanings of "gut(s)" : https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/gut #s 1.2, 3, and 4.
answered 6 hours ago
alephzero
1,510411
answered 6 hours ago
alephzero
1,510411
answered 6 hours ago
alephzero
1,510411
answered 6 hours ago
alephzero
1,510411
1,510411
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Guts is used widely used informally especially in British English to mean fortitude, courage or determination:
guts [plural]
informal the courage and determination you need to do
something difficult or unpleasant
It takes guts to start a new business on your own.
have the guts (to do something)
No one had the guts to tell Paul what a mistake he was making.
Guts (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English)
The plural designation is also shown in the entries in Merriam-Webster, Collins, and Oxford Learner's dictionaries.
answered 5 hours ago
Michael Harvey
8,7031723
Yeah, but I think almost all native speakers (except grammatically-cowed "hypercorrectionists") would prefer singular Guts is what you need for this job over plural Guts are what you need for this job. Well, that's what I think off the top of my head anyway. Obviously I know which I prefer, but I might check out Google Books for the same syntactic issue with a more common "ambiguous plurality" noun... (Brains is what you need to solve a problem like this :)
– FumbleFingers
3 hours ago
I really think you might just take a leap and say AmE too. I am being slightly sarcastic there.....:) :) And why even bother with anything other than plural?
– Lambie
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
Guts is used widely used informally especially in British English to mean fortitude, courage or determination:
guts [plural]
informal the courage and determination you need to do
something difficult or unpleasant
It takes guts to start a new business on your own.
have the guts (to do something)
No one had the guts to tell Paul what a mistake he was making.
Guts (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English)
The plural designation is also shown in the entries in Merriam-Webster, Collins, and Oxford Learner's dictionaries.
answered 5 hours ago
Michael Harvey
8,7031723
Yeah, but I think almost all native speakers (except grammatically-cowed "hypercorrectionists") would prefer singular Guts is what you need for this job over plural Guts are what you need for this job. Well, that's what I think off the top of my head anyway. Obviously I know which I prefer, but I might check out Google Books for the same syntactic issue with a more common "ambiguous plurality" noun... (Brains is what you need to solve a problem like this :)
– FumbleFingers
3 hours ago
I really think you might just take a leap and say AmE too. I am being slightly sarcastic there.....:) :) And why even bother with anything other than plural?
– Lambie
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
Guts is used widely used informally especially in British English to mean fortitude, courage or determination:
guts [plural]
informal the courage and determination you need to do
something difficult or unpleasant
It takes guts to start a new business on your own.
have the guts (to do something)
No one had the guts to tell Paul what a mistake he was making.
Guts (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English)
The plural designation is also shown in the entries in Merriam-Webster, Collins, and Oxford Learner's dictionaries.
answered 5 hours ago
Michael Harvey
8,7031723
Guts is used widely used informally especially in British English to mean fortitude, courage or determination:
guts [plural]
informal the courage and determination you need to do
something difficult or unpleasant
It takes guts to start a new business on your own.
have the guts (to do something)
No one had the guts to tell Paul what a mistake he was making.
Guts (Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English)
The plural designation is also shown in the entries in Merriam-Webster, Collins, and Oxford Learner's dictionaries.
answered 5 hours ago
Michael Harvey
8,7031723
answered 5 hours ago
Michael Harvey
8,7031723
answered 5 hours ago
Michael Harvey
8,7031723
answered 5 hours ago
Michael Harvey
8,7031723
8,7031723
Yeah, but I think almost all native speakers (except grammatically-cowed "hypercorrectionists") would prefer singular Guts is what you need for this job over plural Guts are what you need for this job. Well, that's what I think off the top of my head anyway. Obviously I know which I prefer, but I might check out Google Books for the same syntactic issue with a more common "ambiguous plurality" noun... (Brains is what you need to solve a problem like this :)
– FumbleFingers
3 hours ago
I really think you might just take a leap and say AmE too. I am being slightly sarcastic there.....:) :) And why even bother with anything other than plural?
– Lambie
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
Yeah, but I think almost all native speakers (except grammatically-cowed "hypercorrectionists") would prefer singular Guts is what you need for this job over plural Guts are what you need for this job. Well, that's what I think off the top of my head anyway. Obviously I know which I prefer, but I might check out Google Books for the same syntactic issue with a more common "ambiguous plurality" noun... (Brains is what you need to solve a problem like this :)
– FumbleFingers
3 hours ago
I really think you might just take a leap and say AmE too. I am being slightly sarcastic there.....:) :) And why even bother with anything other than plural?
– Lambie
2 hours ago
Yeah, but I think almost all native speakers (except grammatically-cowed "hypercorrectionists") would prefer singular Guts is what you need for this job over plural Guts are what you need for this job. Well, that's what I think off the top of my head anyway. Obviously I know which I prefer, but I might check out Google Books for the same syntactic issue with a more common "ambiguous plurality" noun... (Brains is what you need to solve a problem like this :)
– FumbleFingers
3 hours ago
Yeah, but I think almost all native speakers (except grammatically-cowed "hypercorrectionists") would prefer singular Guts is what you need for this job over plural Guts are what you need for this job. Well, that's what I think off the top of my head anyway. Obviously I know which I prefer, but I might check out Google Books for the same syntactic issue with a more common "ambiguous plurality" noun... (Brains is what you need to solve a problem like this :)
– FumbleFingers
3 hours ago
I really think you might just take a leap and say AmE too. I am being slightly sarcastic there.....:) :) And why even bother with anything other than plural?
– Lambie
2 hours ago
I really think you might just take a leap and say AmE too. I am being slightly sarcastic there.....:) :) And why even bother with anything other than plural?
– Lambie
2 hours ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
The cited use of guts is exactly paralleled by brains. We tend to think of the "idiomatic" senses (courage / intelligence) as only applying to the plural form, because we never use He has gut / brain to mean He's brave / clever.
But noting that many if not most native speakers would prefer Guts / brains is something he's never been short of, rather than ...are something..., I think it's reasonable to say that semantically, we think of the idiomatic plural usage as representing a singular quality / attribute.
It's almost meaningless to ask which version is "right", and Anglophones in general have a long history of ignoring pedants anyway (consider the data is vs the data are :). But unquestionably I personally would favour semantics over syntax in OP's case.
EDIT: Thanks to @Ronald Sole for the link to McMillan Dictionary..., wherein their example usage That’s what you need to be a referee – guts clearly uses a singular reference (that is what you need, not those are what you need).
It may not be directly relevant to OP's exact example, but when searching for relevant pronouncements on the usage, I came across this delightfully ambiguous example...
These animals have brains Semantics: A Reader (2004) - Page 420
...which could be literal - each of the animals actually does have at least some kind organ containing neurons. But it could also be figurative - some or all of them are [unusually] smart. And exactly the same ambiguity would apply with guts in that example (digestive organ / bravery).
answered 3 hours ago
FumbleFingers
42.4k150116
1
What is most definitely wrong is: Guts is required for this. No one would say that....
– Lambie
2 hours ago
@Lambie: As implied by my answer, you're a "prescriptive syntax-cowed" pedant. I say things like that, and so do many if not most native speakers.
– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago
1
Well, I say 'guts are needed for [whatever]' and I am definitely neither prescriptive nor syntax-cowed.
– Michael Harvey
2 hours ago
@FumbleFingers Not at all. I just say things that sound good, and not like tripe. Though I do enjoy properly prepared tripe.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
The cited use of guts is exactly paralleled by brains. We tend to think of the "idiomatic" senses (courage / intelligence) as only applying to the plural form, because we never use He has gut / brain to mean He's brave / clever.
But noting that many if not most native speakers would prefer Guts / brains is something he's never been short of, rather than ...are something..., I think it's reasonable to say that semantically, we think of the idiomatic plural usage as representing a singular quality / attribute.
It's almost meaningless to ask which version is "right", and Anglophones in general have a long history of ignoring pedants anyway (consider the data is vs the data are :). But unquestionably I personally would favour semantics over syntax in OP's case.
EDIT: Thanks to @Ronald Sole for the link to McMillan Dictionary..., wherein their example usage That’s what you need to be a referee – guts clearly uses a singular reference (that is what you need, not those are what you need).
It may not be directly relevant to OP's exact example, but when searching for relevant pronouncements on the usage, I came across this delightfully ambiguous example...
These animals have brains Semantics: A Reader (2004) - Page 420
...which could be literal - each of the animals actually does have at least some kind organ containing neurons. But it could also be figurative - some or all of them are [unusually] smart. And exactly the same ambiguity would apply with guts in that example (digestive organ / bravery).
answered 3 hours ago
FumbleFingers
42.4k150116
1
What is most definitely wrong is: Guts is required for this. No one would say that....
– Lambie
2 hours ago
@Lambie: As implied by my answer, you're a "prescriptive syntax-cowed" pedant. I say things like that, and so do many if not most native speakers.
– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago
1
Well, I say 'guts are needed for [whatever]' and I am definitely neither prescriptive nor syntax-cowed.
– Michael Harvey
2 hours ago
@FumbleFingers Not at all. I just say things that sound good, and not like tripe. Though I do enjoy properly prepared tripe.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
The cited use of guts is exactly paralleled by brains. We tend to think of the "idiomatic" senses (courage / intelligence) as only applying to the plural form, because we never use He has gut / brain to mean He's brave / clever.
But noting that many if not most native speakers would prefer Guts / brains is something he's never been short of, rather than ...are something..., I think it's reasonable to say that semantically, we think of the idiomatic plural usage as representing a singular quality / attribute.
It's almost meaningless to ask which version is "right", and Anglophones in general have a long history of ignoring pedants anyway (consider the data is vs the data are :). But unquestionably I personally would favour semantics over syntax in OP's case.
EDIT: Thanks to @Ronald Sole for the link to McMillan Dictionary..., wherein their example usage That’s what you need to be a referee – guts clearly uses a singular reference (that is what you need, not those are what you need).
It may not be directly relevant to OP's exact example, but when searching for relevant pronouncements on the usage, I came across this delightfully ambiguous example...
These animals have brains Semantics: A Reader (2004) - Page 420
...which could be literal - each of the animals actually does have at least some kind organ containing neurons. But it could also be figurative - some or all of them are [unusually] smart. And exactly the same ambiguity would apply with guts in that example (digestive organ / bravery).
answered 3 hours ago
FumbleFingers
42.4k150116
The cited use of guts is exactly paralleled by brains. We tend to think of the "idiomatic" senses (courage / intelligence) as only applying to the plural form, because we never use He has gut / brain to mean He's brave / clever.
But noting that many if not most native speakers would prefer Guts / brains is something he's never been short of, rather than ...are something..., I think it's reasonable to say that semantically, we think of the idiomatic plural usage as representing a singular quality / attribute.
It's almost meaningless to ask which version is "right", and Anglophones in general have a long history of ignoring pedants anyway (consider the data is vs the data are :). But unquestionably I personally would favour semantics over syntax in OP's case.
EDIT: Thanks to @Ronald Sole for the link to McMillan Dictionary..., wherein their example usage That’s what you need to be a referee – guts clearly uses a singular reference (that is what you need, not those are what you need).
It may not be directly relevant to OP's exact example, but when searching for relevant pronouncements on the usage, I came across this delightfully ambiguous example...
These animals have brains Semantics: A Reader (2004) - Page 420
...which could be literal - each of the animals actually does have at least some kind organ containing neurons. But it could also be figurative - some or all of them are [unusually] smart. And exactly the same ambiguity would apply with guts in that example (digestive organ / bravery).
answered 3 hours ago
FumbleFingers
42.4k150116
edited 2 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
FumbleFingers
42.4k150116
answered 3 hours ago
FumbleFingers
42.4k150116
answered 3 hours ago
FumbleFingers
42.4k150116
42.4k150116
1
What is most definitely wrong is: Guts is required for this. No one would say that....
– Lambie
2 hours ago
@Lambie: As implied by my answer, you're a "prescriptive syntax-cowed" pedant. I say things like that, and so do many if not most native speakers.
– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago
1
Well, I say 'guts are needed for [whatever]' and I am definitely neither prescriptive nor syntax-cowed.
– Michael Harvey
2 hours ago
@FumbleFingers Not at all. I just say things that sound good, and not like tripe. Though I do enjoy properly prepared tripe.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
1
What is most definitely wrong is: Guts is required for this. No one would say that....
– Lambie
2 hours ago
@Lambie: As implied by my answer, you're a "prescriptive syntax-cowed" pedant. I say things like that, and so do many if not most native speakers.
– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago
1
Well, I say 'guts are needed for [whatever]' and I am definitely neither prescriptive nor syntax-cowed.
– Michael Harvey
2 hours ago
@FumbleFingers Not at all. I just say things that sound good, and not like tripe. Though I do enjoy properly prepared tripe.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
1
1
What is most definitely wrong is: Guts is required for this. No one would say that....
– Lambie
2 hours ago
What is most definitely wrong is: Guts is required for this. No one would say that....
– Lambie
2 hours ago
@Lambie: As implied by my answer, you're a "prescriptive syntax-cowed" pedant. I say things like that, and so do many if not most native speakers.
– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago
@Lambie: As implied by my answer, you're a "prescriptive syntax-cowed" pedant. I say things like that, and so do many if not most native speakers.
– FumbleFingers
2 hours ago
1
1
Well, I say 'guts are needed for [whatever]' and I am definitely neither prescriptive nor syntax-cowed.
– Michael Harvey
2 hours ago
Well, I say 'guts are needed for [whatever]' and I am definitely neither prescriptive nor syntax-cowed.
– Michael Harvey
2 hours ago
@FumbleFingers Not at all. I just say things that sound good, and not like tripe. Though I do enjoy properly prepared tripe.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
@FumbleFingers Not at all. I just say things that sound good, and not like tripe. Though I do enjoy properly prepared tripe.
– Lambie
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Dikshit Gautam is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fell.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f180552%2fis-guts-singular-or-plural%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
noun [plural] informal macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/guts
– Ronald Sole
6 hours ago