Attn: Grammar mavens

[chickenfeet]

I was writing a comment this morning when I ran into a zone of grammatical uncertainty. Thus, I appeal to the collective wisdom of the hive.

[Poll #759286]

Comments

[gale_storm]

Who cares about grammar when guacamole and naked bodies are involved?

[keithlard.livejournal.com]

The trick for this sort of thing is to substitute an actual name for 'each other'. So "Licking the guacamole off Keith's naked body" would be correct.

I'd prefer salsa though.

[lnr]

You're licking guacamole off the bodies belonging to each other, not to each others.

[kalypso-v.livejournal.com]

On analogy with "one another's" I think it's singular. I found an online source (http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/pronoun.htm) to back me up, though no doubt if I looked harder I'd find another one that disagreed.

[oursin.livejournal.com]

How many people are involved? If it's two, first option is correct; if it's a group scene, the second.

[a-d-medievalist.livejournal.com]

But even more -- the other should be singular, so option three:

each other's bodies

I think. Because each makes other singular, but you are talking about the bodies of two people ...

No, wait -- I've re-thought again, because, "if we were each to lick guacamole off the other's body" is correct.

Grammar School days are haunting me

[sher-khan.livejournal.com]

"Licking the guacamole off each other's naked body should resolve the timing issue"
Is correct, within a more general context.
Allow me to explain:
We are assuming here that each person involved in said sentence is an individual and does not have either multiple bodies, or have outright ownership of other bodies (slavery, cadaver collections?).

Given that each person involved will only have One body (their own), then when referring to the possession of that person you are referring to singular items per person. Hence "each other's body"

Now IF you have a number of people with slaves in their entourage (and by slaves we would have to assume complete and utter ownership, where the slave is not a person, but property and will every remain so), and the slaves are being covered with the guacamole, then you may, when talking to only 2 slave owners refer to "each other's bodies", as there will be only 1 other in relation to 1 person, but multiple possessions. However if talking to 3 or more slave owners, all of whom will be licking guacamole from every other slave owner's chattel, then you may use "each other's bodies", because here we have more that 1 "other" in relation to every person, who also have multiple possessions (bodies).

The same scenario would apply for Medical students/doctors/cannibals(?)/necrophiliacs involved with guacamole licking contests from cadavers.
2 necrophiliacs each with one cadaver =Licking the guacamole off each other's naked body
2 necrophiliacs each with multiple cadavers =Licking the guacamole off each other's naked bodies
3 or more necrophiliacs each with multiple cadavers =Licking the guacamole off each others' naked bodies

Are we clear?
(had to repost - wrote the previous one too fast, omitted a few words when typing)

[kaet.livejournal.com]

I don't think you can pluralize 'each other'. I think it's a kind of singular pronoun in a sort of superposition state rather than a plural.

[aparecida.livejournal.com]

I must disagree with several posters above. I believe that the use of the term "each other" is restricted to two persons. If three or more persons are involved, the proper term is "one another." Thus, "each others'" is never correct; you would say, "The threesome licked guacamole off one another's bodies."

[badasstronaut.livejournal.com]

I think I'd choose something other than guacamole though.

[itchyfidget.livejournal.com]

Each other's, one another's ... I don't think you can pluralise any of these. I think that might have something to do with the (sorta') reflexivity of them. F'rex, others' bodies is fine, but I really don't think you can ever write each others'.