Talk:cost

Nothing "COSTS" x dollars, an item "COST" x dollars. Costs is plural as in there are costs involved, not this costs 10 dollars!

I think this is false logic here. 'costs' is used as a verb in this case. Costs is probably ungrammatical, but is widely used. 92.20.171.204 08:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)




 * costs is perfectly grammatical in the usage. It is the third-person singular present indicative of cost. DCDuring TALK 14:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Possible missing sense
Possible missing sense (heraldry): see cottise:. Equinox ◑ 14:33, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Three etymologies or fewer?
For English, I see three etymology sections, but none of them cites sources and I'm not convinced that they are really different. Perhaps they are just one or maybe two? --LA2 (talk) 19:50, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Etymology
So it is not related to French ? Interesting. --Fsojic (talk) 02:03, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually, it is even more interesting : two different roots ended up in the same word with the same meaning ! --Fsojic (talk) 02:12, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Baloney
"At all costs" supposedly meaning "by all means" is a bunch of chain-mail baloney. "At' is an ancient English preposition, over 1,000 years old, and has never meant "by." (See any dictionary.) "At all costs" means "at any price;' 'by' nothing. This very idiom ('at all costs') is cited by the AHD under the entry for 'cost'; their etymological entries are well-respected and the unabridged print edition contains a full PIE appendix. Other dictionaries and Etymonline list only one derivation, and, as for many English noun/verb pairs, refer the noun to the verb's etymological entry. I'm moving the first entry to #3 as a compromise (almost certainly too far). It needs full citations and if it is part of a composite derivation it must remain no higher than #3 according to standard practice as that derivation (i.e. 'word') - if it even has any kind of legitimacy - is archaic/obsolete.

Can someone explain the Pecock citation?
"This word 'graved image' betokenneth, needs cost,.. a feigned graved image." How do we parse this? Equinox ◑ 00:47, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's a dodgy one. Doesn't fit the meaning, and can't be found. I might add it to the Citations page, but probably not Darren X. Thorsson (talk) 20:54, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

implicit cost: opportunity cost without payment or transaction
an opportunity cost for which no payment is made nor any asset value reduced Microsoft® Encarta® 2009 --Backinstadiums (talk) 19:51, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

costs (plural noun): legal expenses
costs (plural noun): the amount of money that is spent pursuing a legal action, especially those expenses that a losing party may be required to pay 2. total sum of money: the calculated amount of money needed for something, housing costs --Backinstadiums (talk) 10:16, 26 September 2020 (UTC)