I found this link to names of the groups of animals. I am confused because there are so many various congregations. Is there any guidance rather than learning by rote if I want to remember them?

  • Welcome to English Language Learners. The nature of your question may make it difficult for users to provide a definitive answer. Do note that most of these words for groups of animals are not commonly used in "everyday" English, and many native speakers wouldn't even know most of them without checking a reference book. Some (not all!) of the words that are commonly used are flock (for birds), herd (for hoofed animals), colony (for insects and some rodents), and school (for fish).
    – pyobum
    Feb 12, 2015 at 7:11
  • @pyobum Yeah, I was writing an answer but it would pretty much say the same thing you just did, adding only that the names are generally only used within the scientific community.
    – Catija
    Feb 12, 2015 at 7:14
  • 1
    Some of them are just fun to look up & remember, when you're 6 years old. Who couldn't love knowing that it's a murder of crows, or a murmuration of starlings. Some you may know without even realising you know, because they are quite frequently used - a pride of lions, for instance. Feb 12, 2015 at 8:28
  • Onoly about 5 of those phrases are commonly used by the average person. You can probably pick them up as you pick up other phrases in English: exposure to everyday English. If you need to learn more of them, you can memorize some more.
    – user6951
    Feb 12, 2015 at 13:42

4 Answers 4


Most of the group names on that list aren't general knowledge or in everyday use.

If you want an even longer list that includes the terms for the male and female members of the species along with the name for the young and groups, check this out. Many of these aren't general knowledge, either.

Even for animals we talk about a lot, the average person wouldn't know to call a group of cats a clowder.

There are a few that most people know, and a few general-purpose terms that can be used if necessary.

Herd - Useful for most hooved and/or grazing mammals: Cattle, sheep, horses, goats etc. But also elephants, giraffes, hippos.

Litter - Generally used for birth groups of small mammals: Kittens, piglets, puppies etc.

Colony - Used for mostly some insects (ants, termites), bats, penguins, and rabbits.

Swarm - Used for flying insects.

Flock - Used for all birds, regardless of whether in flight or on the ground. Also commonly used for sheep and goats.

Pod - Used for groups of sea mammals: dolphins, whales, seals.

School - Used for groups of fish.

These are a good starter list. There are a few others that many people know that are specific to a particular sort of animal:

Pride - Used for lions.

Pack - Used for wolves and sometimes dogs.

Hive - Used for bees.

When in doubt, use something generic like bunch or even group. That's a whole bunch of sheep. That is a nice group of tigers.

Hope this helps!

  • Feel free to edit or remove if you think this is inappropriate.
    – Catija
    Feb 12, 2015 at 7:47
  • 2
    Actually, it's a swarm of bees unless they are settled in their hive. And, according to "The Book of St Albans", it's a kindle of kittens. And if you like "murder of crows", you'll appreciate "an unkindness of ravens". Feb 12, 2015 at 17:40
  • 8
    @WhatRoughBeast My list is designed to be terms that are generally acceptable without forcing someone to memorize 100 different terms. Saying Litter of kittens is perfectly acceptable and is way more common than kindle, even if it's the "correct" term. books.google.com/ngrams/…
    – Catija
    Feb 12, 2015 at 17:49
  • 11
    Language is defined by how people actually use it, not by some book that claims to be an authority. The "correct" term is "litter of kittens," because that is what any native speaker would say. No one except someone trying to look superior or be funny would say "kindle of kittens" Feb 13, 2015 at 0:48
  • 1
    @Angew: No, it doesn't. If someone claiming to be the language-authority makes a change to the language and no one follows it, is that change a part of the language? Most linguists would say no, it's not. What happens in the real world is that the "authorities" end up not governing the language, but simply watching it and trying to determine when and how it has changed. Then they make those changes "official" by writing them down in a book. Feb 13, 2015 at 17:33

As others have mentioned, most of the odd-sounding collective nouns derive from a hunting tradition. However, many of them are much more recent inventions, and are meant to be whimsical. This is apparently a long-standing tradition, as the Book of St Albans (AD 1486) has some that are clearly not hunters' tradition!

There is nothing predictable about them, and indeed most of them are not used widely... or used at all outside of the imagination of the person who came up with them. I'm not a biologist, but I'm quite sure that they are not scientific terms (as some have said), and that scientists would only use the common ones, or (scientists being as whimsical as anyone) ones that they deliberately adopted for the fun of it.

It should be said that even those that aren't used may be widely known, simply because lists of these words are popular in works of trivia. For example, it's generally known that a flock of crows is called a "murder"... but I don't remember ever hearing anyone use outside of discussing trivia. In everyday use, I would say (and expect to hear) "flock".

Ones that are used and hence worth knowing for more than just trivia's sake:

  • A flock of birds
  • A school of fish
  • A swarm of insects
  • A pride of lions
  • A herd of livestock or other animals in general (especially land mammals)
  • A flock of sheep
  • A pod of whales or other cetaceans (and seals?)
  • A pack of wolves or other animals that hunt in groups

There are definitely others that are used (mob of kangaroos, troop of baboons or other primates, colony of social animals, nest of insects or birds), but you can communicate just fine without ever using them, and if you hear them you can often work them out from context.

Source: my own anecdotal knowledge, and Wikipedia.

  • 3
    +1 although I could narrow the list to like five: flock, school, swarm, herd, pack; with group for everything else. :)
    – user6951
    Feb 12, 2015 at 13:45
  • 3
    "but I don't remember ever hearing anyone use outside of discussing trivia" Yes. I have never, ever in casual conversation, or in a technical discussion in a science magazine, heard or read someone say "an exaltation of larks" or "a parliament of owls", except to say, "hey, did you know that there's a special word for a group of X?" Maybe there's some sub-population of English speakers who use them -- okay, I admit, I don't tend to hang around hunters or forest rangers or zoo keepers or anybody who has a lot of contact with animals -- but for all practical purposes I think these are ...
    – Jay
    Feb 12, 2015 at 18:03
  • ... just made-up words that nobody really uses.
    – Jay
    Feb 12, 2015 at 18:03

In direct answer to your direct question: no, there is no way to learn them other than by memorizing them. Of course, as has been mentioned, most of the terms which are intimidating you are simply not in wide use, so you really only need to learn a few.

As has been mentioned, the earliest compilation of collective nouns is "The Book of St. Albans" (which was the third book printed in English - I know the Bible was first, but I don't know the second, so don't bother asking), but a really excellent modern book on the subject is James Lipton's "An Exaltation of Larks". At the beginning of the book, he argues that knowing collective nouns of game animals was a status issue among the gentry of the time, and this may have contributed to the proliferation of these terms. Inventing new terms for different animals made the subject more difficult for the uninitiated. It is also true that some collective nouns were inspired by the attributes attributed to the animal's behavior: pride of lions, exaltation of larks (from their song), parliament of owls, murmuration of starlings (from the sound of a flock), ostentation of peacocks, etc. Some terms made sense at the time of formation, but the connection has been lost with changes in usage: "host" refers both to angels and armed men, but nowadays angels have lost their martial connotations and made far less fearsome than they used to be. In at least one case, the usage appears to be an error caused by a scribe: school of fish was not inspired by the fish all facing in one direction, like students in a classroom, but by miscopying the original term, "shoal of fish" which describes their appearance in the water.

As Lipton points out, one of the interesting aspects of English is that anybody can invent a word, and if it becomes widely used it will be recognized as "proper". So the invention of collective nouns can become an exercise in humor, or judgement, or various other attributes. "An abominable sight of monks" is clearly the latter. Lipton also recounts the joke of a number British academics responding to the presence of several prostitutes: "a jam of tarts", "a flourish of strumpets" and "an essay of trollops". And, since anyone can do it, Lipton puts forth a few suggestions of his own. "A wobble of bicycles" is my favorite.


Those are called terms of venery and they come from English hunting tradition.

In hunters community, referring the groups of specific animals, or specific formations of animals was so common that they've got their unique names.

The need to have so many words for 'herd' may be confusing for modern city dwellers, as well as the need to have various words for 'snow' may be confusing for someone who lives in Mexico. And because of the nature of the language evolution, there's no 'logical rule' to learn them, just like there's no logical rule for modern teenagers' slang.

For an extended list of terms of venery, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_terms_of_venery,_by_animal

For a little background see for example here: http://rodchu.blogspot.de/2009/05/collective-nouns-terms-of-venery.html

And there are many questions on EL&U about terms of venery: https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/tagged/terms-of-venery

  • 1
    Note that "terms of venery" is a subset of collective nouns. Feb 12, 2015 at 18:13

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .