Should not it be plural?

[Latoof]

I read this sentence in a novel I read and I want to know if the word should be plural.
He hoped to get another four hundred yams from one...

Why there is no -s in this word?

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by Latoof

I read this sentence in a novel I read and I want to know if the word should be plural.
He hoped to get another four hundred yams from one...

Why there is no -s in this word?

It's an adjective, so it doesn't require an -s.

[Latoof]

So what about the idea that it is not just one hundred, but there are four hundreds of this thing. Do you remember our talk about the cats, Cas? I remember that you said and also Blacknomi said the same, that whenever I have more than one item of any thing then it will need the -s.
What do you think? Am I mixing things?

[Casiopea]

Originally Posted by Latoof

So what about the idea that it is not just one hundred, but there are four hundreds of this thing. Do you remember our talk about the cats, Cas? I remember that you said and also Blacknomi said the same, that whenever I have more than one item of any thing then it will need the -s.
What do you think? Am I mixing things?

When the word "hundred" refers to a thing, it functions as a noun, so in that context it can take plural -s, for example,

A: How many cookies do you want?
B: I want a hundred (100).
C: I want hundreds. (200, 300, and so on)

When the word "hundred" modifies a noun, it functions as an adjective, so in that context it doesn't take plural -s. Remember that only nouns take plural -s. In our example sentence, "four-hundred yams", the words 'yams' is the noun, and the set phrase 'four-hundred' is an adjective, so no -s is required.

There's a difference between nouns and adjectives, so try not to add the plural -s rule to adjectives.

[Latoof]

Sure!