6 ms·
What a fantastic comment. You've inspired me to research the evolution of virii, and their place in the world.
by thechangelog 15y ago
What a fantastic comment. You've inspired me to research the evolution of virii, and their place in the world.
- StavrosK 15y agoI'll help: The correct plural is "viruses".
- cperciva 15y agoVirus doesn't have a plural, but if it did it would be "virora".
- thechangelog 15y agoThanks. Should have trusted autocorrect.
- StavrosK 15y agoIn Latin, you mean?
- ysangkok 15y agohttp://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language/g63.html http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language/g63.html What is the plural of virus? Viruses. It is not viri, or (worse) virii. True, the word comes directly from Latin, but not all Latin words ending in -us have -i as their plural. http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html The plural of virus is neither viri nor virii, nor even vira nor virora. It is quite simply viruses, irrespective of context.
- cperciva 15y agoYes, I'm aware of the arguments. Suffice to say that I don't find "it doesn't fit comfortably in the mouth of an English speaker" to be a good basis on which to form conclusions about how Latin speakers would decline their vocabulary.
- _delirium 15y agoIsn't the question how English speakers should form plurals for their vocabulary, though? Nobody is arguing that you should use "viruses" as the plural when writing articles in Latin. I mean, despite being Greek, I don't particularly object to the fact that most of the Greek loanwords in English fail to fully follow Greek grammar when people speak English. For example, phobias rather than phoboi or phobioi has become the accepted plural of phobia. Heck, people don't even decline my name properly when speaking to me, since English doesn't use the vocative case.
- StavrosK 15y agoWouldn't it just be "phobies", rather than "phoboi", since that's the plural of "phobos"?