• Deconceptualist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Sure we do, on occasion anyway. Cacti, fungi, alumni, syllabi, loci, foci, radii, moduli, stimuli, uteri, papyri, nuclei, termini.

    Language isn’t about being “correct”, as there’s no truly objective standard. Rather, it’s about being understood. But I guess you didn’t watch that video.

    • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      Every single plural you list is derived straight from latin. If you created a neologism for a previously non-existent concept you would pluralize it with “s” in English eg email becomes emails not emali. The “i” as a plural is only for words taken straight from Latin.

      I watched it. I don’t place any value on youtube videos made by people speaking outside their expertise.

      • Deconceptualist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        The “i” as a plural is only for words taken straight from Latin.

        Sure, but we use it. We adopted those words without altering that form. You said we don’t use it in English, full stop, so I gave 13 counterexamples.

        I don’t place any value on youtube videos made by people speaking outside their expertise.

        I don’t think my eyes can roll any harder.

        • RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          We don’t use it in English. We just retain the latin plural for Latin words. We don’t use Latin plurals for Greek words that use a different standard for pluralization.

          You made an appeal to authority when you provided the Steven Fry video. Fry is not by any standard an expert on the English language or linguistics. He is an actor and he has written non-academic pieces that are not on linguistics.

          There’s no reason to roll your eyes when someone rejects your non-expert source as it is an appeal to authority.