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

        And that’s why octopuses is correct. Octopi is not a derivation of octopus nor do we use “i” as a plural ending in English.

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

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

        That gets down to what you mean by “acceptable”. Octopi is not a natural derivation of octopus as the plural is octopodes just like “aint” is not a natural derivation of any form of the verb “is” BUT in both aint and octopi’s case most understand those words so they might be acceptable depending.