Wood On Words
Can’t get enough words about words with Sunday’s newspaper column? Then this blog’s for you, my word-craving friend. I work the late shift, so don’t look for responses until the next day.

Further explorations in pluralities

July 15th, 2008 at 07:00am Barry Wood

In general, other than in science- and math-related fields, simple, Americanized (or Anglicized) plurals of adopted “foreign” words are best. In most other instances, then, use “indexes” instead of “indices,” “appendixes” instead of “appendices,” “formulas” (not “formulae”), “spectrums” (not “spectra”), “funguses” (not “fungi”), “cactuses” (not “cacti”) and “octopuses” (not “octopi”).

Some additional considerations, mostly inspired by (or lifted from) “Garner’s Modern American Usage” by Bryan A. Garner:

The word “indices” is considered “permissible in the sense ‘indicators.’ ” Why not just use “indicators,” then?

Webster’s gives either “fungi” or “funguses” for the plural, implying that they’re equally acceptable. Again, I vote for the consistency of “funguses,” if for no other reason than not having to decide how to pronounce “fungi.”

The dictionary also offers both “cactuses” and “cacti,” but unless you’re a botanist, stay with “cactuses.”

As for “octopi,” Garner says that’s not even correct in its language of origin. He says the proper Greek plural is “octopodes.”

As I’ve said before, once English “borrows” a word, it often gets customized. In this case, “octopuses” grabs me, “octopi” doesn’t.

Entry Filed under: unusual plurals

6 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Brian Mackey  |  July 15th, 2008 at 2:44 pm

    With all due respect to Messrs. Wood and Garner (”Misters,” anyone?), I couldn’t disagree more. Why not just use the least-common-denominator plural — add “s” — in all cases?

    Thus, on a recent hike, I saw many animals, including deers, oxes, gooses and mooses. (Not to be confused with the malapropistic animals, like foxen and meese.)

    I acknowledge it can go too far, as with octopi — I believe it was the comedian Shelly Berman who had a bit about a box of tissues containing many “Kleenices.” That said, I cringe every time I hear a broadcaster refer to upcoming candidate “forums.”

    As exemplified by the animals named above, English speakers already know many oddball plurals. I don’t have a problem with a few more, but perhaps I’m alone on this.

    (Notwithstanding this comment, I do enjoy your blog, Mr. Wood, so please keep up the good work.)

  • 2. William Wolverine  |  July 15th, 2008 at 3:55 pm

    I wonder what JIM Garner would say about this? Mr. Rockford Files certainly was a fun-guy. Rock on, Woodie.

  • 3. Barry Wood  |  July 17th, 2008 at 1:40 am

    Dear Mr. Mackey:
    Opposing views are always welcome. And I don’t favor doing away with all the inconsistencies of English. It wouldn’t be fun anymore.
    I assume from your disdain for “forums” that you prefer the Latin “fora.” According to Mr. Garner, some writers in political science and law prefer “fora,” but he is not alone is calling such use “pedantic.” Of course, some people are proud to be pedantic, and many of them end up in my profession as copy editors. This is not entirely a bad thing.
    However, if you cringe at every use of “forums,” I foresee little relief in the near future.
    Thanks for your comments.

  • 4. Barry Wood  |  July 17th, 2008 at 1:50 am

    Dear Mr. Wolverine,
    Did you use to work here under an assumed name?
    Thanks for joining in the pun fun.
    By the way, I’m so old that I’ll always associate Jim Garner with his role as Bret Maverick.

  • 5. William Wolverine  |  July 18th, 2008 at 12:05 pm

    Dear Mr. Wood,

    Are you saying you have an employee there named Wolverine? That would be odd, because it is an adopted moniker by me. I would find it kind of funny if someone actually had that as a first or last name.

  • 6. Barry Wood  |  July 19th, 2008 at 12:09 am

    Dear Mr. Wolverine:
    Sorry, I guessed wrong. We had a staffer with the same first name and a very similar last name, and I thought maybe he was checking in with me. Similarly, at least two other people who have responded to my blog have used names eerily similar to those of former employees. Apparently it’s just coincidence. Sometimes I look for word games where there are none.
    This whole thing of “adopted” names is new to me. I use my real name.

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Security Code:

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed