Re: [OT] Virii (sic)

Nadav Har'El
2001-08-01T08:57:00Z

On Wed, Aug 01, 2001, Riley Williams wrote about "Re: [OT] Virii (sic)":
> > [The singular is virus. The plural in English is viruses. In
> > Latin there is no plural - it is even debatable whether virus is
> > a noun in Latin - in any case it is indeclinable.]

What I don't understand is why people use the form virii, with a double I!

Just like the plural of abacus is abaci, the plural of cactus is cacti
(check the dictionary if you don't believe me), shouldn't the plural of
virus be viri, with one I at the end (of course, "viruses" is also currently
accepted as a plural, and even preferred by some people).

I think people get confused by the fact that the plural of radius is radii.
That extra "I" comes from the i in radius - it shouldn't appear in the plural
of "virus"! The plural of the different word "virius" should have been virii.

> PS: Plural of bacteria is bacterium, from the same source.

Note that bacteria is already plural - bacterium is the singular.

There's a more computer relevant fact: "data" is a plural noun, whose
singular is "datum". Similarly, "media" is plural, whose singular is
"medium". So constructions like "datas" or "medias" are wrong, although
they are becoming more and more accepted...

Does anybody still use the form formulae as a plural of formula? I do, but
I think I belong to a dying breed :)

[Oops, I don't think this discussion is very relevant to Linux kernels any
more...]

--
Nadav Har'El | Wednesday, Aug 1 2001, 12 Av 5761
nyh@math.technion.ac.il |-----------------------------------------
Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |A city is a large community where people
http://nadav.harel.org.il |are lonesome together.