Query Details
| Query Subject: |
Virus : Plural
|
| Author: | Ninja Looter |
| Submitter Email: | click here to access email |
| Query: |
I'm making a Linguistlist query about the plural of the word ''Virus.'' This is a two-fold question. Do you feel that the word ''Virus,'' in English, is a fully English word, or does it retain some of its Latinate heritage. There are many variants of the plural of ''Virus.'' Viruses (Fully English word) Virii (Ill formed from Virius, Masculine, second declension Latin) Viri (Ill formed? from Virus, *Masculine, second declension Latin) Vira (From Virus, Neuter, second declension Latin) I've seen treatment of Virus as a 4th declension Noun, rather than second, also. What are the views of our Latin scholars here? With regard to the alternation (Virus ~ Viruses) as a completely Modern English word, it seems odd to me that those who make this Modern English alternation also make the plurals of (Corpus, Genus, and others) as (Corpora, Genera, and others). While a line must be drawn somewhere between faithfully representing the lineage of a word, and simple practical reasons, it seems odd to me that medical scholars (and to a lesser extent computer experts) would not make a similar treatment of the word ''Virus,'' respecting its Latinate roots like they respect other words. Faithfully Yours, NJ |
