Names pt. 2

 So, I seem to have unfinished business, as I believe that certain names don't have plural forms yet.  No matter.  I will continue to solve the problems nobody was having by whining on the internet.  Now, I have determined the way all propper nouns ending in -os should be pluralised.  Now, I currently have a few plurals to draw on.  "rhinoceros", "latios", "tauros", and "gyarados" are all made plural by -otes.  For -as, it followes the "latias" paradigm, -ates.  So, "Thomas" would become "Thomates", and all is right with the world.  If you do not follow this, just have it be known that you sound very stupid because you cannot english good.

CHANGE MY MIND!!!

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Φersu, the newest english word, taken right from Etruscan.

 We should loan the etruscan word "φersu" with the plural "φersuar".  We could spell it the way the etruscans did too!  It is the origin of person, and it means a mask worn in a play.  No, I do not care that this will be the third word we took from "𐌘𐌄𐌓𐌔𐌖".  Normally I would advocate this "φersuar" as the correct spelling for "person", and if the "n" was silent, then I would, but I think we need to loan it because we need more loans from Etruscan.  Also, Ynglish has some doublets already, so why not make some more? I believe we should combat the Romancisation of Ynglish by loaning from other languages.  This being said, because loanwords do not usually displace words from the lexicon of a language when coming into the wordhoard, I think we should be even more liberal when loaning, and also when coining simply because this gives us even more of a rich diversity of synonyms and near synonyms, and also makes it easier to rhy...
Read more

About "-us" and "-um" as far as plurals are concerned

      I have stumbled upon a post by lexico saying that "cacti" is wrong, and so is "viri".  They are wrong.  Their logic is that since these words aren't latin in origin, we can't pluralise them with -i.  Pay no attention to these ignorami.  It is only correct to pluralise multisylabic words ending in "-us" and not in "-ous" with "-i" or "-odes".  ie. "cactodes" and "cacti" are correct, but "cactuses" isn't, despite what Lexico would have you believe.  An exception to this rule is "nucleus" when used in the context of a cell.  Also, Lexico says "algæ", of all things, is correct, and the plural of "alga" as opposed to "algie", "alge", "algea" being the correct way to refer to it.  Algea is the correct term which is an uncountable noun, and the word "alga" which Lexico made up should only be used if you are writing fo...
Read more