Re: YAEPT: uu/ii (< Quick Latin pronunciation question)
| From: | Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Monday, May 26, 2008, 16:00 |
|---|
Yup, virus was a collective noun in Latin. IIRC, it's also 4th decl,
not 2nd, which would make any ostensible plural "virus" anyway. Could
be wrong about that last bit in any number of ways, though. In any
case, this is why I lumped "vir(I)I" in with "Elv(I)I". Same category
as "octopi", only mildly more correct than "stewardi".
On 5/26/08, Ph. D. <phil@...> wrote:
> li_sasxsek wrote:
>>
>> virii /viraI/ thousgh I generally use "viruses".
>
> I've never come across that one. That would make
> the singular "virius." If you mean "virus," I believe
> that the plural of that word is not attested in any
> ancient Latin writings.
>
> --Ph. D.
>
--
Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com
Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>