Fora vs Forums

We do in fact take on board some non-English grammar when lifting 'foreign' phrases into English, like "al fresco", "literati" and so on.

@jayles - Of course we do, but we don't make a rule of it. And there are good reasons for both your examples - 'al fresco' is an expression, not a word, and 'literati' is virtually only ever used in the plural - when did you last hear anyone mention a literatus (Latin) or literato - (old Italian)?

And then we play with them: to eat 'al desko' ; the 'glitterati', not to mention the 'latterati'.

And most of us, no doubt, refer to 'the hoi-polloi', even though 'hoi' already means 'the'. (Funny how those pedants who object to 'the' hoi-pollo never seem to worry about things like 'the' albatross, 'the' alcove or 'the' alcohol).

The only rule at play here is usage - and often both are possible, although we seem to have our preferences. Forums leads fora, but millennia (despite Firefox red-lining it) totally outstrips millenniums - which hardly registers in British books:

http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=forums%2Cfora%2Cmillenniums%2Cmillennia&year_start=1800&year_end=2005&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cforums%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cfora%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmillenniums%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cmillennia%3B%2Cc0

Americans seem to prefer referenda to referendums by quite a margin, while Brits less definitively prefer referendums (I'm with the Americans on this one). On the other hand, I doubt many people say 'musea':

http://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=referendums%3Aeng_us_2012%2Creferenda%3Aeng_us_2012%2Creferendums%3Aeng_gb_2012%2Creferenda%3Aeng_gb_2012&year_start=1800&year_end=2005&corpus=18&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Creferendums%3Aeng_us_2012%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Creferenda%3Aeng_us_2012%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Creferendums%3Aeng_gb_2012%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Creferenda%3Aeng_gb_2012%3B%2Cc0

Richard Chenevix Trench in "English Past and Present" writes: ... they were made to drop their foreign termination, or otherwise their foreign appearance, to conform themselves to English ways, and only so were finally incorporated into the great family of English words.

Thus a word is not truly English til it loses it foreign look.

To WW's list, I'd add other words like 'czar' ... in Russian, the plural is 'czari' (цари́) and the genitiv ... 'czar's' is 'czarya' (царя́) ... There were two czari and the men czarya (the czar's men) ... The administration's last two health czari ...

Naw, they don't hit the ears right. Once a word is fully English'd, it should take an English plural. Learning the sundry plural shapes from sundry tungs would be great, big pain in the ass ... Not gonna do it!

@Skeeter Lewis - Thanks for that, I'd never realised that's where it came from. You can still find modern examples of it being used in the more general 'legal' sense at Google Books -

"His forensic skills helped him to a number of courtroom victories, but they left him with little sense of personal fulfillment" - D.W. Griffith's the Birth of a Nation, London Melvyn Stokes University College - 2007

This one is not so much legal as going back to idea of a/the forum - "Nixon was an effective debater, but his forensic skills were overwhelmed by the television images of a sweating, shifty—eyed politician which marked the return of the original Tricky Dick" - Presidential Upsets, Douglas J. Clouatre - 2013

And one, appropriately enough, from an account of Ancient Athens:

"His forensic skills had been tested in his litigation with Callippus and his neighbour, Nicostratus" - War, Democracy and Culture in Classical Athens, David M. Pritchard - 2010

I think that even if the speaker knows the correct plural form of a word borrowed from a foreign language (including Latin), then the speaker should not use the correct foreign plural form of the word when speaking or writing English. Why disregard the rules of English grammar? I promise always to use innuendos rather than innuendi.

In fact I've never heard anyone use innuendi which I really could not say without laughing and would not be at all surprised if someone else in earshot made a sarcastic comment, probably including such derogatory terms as "tosser" and "pretentious", aimed at anyone who did use it. Not me of course. Far too polite and well brought up.

I confess to being rather fond of the singular of scampi.....'scampo'.
Skeet

Well the Latin plural of innuendo might be innuendis; but really best avoided; hints would be a better word-choice.

Latin is not a dead language, it is actually the language used in the Vatican City. Language is fluid and morphs all the time, fora will become forums, stadia will become stadiums and the originals will be forgotten. Who says'refrigerator', 'perambulator' or 'influenza' any more?

Sorry to revive this ancient thread, but i was looking online and i think it is interesting that the 'octopodes' plural is getting some support here and there. I thought it was worth highlighting the fact that 'antipodes' follows the same declension - but here we never use the singular form 'antipous'.

Hi everyone!
Again, I need your help
I know that correct construction of the sentence:
"I can see how tiny we are"
But is it possible to say?

"i can see how tiny are we"
Like a statement....
Because in my situation it's better for singing, riming and flow in the song. Or it just sounds stupid?

While this is a discussion of Latin words in English, I'm frightened by the inclusion of a German word, Schnapps, the plural of which is not Schnappsen. Until reading this discussion, I have never seen Schnappsen anywhere (not that I'm a regular consumer of such beverages). Also Schnapps, though directly taken from German is spelled with only one 'p' in its original form. The plural in German would be Schnaepse (if you can't make the umlaut), or Schnäpse. Beyond that forums vice fora is a matter of preference though my spell check prefers the former, I the latter.

Hi can someone please translate this for me

When the well is dry, we know the worth of water.

thanks
that was useful.
any way this is mobotak.com and its a company whom interested in tech and electronic gadgets.our company buy,sell and repair cell phones,tablets and computers ans so sell their accessories,if you have any questions about this kind of staff we will glad to help.
mobotak.com/Categorygrid/id/74/%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%A8%20%DA%AF%D9%88%D8%B4%DB%8C
mobotak.com/Categorygrid/id/80/%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%B1%DB%8C%20%D9%85%D9%88%D8%A8%D8%A7%DB%8C%D9%84
your sincerely,

that was interesting
any way this is mobotak.com and its a company whom interested in tech and electronic gadgets.our company buy,sell and repair cell phones,tablets and computers ans so sell their accessories,if you have any questions about this kind of staff we will glad to help.
mobotak.com/Categorygrid/id/74/%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%A8%20%DA%AF%D9%88%D8%B4%DB%8C
mobotak.com/Categorygrid/id/80/%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%B1%DB%8C%20%D9%85%D9%88%D8%A8%D8%A7%DB%8C%D9%84

Being wife of very wealthy tycoon, it's understandable that she's able to buy an _____assortment of diamonds.

What word best fits 'expensive' or 'extensive'?

@Matthe Ware
It sounds like a school test! To me either would be "correct"; in fact 'extensive assortment of diamonds' comes up about a dozen times as a phrase on google, but 'expensive...' does not, if that is a good criterion.

It's a clue from a Sunday newspaper crossword. I'm supposed to pick one that fits best even though both seem legit.

I am amused by those who play the "we are modern English speakers, therefore forums is right and Fora is old hat and pretentious" card.

Here is a word for those people "Bullshit!" Or two words "Bovem stercore"

Why, if your modern theory is so right, do you bother to use Forums? Why not meeting places?

I heard a so called intellectual expert on the radio recently, sternly damning Latin plurals "No place for pretentious Latin plurals" he said, "aquariums, stadiums, rostrums, it is all quite correct and even preferred today" and he spluttered on. I had to chuckle, when a little later in the conversation, he used the words; data and criteria; Of course, we all know most assuredly that he meant "datums and criterums"

indeed, but is not the real heart of the question's crossroad whether the proper Latin or modern Anglo-modified (ie) use is effective or simply correct? just considering the question to understand answers was my thought.

DamonTarlaei is a great example of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. He claims to be a Latin 'scholar', yet does not know that 'octopus' is of Greek origin. The 'correct' plural, therefore, is 'octopodes'. However, 'octopusses' is generally accepted these days. The one plural that is absolutely wrong (always was, always will be wrong) is 'octopi'.

I personally like your post, you have shared good article. It will help me in great deal.
gmail login

This is really a great stuff for sharing. Keep it up .Thanks for sharing.
hotmail login

Octopodia!

And long live fora!

My complements on your hilarious pop up. I just clicked "no" on the "need a proofreader question" and was greeted with "OK genius, Good luck." I love it. The next time I do need a proofreader you will be my first stop. All the best!

I love your pop up. Just clicked "no" on the "need a proofreader" question and was greeted with: "OK, genius. Good luck." The next time I do need a proofreader, you will be my first stop. All the best!

A pop-up asked me if I needed a proofreader. I replied 'No', and got the reply 'OK, genius'. Not very polite from someone who can't spell 'interchangeable'.

'Octopus' is New Latin dating from the 18th century. It may be of Greek origin, but it's not Greek (if it were, it'd be spelled 'oktopous,' with 'oktopodes' as the plural. So 'octopi' is a perfectly fine plural, as is the anglicized 'octopuses.'