[ SECRET POST #2484 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2484 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 044 secrets from Secret Submission Post #355.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

A noun being a Greek derivation (which it no doubt is, as are a gazillion more words used in Latin) doesn't mean it gets the Greek declension. Some authors do that, but it's considered to be not common especially if the word is already Latinized (which "exodus" is, as can be seen by the -us ending). The Thesaurus Linguae Latinae lists several examples of 'exodus' being declined like any noun belonging to the o-noun paradigm.

More modern example: "to download" is an English word. That doesn't stop German speakers from conjugating it like any other verb: ich downloade, du downloadest, sie downloadet; inf. downloaden, part. gedownloadet/downgeloaded.

[kelincihutan]

I agree, actually (not with your "any word ending in '-us' must have a Latin root somewhere" bit, but with your larger point). In fact, that's basically my point. We should pluralize this as "exoduses," given that we are--in this thread--speaking English, so English linguistic rules ought to apply. This thread contains a long discussion on how to pluralize "status" that goes back and forth on basically this same point. But the funniest statement is this: "People who go around sticking Latinate endings willy-nilly on any vaguely Latin-looking word are ignorami with hidden agendae."

If someone's going to use a non-standard pluralization, however, based on the etymology of a word, then it should be the correct non-standard plural based on that words actual etymology. Greek, in this particular case. I suppose someone could probably make a case for -i being a quasi-valid English plural based on how common it's become to tack that onto any word ending in -us. But that particular convention has not become truly established yet, and may not ever get there. And since the point of language in the first place is communication, it doesn't make sense to do things with it that make it harder/stranger to communicate clearly. Like randomly sticking suffixes onto things where they might not even belong.

AYRT

[(Anonymous)]

A noun ending in -us is a pretty strong indicator for the noun having Latin roots, but it's not 100%, yes. Probably should have phrased that more clearly ^^'

Hmmm okay, so this is probably because I live in Germany where Latin is Super Important (as is Greek and French, but don't you DARE use English words because that is so LOW /sarcasm), so Latin/AG-root nouns, unless they are high frequency, usually get pluralised in a way that is similar to or the way as they are in the original language (meaning Latin and Ancient Greek). So we have "Atlas" getting pluralised "Atlanten" which is some sort funny amalgamation of atlantes (which would be the 'correct' Greek plural, had that word existed in Ancient Greek, which it did not, at least not in plural) and the plural -(e)n which is German. A lot of German speakers don't care about that so they use Atlasse which is the plural that comes naturally for a word like Atlas. The rest is super snobbish about Atlasse being WROOOOOOOOOOONG and insist on Atlanten (the standard dictionary has "Atlasse" as the only plural because of the high frequency, only Wiktionary and some other more thorough dictionaries also list Atlanten as one of two plural forms). A stronger example is Rhythmus whose only acceptable plural is not Rhythmusse, as would be expected, but Rhythmen (AG + German). Also: Visum (singular) accepts both Visa (Latin plural) and Visen (Germanized plural), but I've never heard people use that; I do hear "Visas" because -a is not in any way or shape or form any kind of even remotely German plural form so an -s gets added XD.(Side note: a lot of actually AG words we use in German became part of the language through the Roman invasion and expansion, that is, through Latin, not AG itself. Should be similar with English.)

Now, when I talked about exodus in the post you're replying to, I was talking about the word in the context of Latin texts, where it was declined as an o-declension noun (I have a sliiiight aversion to Ancient Greek so my bias is showing; yes, the correct, i.e. AG form would be exodes, but more people use the Latinized exodus (I'd venture the guess: because of the bible), so that's what I talked about.)

I kinda feel I'm not making much sense right now /o\ I mostly reacted to you saying: "sticking a Latinate plural on there is...not really the thing" because it was definitely The Thing in Latin texts. It's not in English, where exoduses is the correct plural, as it is in German (Exodusse, neither Exodi nor Exodes, but some people would still complain, I guess), so that's what we should use in an English context. (The post saying that it's exodi and not exodii is by me, too, as you may have guessed XD and it's only about the form and not about usage in English.)

And. oh shit I did not mean to write so much. I got carried away /o\ sorry >.

Re: AYRT

[(Anonymous)]

In this case, the plural in Greek is exodi (well, pronunced more like exodee).