Depends on the language. Current standardized American English overwhelmingly list adds -s/-es to make a plural noun. So “octopuses” would be technically correct with “octopodes” and “octopi” also accepted.
If you’re writing Latin, you’d want octopi instead. If you’re writing Greek: octopodes.
But English is a democratic language, so feel free to vote often and early by using your preferred version.
To be pedantic, octopi comes from the misconception that octopus is a second-declension noun in Latin when it’s actually a third-declension noun. If you were writing Latin, you’d still want octopodes
That one Merriam-Webster video that did the rounds on this topic years ago seems to have been retracted. I don’t think “technically correct” is right, since it is never really used, but more “arguably could have been”. And, as was even stated in that video, if you say octopedes nobody will know what you’re on about. Except octopodes nuts.
Well, we can’t have all the octopodes nuts having their secret octopodes (related?) discussions with their own secret language like the word “octopods”, now can we?
I feel like any linguist upset by non-prescriptive language needs to maybe reconsider their life choices. Imagine telling someone they’re painting incorrectly or being mad at the discovery of a new species.
*octopodes (yes I know octopuses is also correct but the technically correct version sounds cooler)
Depends on the language. Current standardized American English overwhelmingly list adds
-s/-esto make a plural noun. So “octopuses” would be technically correct with “octopodes” and “octopi” also accepted.If you’re writing Latin, you’d want octopi instead. If you’re writing Greek: octopodes.
But English is a democratic language, so feel free to vote often and early by using your preferred version.
at this point i feel the only sensible answer is to use the most nonsensical form that still sounds normal
Octothingies is my favorite
To be pedantic, octopi comes from the misconception that octopus is a second-declension noun in Latin when it’s actually a third-declension noun. If you were writing Latin, you’d still want octopodes
*Octopussies
Only Japanese ones
That one Merriam-Webster video that did the rounds on this topic years ago seems to have been retracted. I don’t think “technically correct” is right, since it is never really used, but more “arguably could have been”. And, as was even stated in that video, if you say octopedes nobody will know what you’re on about. Except octopodes nuts.
Well, we can’t have all the octopodes nuts having their secret octopodes (related?) discussions with their own secret language like the word “octopods”, now can we?
We can’t keep letting them get away with it!
Octopi?
Dont you dare use a Latin pluralization of a Greek root word!
I’ll use whatever pluralodes I feel like!
Wow, look at all these plurapodes
There’s lodes of them!
Its origin is Greek, but it comes to us through Latin, so fuck it. Plus it’s language, and octopi is understood by fluent speakers
Title fixed.
Octopodes nuts
I kinda love how this only works if you know the correct pronunciation. For those that don’t, it’s ock-top-uh-deez
deleted by creator
Octopi, octopuses, and octopods are all valid pluralizations of octopus in American English.
Conversely, cacti is the only valid pluralization of cactus.
Don’t worry, language itself pissed us off long before you did.
I feel like any linguist upset by non-prescriptive language needs to maybe reconsider their life choices. Imagine telling someone they’re painting incorrectly or being mad at the discovery of a new species.
deleted by creator