Octopetes
Victor Engel
A professor of mine proposed this as the best plural for Octopus.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Victor Engel Vector Angle
St...@The-Light.com lig...@onr.com
http://the-light.com http://www.onr.com/user/lights
Keith C. Ivey
St...@The-Light.com (Victor Engel) wrote:
>A professor of mine proposed this as the best plural for Octopus.
Did your professor give any rationale for it? The usual
pedantic plural of "octopus" is "octopodes", pronounced
/,Ak t@ 'poU diz/ ("OK tuh PO deez"). The fake Latin plural is
"octopi", and the regular English plural is "octopuses". Aren't
three plurals enough for one word?
Keith C. Ivey <kci...@cpcug.org> Washington, DC
Contributing Editor/Webmaster
The Editorial Eye <http://www.eeicom.com/eye/>
G Sumner Hayes
St...@The-Light.com (Victor Engel) writes:
> A professor of mine proposed this as the best plural for Octopus.
>
Shouldn't that be "octopedes"?
Cordially,
Sumner
--
Respond by post or email, but please don't CC: postings to me; my mailbox
is already quite full.
Victor Engel
Whoops! I screwed up. It should have been octopodes.
kci...@cpcug.org (Keith C. Ivey) wrote:
>St...@The-Light.com (Victor Engel) wrote:
>
>>A professor of mine proposed this as the best plural for Octopus.
>
>Did your professor give any rationale for it? The usual
>pedantic plural of "octopus" is "octopodes", pronounced
>/,Ak t@ 'poU diz/ ("OK tuh PO deez"). The fake Latin plural is
>"octopi", and the regular English plural is "octopuses". Aren't
>three plurals enough for one word?
-----------------------------------------------------------
slhin...@aol.com
It has been said that "the word *octopi* betrays an ignorance of three
languages." "Octopus" is half Greek and half Latin. If "octopi" is used (
a Latin ending) it should, according to at least one specialist I knew, be
pronounced "ocTOPE-ee." The third language is, of course, English, ans
"octopuses" is quite acceptable.
Sam Hinton
La Jolla, CA
Victor Engel
slhin...@aol.com wrote:
For some reason, the word "octopuses" makes me think of Ogden Nash.
Did he write of octopuses?
N.R. Mitchum
slhin...@aol.com wrote:
--------
>.......
It may demonstrate however a fine regard for the English-speaker's
modesty. It's possible to pronounce "octopus" without much stress
on the final syllable, whereas "octopuses" almost demands the clear
voicing of a vulgarity.
Gracious sakes alive!
Nathan Mitchum
Joseph C Fineman
slhin...@aol.com writes:
>It has been said that "the word *octopi* betrays an ignorance of three
>languages." "Octopus" is half Greek and half Latin. If "octopi" is used (
>a Latin ending) it should, according to at least one specialist I knew, be
>pronounced "ocTOPE-ee."
Further ignorance (of English). The standard pronunciation of the
Latin -i in words taken into English (foci, loci, radii, etc.) is
long, as in the word I.
>The third language is, of course, English, and "octopuses" is quite
>acceptable.
I agree that that is best. _However_,
If you are hunting them, or fishing for them, or whatever you do, then
presumably you may exercise the Hunter's Collective Prerogative & call
them octopus.
The form "octopi" is not _quite_ indefensible. Classical Latin did
not have "octopus", but it did have the analogous word "polypus" --
and the ancients ignored the Greek & declined it like an ordinary
second-conjugation noun: pl. polypi. We have adopted their ignorance
to the extent of creating "polyp" in English, so perhaps it would not
be a mortal sin to extend the mistake by analogy to "octopus".
--
Joe Fineman j...@world.std.com
495 Pleasant St., #1 (617) 324-6899
Malden, MA 02148
Evan Kirshenbaum
In article <19961121133...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
<slhin...@aol.com> wrote:
>It has been said that "the word *octopi* betrays an ignorance of
>three languages." "Octopus" is half Greek and half Latin. If
>one specialist I knew, be pronounced "ocTOPE-ee." The third language
>is, of course, English, ans "octopuses" is quite acceptable.
Surely, it only betrays an ignorance of Latin and Greek (or a
recognition that the speaker is using English). "Octopi" has been a
common English word for quite a while, and was indeed the form taught
in many schools (including mine).
From MWDEU (p. 678, "octopus")
The history of these plurals in English shows _octopuses_ the
oldest, starting with the OED's 1884 example. _Octopi_ first
turned up in our files in 1922. The editors of Webster's Second
had exactly the same number of citations for _octopi_ and
_octopuses_, and from about the same kinds of sources, so they
included both, along with the OED's _octopodes_. [The OED had
flagged "octopus" as a foreign word.--erk] The citations gathered
for the books published after Webster's Second show _octopuses_
slightly more popular than _octopi_. Several publications--
_Time_, the _New York Times_, the _Times Literary Supplement_, and
publications of the Smithsonian Institution, for instance--have
used both plurals. Citations gathered since the publication of
Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary (1983) show _octopuses_
continuing to increase its edge over _octopi_.
So the evidence to date shows that _octopuses_ is gaining in
frequency of use, and that _octopi_ is dropping back but is still
a respectable second. _Octopodes_ is a non-starter: we have no
evidence of its use in context.
----
Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------
HP Laboratories |Bullwinkle: You sure that's the
1501 Page Mill Road, Building 1U | only way?
Palo Alto, CA 94304 |Rocky: Well, if you're going to be
| a hero, you've got to do
kirsh...@hpl.hp.com | stupid things every once in
(415)857-7572 | a while.
John Nurick
On Wed, 20 Nov 1996 12:22:56 GMT, kci...@cpcug.org (Keith C. Ivey)
wrote:
<snip>
>The usual
>pedantic plural of "octopus" is "octopodes", pronounced
>/,Ak t@ 'poU diz/ ("OK tuh PO deez").
or /A.kt'A.p@diz/ (okTOPudeez) for recessive RP types!
Best wishes
John
David Hadley
slhin...@aol.com wrote:
>It has been said that "the word *octopi* betrays an ignorance of three
>languages." "Octopus" is half Greek and half Latin. If "octopi" is used (
>a Latin ending) it should, according to at least one specialist I knew, be
>pronounced "ocTOPE-ee." The third language is, of course, English, ans
>"octopuses" is quite acceptable.
>Sam Hinton
I presume the octopus is so-called because of the number of appendages
it possesses. What puzzles me though is why these are called tentacles
and not eightacles.
--
David Hadley
Edward K. Dunham
On 21 Nov 1996 13:30:56 GMT, slhin...@aol.com wrote:
>It has been said that "the word *octopi* betrays an ignorance of three
>languages." "Octopus" is half Greek and half Latin. If "octopi" is used (
>a Latin ending) it should, according to at least one specialist I knew, be
>pronounced "ocTOPE-ee." The third language is, of course, English, ans
>"octopuses" is quite acceptable.
>Sam Hinton
>La Jolla, CA
Er, no. "Octo" is eight in both Greek and Latin; "pous" is foot
in Greek, and in Greek its plural is "podes". Therefore
"octopus" is an unexceptional English transliteration of an
all-Greek word. "Octopodes" (not "octopetes") would be the
plural if you wanted to follow the Greek, but I'm not sure one
should have to know Greek in order to speak English, and I think
there is much to be said for a regular English plural of
"octopuses", admittly lacking in euphony.
What's the plural of "hippopotamus"?
Ed.
--
Edward K. Dunham, Seal Harbor, ME 04675-0005, USA +1 207 276-3753
"Avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins
the hearers." (2 Tim 2:14)
Philip Eden
Oh dear, some of us can be much more recessed than that !
Try /'Ak t@p@diz/ (OK tupudeez)
Philip Eden
Jon Robert Crofoot
ekdu...@acadia.net (Edward K. Dunham) wrote:
>On 21 Nov 1996 13:30:56 GMT, slhin...@aol.com wrote:
>
>>It has been said that "the word *octopi* betrays an ignorance of three
>>languages." "Octopus" is half Greek and half Latin. If "octopi" is used (
>>a Latin ending) it should, according to at least one specialist I knew, be
>>pronounced "ocTOPE-ee." The third language is, of course, English, ans
>>"octopuses" is quite acceptable.
>>Sam Hinton
>>La Jolla, CA
>Er, no. "Octo" is eight in both Greek and Latin; "pous" is foot
>in Greek, and in Greek its plural is "podes". Therefore
>"octopus" is an unexceptional English transliteration of an
>all-Greek word. "Octopodes" (not "octopetes") would be the
>plural if you wanted to follow the Greek, but I'm not sure one
>should have to know Greek in order to speak English, and I think
>there is much to be said for a regular English plural of
>"octopuses", admittly lacking in euphony.
>
>What's the plural of "hippopotamus"?
>
Hippos
Matthew P Wiener
In article <3297383d...@news.acadia.net>, ekdunham@acadia (Edward K. Dunham) writes:
>On 21 Nov 1996 13:30:56 GMT, slhin...@aol.com wrote:
>>It has been said that "the word *octopi* betrays an ignorance of three
>>languages." "Octopus" is half Greek and half Latin.
That is not what the OED says. Try looking things up first, Sam.
>> If "octopi" is used (
>>a Latin ending) it should, according to at least one specialist I knew, be
>>pronounced "ocTOPE-ee."
In Latin, maybe. Latinate plurals are not always pronounced in the Latin
fashion.
>> The third language is, of course, English, ans
>>"octopuses" is quite acceptable.
>Er, no. "Octo" is eight in both Greek and Latin; "pous" is foot
>in Greek, and in Greek its plural is "podes". Therefore
>"octopus" is an unexceptional English transliteration of an
>all-Greek word.
According to the OED, the Greek (upon transliteration) is `oktopous',
and the Latin borrowing from that is `octopus'. So presumably both
"octopodes" and "octopi" are valid pedant plurals.
Aristotle wrote about them, by the way, so I presume he wrote about
octopodes. It might be amusing to track down various translations.
> "Octopodes" (not "octopetes")
Nor "octofeets".
> would be the
>plural if you wanted to follow the Greek, but I'm not sure one
>should have to know Greek in order to speak English, and I think
>there is much to be said for a regular English plural of
>"octopuses", admittly lacking in euphony.
I brought in my copy of Frank W Lane KINGDOM OF THE OCTOPUS, one of
the most enchanting natural history popular books ever written, and
still of teuthological interest despite its 1960/74 copyright dates.
The author apparently read almost the complete scientific literature
on octopuses, and also to have corresponded with all the world's
experts.
Early on, the first time Lane writes about his subject in the plural
(octopuses), he includes a footnote:
Other plural nouns which have been used for these animals
are octopussies, octopi, octopods, octopoids, octopodes
--and octopus.
And as a footnote to his vocabulary at the end, Lane mentions that
the adjectival form is subject to dispute, and that his choice was to
use "octopus" for the physical, eg, "octopus eyes", and "octopodan"
for the abstract, eg, "octopodan behavior".
Looking through his rather extensive bibliography, I noticed little
variation. "Octopuses" was just about the only English plural. One
writer with a Japanese name, writing in English in a Japanese journal,
used "octopods".
Curiously enough, "octopodes" seems to be the French plural, while
"Octopoden" the German plural. These may or may not be irregular.
My pocket bilingual dictionaries do not have the relevant entry.
Regarding pedantry, I would suggest "octopods" has the only scientific
justification. The reason is slightly subtle. The cephalopod class is
scientifically known as Cephalopoda, divided into several orders: the
Nautiloida (nautilus), Sepioida (cuttlefish), Teuthoida aka Decapoda
(squid), Vampyromorpha (vampire squid), Octopoda (octopus). (I have
no idea if there is expert concurrence here or not. Probably not.)
"Octopus" itself is one particular genus within the Octopodidae, which
is one particular family within the Octopoda. But the popular word
"octupus" is used for all the Octopoda, not just those species that
Cuvier singled out for the "Octopus" genus. Since plurals are formed
rather regularly from taxon names, one can assume--without citation--
that "octopods" is the correct scientific plural when speaking of more
than one member of the Octopoda, which happens to coincide with the
popular meaning of "octopuses".
On the other hand, I think that the "species that Cuvier singled out"
was just *Octopus vulgaris*, the common octopus, and which may also be
one common sense behind "octopus".
--
-Matthew P Wiener (wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Geoff Butler
In article <3297383d...@news.acadia.net>, "Edward K. Dunham"
<ekdu...@acadia.net> writes
>
>What's the plural of "hippopotamus"?
"Hippoipotamus", of course.
-ler
John Nurick
>Oh dear, some of us can be much more recessed than that !
>
>Try /'Ak t@p@diz/ (OK tupudeez)
>
Indubitably.
Edward K. Dunham
On 22 Nov 1996 02:40:18 GMT, ev...@poirot.hpl.hp.com (Evan
Kirshenbaum) wrote:
>[...]
>Surely, it only betrays an ignorance of Latin and Greek (or a
>recognition that the speaker is using English). "Octopi" has been a
>common English word for quite a while, and was indeed the form taught
>in many schools (including mine).
>
>From MWDEU (p. 678, "octopus")
>[...]
Somebody who uses "octopi" as the plural of "octopus" seems to
think it's a Latin word and that since it ends in "-us" its
plural must be in "-i". If the word is of Latin derivation, it
must to be "octo" (eight) + "pes" (foot). Now the plural of
"pes" in Latin is "pedes". The coinage was probably rather from
the Greek "octo" (eight) + "pous" (foot). In Greek, the plural
of "pous" is "podes". Anyway, there's no basis in either Latin
or Greek for "octopi".
Not all Latin words in "-us" have plurals in "-i". "Cantus" and
"corpus" come to mind; any third- or fourth-declension noun in
-us would do.
It's like saying "traumae" for the plural of "trauma". Why not
say "traumas" unless you're pretending to know something you
don't?
Usage counts only demonstrate how many such imposters get past
editors (why should editors know Latin or Greek?) and into print.
Ed.
--
Edward K. Dunham, Seal Harbor, ME 04675-0005 USA 1 207 276-3753
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darueber muss man schweigen." (Wittgenstein)
Victor Engel
Behold the hippopotamus!
We laugh at how he looks to us,
And yet in moments dank and grim,
I wonder how we look to him.
Peace, peace, thou hippopotamus!
As you no doubt delight the eye
other hippopotami.
Ogden Nash
Jon Robert Crofoot <Bob.C...@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>ekdu...@acadia.net (Edward K. Dunham) wrote:
>>On 21 Nov 1996 13:30:56 GMT, slhin...@aol.com wrote:
>>What's the plural of "hippopotamus"?
>>
>
> Hippos
Matthew P Wiener
In article <579q5b$n...@netnews.upenn.edu>, weemba@sagi (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
>Looking through his rather extensive bibliography, I noticed little
>variation. "Octopuses" was just about the only English plural. One
>writer with a Japanese name, writing in English in a Japanese journal,
>used "octopods".
>Curiously enough, "octopodes" seems to be the French plural, while
>"Octopoden" the German plural. These may or may not be irregular.
>My pocket bilingual dictionaries do not have the relevant entry.
Checking several larger bilingual dictionaries, I found the French
have their own words, one for the zoological octopus and one for the
culinary octopus, while the Germans call an octopus "ein Krake". (I
find this odd, since in English, we usually view kraken as exaggerated
reports of giant squids.)
One of three bilingual English-German dictionaries (Duden) also listed
Octopus, apparently as a technical zoological term only, like horse and
equus.
>Regarding pedantry, I would suggest "octopods" has the only scientific
>justification. [...] "Octopus" itself is one particular genus within
>the Octopodidae, which is one particular family within the Octopoda.
>But the popular word "octopus" is used for all the Octopoda, not just
>those species that Cuvier singled out for the "Octopus" genus. Since
>plurals are formed rather regularly from taxon names, one can assume--
>without citation--that "octopods" is the correct scientific plural
>when speaking of more than one member of the Octopoda, which happens
>to coincide with the popular meaning of "octopuses".
And so this speculation on my part seems to be exactly what I ran across
in the Lane bibliography, in French, in German, and in a Japanese use
of English.
Geoff Butler
In article <579q5b$n...@netnews.upenn.edu>, Matthew P Wiener
<wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> writes
>[snipped interesting stuff for the sake of brevity]
>Regarding pedantry, I would suggest "octopods" has the only scientific
>justification. The reason is slightly subtle. The cephalopod class is
>scientifically known as Cephalopoda, divided into several orders: the
>Nautiloida (nautilus), Sepioida (cuttlefish), Teuthoida aka Decapoda
>(squid), Vampyromorpha (vampire squid), Octopoda (octopus). (I have
>no idea if there is expert concurrence here or not. Probably not.)
From an unscientific point of view, 'octopods' sounds as if ought to
mean 'octopusses and similar eight-legged beasties', ie rather more
vague than 'octopusses'.
-ler
Matthew P Wiener
In article <y$PLlXAFb...@gbutler.demon.co.uk>, Geoff Butler <geoff@gbutler writes:
>In article <579q5b$n...@netnews.upenn.edu>, Matthew P Wiener
><wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> writes
>>Regarding pedantry, I would suggest "octopods" has the only scientific
>>justification. The reason is slightly subtle. The cephalopod class is
>>scientifically known as Cephalopoda, divided into several orders: the
>>Nautiloida (nautilus), Sepioida (cuttlefish), Teuthoida aka Decapoda
>>(squid), Vampyromorpha (vampire squid), Octopoda (octopus). (I have
>>no idea if there is expert concurrence here or not. Probably not.)
>From an unscientific point of view, 'octopods' sounds as if ought to
>mean 'octopusses and similar eight-legged beasties', ie rather more
>vague than 'octopusses'.
But there are no "similar eight-legged beasties". There are spiders
and sea spiders, for example, but they are quite unrelated.
On reflection I'm not sure how to evaluate "octopods" as a plural of
"octopus", other than Lane cites it as such. It is actually a plural
for "octopod", meaning an animal in the order Octopoda, and it just
works out that "octopod" is an exact synonym for "octopus" the animal,
as commonly understood.
By the way, I don't think anyone recognizes "octopusses" as an actual
plural. The dictionaries I have checked, and Lane's bibliography, all
have "octopuses".
Fredrick Rea O'Keefe
After reading this ongoing thread, my closest dictionary (Webster's New
Collegiate, 1953) demanded attention. What do I see for the plural?
octopuses (OC to pus ez, must be English), octopodes (oc TO po dez, of
the Latin singular, but not so stated), and octopi (a Latin(ized) plural --
ok TO pi).
Seems everyone's "correct."
Rick
Matthew P Wiener <wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> wrote in article
<57etlk$8...@netnews.upenn.edu>...
Matthew P Wiener
In article <01bbdbf0$fea3c400$5ae5...@fredrick.gte.net>, "Fredrick Rea O'Keefe" <fredrick@gte writes:
>After reading this ongoing thread, my closest dictionary (Webster's New
>Collegiate, 1953) demanded attention. What do I see for the plural?
>octopuses (OC to pus ez, must be English), octopodes (oc TO po dez, of
>the Latin singular, but not so stated),
Greek, actually.
> and octopi (a Latin(ized) plural --
>ok TO pi).
>Seems everyone's "correct."
That's not clear at all. There are numerous words or forms that exist
in dictionary or metadictionary context only. The question is not whether
dictionaries list these forms, but does the form actually exist out there.
In particular, what is the status of "octopodes"?
Lane claimed to have come across "octopodes", but I hope he meant more
than somebody's dictionary or the French scientific plural.
Victor Engel
Geoff Butler <ge...@gbutler.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>From an unscientific point of view, 'octopods' sounds as if ought to
>mean 'octopusses and similar eight-legged beasties', ie rather more
>vague than 'octopusses'.
>
As in, "Daddylonglegses are octopods as are octopusses."
Geoff Butler
In article <57etlk$8...@netnews.upenn.edu>, Matthew P Wiener
<wee...@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu> writes
>>mean 'octopusses and similar eight-legged beasties', ie rather more
>>vague than 'octopusses'.
>
>and sea spiders, for example, but they are quite unrelated.
Irrelevant, really: I only said 'sounds as if it ought to'. As you say,
the fact that the octopus is the only Octopod confuses matters.
>By the way, I don't think anyone recognizes "octopusses" as an actual
>plural. The dictionaries I have checked, and Lane's bibliography, all
>have "octopuses".
Yes, I know. I even checked it (Chambers) before I wrote it, but I went
ahead and wrote it anyway. To my Brit eye, it needs the 'ss' to avoid
being pronounced 'octo-poosies'. I know that the rule involves stressed
final syllables, but it really ought to involve schwaed (sp!) final
syllables.
-ler
Gareth Williams
Thus spake St...@The-Light.com (Victor Engel) :
+Geoff Butler <ge...@gbutler.demon.co.uk> wrote:
+
+>From an unscientific point of view, 'octopods' sounds as if ought to
+>mean 'octopusses and similar eight-legged beasties', ie rather more
+>vague than 'octopusses'.
+>
+
+As in, "Daddylonglegses are octopods as are octopusses."
I think you misspelled 'spiders' (or crabs... or hexapods)?
regards
Gareth Williams <g...@fmode.demon.co.uk>
Phil Gustafson
Gareth Williams <g...@fmode.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>+As in, "Daddylonglegses are octopods as are octopusses."
>I think you misspelled 'spiders' (or crabs... or hexapods)?
>
a crane fly is a hexapod. The one that's a harvestman is an octopod.
The last crab I ate was, I think, a decapod, but I was busier eating the
legs than counting them.
Crossposted to a.f.u with reservations, because I believe Maggot Girl
has addressed the daddy longlegs issue already. (AFU'ers: The thread
involved AUE'ers getting prissy about "octopi".)
Phil "Dragging out my Xmas .sig" Gustafson
--
^ Goodness! Santa has lost his reindeer, but the enormous velocipede
x O __o __o __o __o __o __o __o __o __o. will get him to Vicki
/(_){-}+--_-\<,--\<,--\<,--\<,--\<,--\<,--\<,--\<,--\<,_ Robinson's house!
\=====/ (_)/----/----/----/----/----/----/----/----/ (_) <ph...@panix.com>
Matthew P Wiener
In article <57na3s$1...@panix2.panix.com>, phil@panix (Phil Gustafson) writes:
>Gareth Williams <g...@fmode.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>+As in, "Daddylonglegses are octopods as are octopusses."
>>I think you misspelled 'spiders' (or crabs... or hexapods)?
>Several different creatures are called daddy longlegses. The one that's
>a crane fly is a hexapod. The one that's a harvestman is an octopod.
>The last crab I ate was, I think, a decapod, but I was busier eating the
>legs than counting them.
A hexapod is a member of the Hexapoda (insects), an octopod is a member
of the Octopoda (octopuses), and a decapod is a member of the Decapoda
(old name for squids).
slhin...@aol.com
Matthew P Wiener wrote
<.....a decapod is a member of the Decapoda
(old name for squids).
*******************************
Today, the Decapoda constitute an Order of the Class Crustacea, Phylum
Arthropoda. The Decapoda taxon is further divided into Suborders Natantia
(swimming decapods, the shrimps, etc.) and Reptantia (crawling decapods,
including lobsters, crabs, and some "shrimps.")
Victor Engel
In an as yet undelivered message, <57na3s$1...@panix2.panix.com>,
phil@panix (Phil Gustafson) writes:
>>Gareth Williams <g...@fmode.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>+As in, "Daddylonglegses are octopods as are octopusses."
>>>I think you misspelled 'spiders' (or crabs... or hexapods)?
>
>>Several different creatures are called daddy longlegses. The one that's
>>a crane fly is a hexapod. The one that's a harvestman is an octopod.
>>The last crab I ate was, I think, a decapod, but I was busier eating the
>>legs than counting them.
This is the first time I have heard of anything other than the
harvestman relative called a daddylonglegs. By the way, I think the
group term for daddylonglegses is "beard", which name is very obvious
when you see one.