For me, it may be that the toilet paper roll needs to have the open end away from the wall. I don’t want to reach under the roll to take a piece! That’s ludicrous!

That or my recent addiction to correcting people when they use “less” when they should use “fewer”

  • jg1i@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago
    • Syllabuses, not syllabi
    • Matrixes, not matrices
    • Indexes, not indices
    • Cactuses, not cacti

    Standardize plurals!

    • xorollo@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      As someone who regularly works with matrices, please, no. I’m kinda ok with the indexes though

    • s_s@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Better idea: Make them superplurals.

      E.g. fish (singular), fish (plural), fishes (superplural)

    • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Okay Imma pick a fight here. Your suggestion is the opposite of pedantic. It advocates for a “vulgarisation” of Latin loanwords (in the sense of “making them more like common words”).

      I want to go back to pluralising more words in line with their Greek or Latin roots. I want to reverse the perfectly natural and reasonable linguistic shift you’re proposing and instead restore or retain that piece of linguistic anachronism as long as possible.