Active Users:500 Time:03/03/2026 07:58:32 PM
Yes. I think so, anyway - been a good while since I had Latin. Legolas Send a noteboard - 16/11/2010 07:12:09 PM
Is it the words ending in -us taking the plural form -i that is trickier?

But I can't think of any words on -um that aren't neuter. Most words in -us are masculine and have a plural in -i, a few have a plural in -us as well (but I'm not sure if we regularly use any of those in the modern Western languages).

That is for Latin words of course. The neuter plural in -a is identical in the two languages, and there are some similarities elsewhere, but in general the Latin and Greek declensions are quite different, so you have to be careful with words that look like they might have Latin origins, but have Greek ones instead. Octopus comes to mind.
Reply to message
Subversive Websites - 13/11/2010 10:49:15 PM 1385 Views
"Intended or serving to subvert, especially intended to overthrow or undermine an established govt". - 14/11/2010 01:44:14 AM 767 Views
Re: Gee, thanks dad! *NM* - 14/11/2010 01:32:32 PM 511 Views
Well, I'm hoping I simply disagree with your diction rather than your motives. - 14/11/2010 03:36:57 PM 834 Views
Re: No, you disagree with my motives. - 15/11/2010 01:06:54 AM 803 Views
The Founding Fathers of the US? - 15/11/2010 10:18:32 AM 848 Views
"Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God". - 15/11/2010 01:15:33 PM 879 Views
I'm sure bin Laden completely agrees - 15/11/2010 01:32:53 PM 854 Views
When you give me an example of Jefferson murdering women and children that analogy will work. - 15/11/2010 01:49:04 PM 802 Views
yes because Jefferson was a PARAGON of virtue himself - 15/11/2010 02:17:58 PM 896 Views
I wasn't aware I'd made that statement. - 15/11/2010 02:25:27 PM 718 Views
nvm, I was going to argue but I have decided not to *NM* - 15/11/2010 07:46:42 PM 464 Views
So you are being completely subjective here? It is wrong, unless it is for a cause you support? *NM* - 15/11/2010 02:30:37 PM 392 Views
No, it's a question of precedence. - 15/11/2010 04:13:04 PM 739 Views
His analogy works very well, and you are still being subjective. - 15/11/2010 08:23:25 PM 976 Views
The precedence is inherent in the statement; that was Jeffersons point. - 15/11/2010 09:17:01 PM 947 Views
Re: The precedence is inherent in the statement; that was Jeffersons point. - 15/11/2010 10:52:40 PM 765 Views
I don't believe that at all. - 16/11/2010 12:08:26 AM 625 Views
Re: As I mentioned numerous times. - 16/11/2010 11:52:36 PM 866 Views
Re: As I mentioned numerous times. - 17/11/2010 01:34:29 AM 840 Views
No, its relevancy is difficult to grasp. - 16/11/2010 07:19:11 AM 1019 Views
Maybe I just have an unusual perspective. - 16/11/2010 04:15:39 PM 894 Views
I didn't know they bombed a SCHOOL!!! - 16/11/2010 04:31:24 PM 778 Views
Please. If there were any soldiers in the WTC on 911 it was coincidental. - 16/11/2010 04:40:51 PM 782 Views
perhaps, but not all important targets are military targets. - 16/11/2010 04:57:20 PM 949 Views
Not all important targets are LEGITIMATE targets either. - 16/11/2010 05:06:11 PM 774 Views
I don't wish one, but I hate sidebars - 16/11/2010 05:09:33 PM 825 Views
All about priorities; your call. - 16/11/2010 10:33:53 PM 747 Views
That's so many hours of my life I'll never get back. - 16/11/2010 10:41:55 PM 793 Views
This your first time on the CMB? - 16/11/2010 11:18:03 PM 791 Views
No, NOW I know what's going on! - 16/11/2010 04:36:04 PM 916 Views
Still doesn't work. - 16/11/2010 04:50:58 PM 945 Views
Those last sentences are going way overboard. - 16/11/2010 05:08:40 PM 773 Views
Terrorism is inexcusable and indefensible, but at least there's a LOGIC to it. - 16/11/2010 05:21:15 PM 863 Views
First of all, your generalizations were misguided. - 16/11/2010 05:40:55 PM 886 Views
Of course I disagree, but that's a different and older debate. - 16/11/2010 11:10:23 PM 1057 Views
I will try to be brief. Try. - 16/11/2010 11:28:28 PM 857 Views
Heh. - 16/11/2010 11:55:40 PM 762 Views
mostly agree - 16/11/2010 11:18:14 PM 728 Views
. . . and now I'm thinking you're the one willfully misunderstanding. - 16/11/2010 05:36:15 PM 799 Views
Not willful, at least. - 17/11/2010 12:29:42 AM 760 Views
sorry - 16/11/2010 11:24:44 PM 839 Views
Well, you know what I was going on about, if that helps? *NM* - 16/11/2010 11:25:18 PM 462 Views
"Subversion" has the connotation of treason, however wrongly. - 15/11/2010 01:32:06 PM 845 Views
Re: Non-sequitur, non-sequitur, CAPS LOCK, opinion, CAPS LOCK. - 15/11/2010 10:45:41 PM 669 Views
Either my mind moves much faster than ya'lls, or ya'll are deliberately missing the point. - 16/11/2010 12:05:28 AM 873 Views
I am curious. - 16/11/2010 01:10:52 AM 716 Views
Argggh, ya got me! - 16/11/2010 05:11:41 PM 724 Views
the dictionary has -nia and -iums. - 16/11/2010 05:16:32 PM 813 Views
I prefer "millennia" but recall someone telling me that's not technically right. - 16/11/2010 05:32:34 PM 762 Views
well, in American English, they're apparantly both "correct" *NM* - 16/11/2010 06:13:40 PM 498 Views
In American English, almost anything is. - 17/11/2010 01:02:15 AM 841 Views
It is right. It's the one thing that's easy in Latin and Greek declensions. - 16/11/2010 06:33:12 PM 768 Views
You call then "neutral" over there? Interesting. *NM* - 16/11/2010 06:42:00 PM 492 Views
Neutral, neutrum, neuter, whatever. Details. *NM* - 16/11/2010 06:45:29 PM 439 Views
Do only neuter words end in -um? - 16/11/2010 06:57:39 PM 832 Views
Yes. I think so, anyway - been a good while since I had Latin. - 16/11/2010 07:12:09 PM 825 Views
Thanks. Maybe that's what I'm remembering. - 16/11/2010 07:17:05 PM 800 Views
IIRC, the number of "n"s was the issue. - 17/11/2010 01:06:24 AM 802 Views
Should definitely be two. *NM* - 17/11/2010 01:48:51 AM 406 Views
Ah, thanks. - 17/11/2010 02:08:08 AM 805 Views
Silly laptops.... - 16/11/2010 05:32:34 PM 905 Views
- 16/11/2010 05:35:22 PM 730 Views
I'm horrible about using "conjugate" as a blanket term. - 17/11/2010 01:09:34 AM 856 Views
I'm definitely missing the point. - 16/11/2010 06:58:17 AM 822 Views
Well, hopefully we've cleared things up now. *MN* - 16/11/2010 05:30:46 PM 815 Views
I don't know if it qualifies as subversive... - 14/11/2010 02:47:34 AM 932 Views
Re: That's not bad. - 14/11/2010 01:38:02 PM 822 Views
The Chap - 14/11/2010 01:58:27 PM 693 Views
Thanks. - 14/11/2010 03:04:49 PM 795 Views
All my subversive websites are religious. - 15/11/2010 02:26:42 AM 781 Views
Re: I'm certainly interested. - 15/11/2010 03:37:11 AM 803 Views
Well, okay then. - 15/11/2010 04:23:35 AM 872 Views
Some stuff I think is pretty neat: - 15/11/2010 07:24:41 PM 881 Views
Re: Noice, noice. - 15/11/2010 11:01:31 PM 810 Views
That first link is really good. - 15/11/2010 11:18:25 PM 910 Views
Re: Ha! - 16/11/2010 11:55:42 PM 680 Views
Re: Also, I like your poems. *NM* - 17/11/2010 01:02:27 AM 435 Views
Re: Dude. - 20/11/2010 02:14:38 AM 876 Views
you mean besides this one? *NM* - 15/11/2010 07:55:03 PM 342 Views
Re: I AM NOT SUBVERTING NEBHEAD!! - 15/11/2010 11:02:10 PM 806 Views
Re: William Faulkner would be unhappy with my thread. - 16/11/2010 08:29:42 PM 776 Views
My work here is done. - 16/11/2010 08:34:22 PM 741 Views
Re: Yes, it's fairly obvious that you need to respond. *NM* - 16/11/2010 11:40:10 PM 463 Views
I often wish I didn't. - 17/11/2010 01:49:33 AM 702 Views
I'm calling you out on this one. - 18/11/2010 12:06:17 AM 758 Views
It's not perfect, but it's the lesser of many evils, IMHO. - 18/11/2010 01:12:43 AM 819 Views
You people with your words. - 16/11/2010 08:34:17 PM 889 Views
. - 16/11/2010 08:54:22 PM 674 Views
Re: I still say we should start a band. - 20/11/2010 02:42:48 AM 837 Views
Re: Man, that attack on Cameron is brutal. *NM* - 20/11/2010 02:47:12 AM 419 Views
Re: Awesome. - 16/11/2010 11:38:29 PM 806 Views

Reply to Message