>This abuse of latin-derived plurals leads to such obsenities as "piece of >data" where "datum" would suffice and "medias".
>"Why can't the English learn to speak?";was that in Pygmalian, or added for My >Fair Lady? Good point, but why restrict it to a few Latin words. Much of English was debased/converted/changed when the more interesting forms (starting around 600-700 AD) were compressed into what some people regard a "modern" English. And, of course, many of our "English" words are based on words from other languages, such as Latin, Greek (older versions), Aramaic, forms of Arabic, and so forth. These should all be kept to their original forms, even if such forms have no past/present/future, or gender, or ownership, or singular/plural, or have multiple extraneous meanings, and so forth. Also, the way English "chops up" interesting words (in German, for example) into a string of separate words might be offensive to some people. One can take this "sticking to the archaic original" in additional positive directions. A good example is the vanishing use of the subjunctive in "modern" English; perhaps the educational system should help restore the expression and usage of this classic format. Complaining about a "modernization" or "a way of adapting a few words into modern English" based almost completely on a few Latin words is very small-minded in my opinion. Of course in one's daily Latin conversations or writings one might see this differently. Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
