Poll about the plural of Octopus

[nukeswife]

My son was working on a paper for SWI B and the topic was cephalopods. In the sample paragraph they use the plural Octopi. It showed up in open office as a spelling error, so I did some searching on line and it seems there is confusion as to whether it should be Octopuses, Octopi or Octopodes.

 

So which do you say.

 

For the record we've always said Octopi

[momto2Cs]

Open Office seems to think a lot of words are misspelled, especially anything science-y.

[nukeswife]

Open Office seems to think a lot of words are misspelled, especially anything science-y.

 

I'm noticing that. It also didn't recognize cephalopod.

[nmoira]

I use "octopodes," but "octopuses" is acceptable as well. Here's what my shorter Oxford says:

 

[ORIGIN Modern Latin from Greek oktōpous, from oktō eight + pous foot.]

 

 

 

[snip]

 

 

 

– NOTE: Standard pl. in English is octopuses, although the Greek pl. octopodes is still occas. used. The Latinate form octopi is incorrect.

This makes sense, since it's derived from Greek and not Latin.

[Heather in VA]

Our dictionary says 'octopi'.

 

Heather

[La Condessa]

Octopi is wrong. The 'pus' in octopus is Greek for foot, not the Latin '-us' singular ending, so pluralizing it with the Latin '-i' is incorrect. Octopodes is the Greek plural, but English doesn't borrow the Greek form of pluralization like it often does with Latin borrowings.

 

The correct plural is just octopus. (Like deer or sheep or fish.) However, octopuses appears frequently enough that it is generally accepted.

 

Linguistics nerd here. I love questions like this.

[Lovedtodeath]

Cool! Thanks mmconde.

[Trixie]

I use "octopodes," but "octopuses" is acceptable as well. Here's what my shorter Oxford says:

 

 

[ORIGIN Modern Latin from Greek oktōpous, from oktō eight + pous foot.]

 

 

 

[snip]

 

 

 

– NOTE: Standard pl. in English is octopuses, although the Greek pl. octopodes is still occas. used. The Latinate form octopi is incorrect.

This makes sense, since it's derived from Greek and not Latin.

 

Bingo. This is correct. I use the standard anglicized plural "octopuses," though.

[Spy Car]

I use "octopodes," but "octopuses" is acceptable as well. Here's what my shorter Oxford says:

 

[ORIGIN Modern Latin from Greek oktōpous, from oktō eight + pous foot.]

 

 

 

[snip]

 

 

 

– NOTE: Standard pl. in English is octopuses, although the Greek pl. octopodes is still occas. used. The Latinate form octopi is incorrect.

This makes sense, since it's derived from Greek and not Latin.

 

Fowler's "Modern English Usage" says octopi is WRONG [as you say it is Greek, not Latin], and "octopodes" is pedantic [but not incorrect]. He favors "octopuses."

 

I kind of like pedantic myself :D

 

Bill

[Elisa]

I thought it was octopuses. And now I know why!

[Jen+4dc]

So I was wrong (octopi):tongue_smilie:. At least I'm not alone:D.

 

Thanks for our "word of the day" today!

[lionfamily1999]

Very interesting... thanks for posting this :)

[LittleIzumi]

Octopi is wrong. The 'pus' in octopus is Greek for foot, not the Latin '-us' singular ending, so pluralizing it with the Latin '-i' is incorrect. Octopodes is the Greek plural, but English doesn't borrow the Greek form of pluralization like it often does with Latin borrowings.

 

The correct plural is just octopus. (Like deer or sheep or fish.) However, octopuses appears frequently enough that it is generally accepted.

 

Linguistics nerd here. I love questions like this.

 

That's what I thought! But it wasn't on the poll. Actually, I think dh mentioned that last week, and he's not the linguist of our house. I was impressed :D

[Mommyfaithe]

I thought it was octopupi...but i picked other because maybe it is just octopus...like deer.

???

Faithe

[Dinsfamily]

Very interesting...I thought it was octopi. So octopus is correct, but octopuses is accepted?

 

So now that we know, shouldn't we use octopus? Would you use octopuses out of habit or because more people think it's correct? Just curious.

[Trixie]

So octopus is correct, but octopuses is accepted?

 

Not quite. "Octopodes" is technically correct, but "octopuses" is also correct/acceptable as the standard plural in English. (See nmoira's post above.)

[nmoira]

 

Very interesting...I thought it was octopi. So octopus is correct, but octopuses is accepted?

I see no source for "octopus" being an acceptable plural form. "Octopuses" is more common, but either "octopuses" or "octopodes" is correct... and "octopi" does linger.

[Dinsfamily]

I see no source for "octopus" being an acceptable plural form. "Octopuses" is more common, but either "octopuses" or "octopodes" is correct... and "octopi" does linger.

 

I was primarily looking at this post...

 

Octopi is wrong. The 'pus' in octopus is Greek for foot, not the Latin '-us' singular ending, so pluralizing it with the Latin '-i' is incorrect. Octopodes is the Greek plural, but English doesn't borrow the Greek form of pluralization like it often does with Latin borrowings.

 

The correct plural is just octopus. (Like deer or sheep or fish.) However, octopuses appears frequently enough that it is generally accepted.

 

Linguistics nerd here. I love questions like this.

[nmoira]

 

I was primarily looking at this post...

But I see no "official" sources that agree with this. I'd be interested to, though.

[Georgia On My Mind]

:glare: Well, I learn something new everyday if I pay attention. I was all ready to go with the octopi because of my Latin background but I am so glad you all clarified it is Greek, not Latin. It makes perfect sense and I am so glad I read all the posts, not just the ones I could agreed with. Love you language nerds.:)

[Haiku]

We use octopi just because it's fun to say, but I think the correct plural is octopuses.

 

Tara

[Ginevra]

Well, now that is fascinating! I'm a linguistics nerd, too, but I would have sworn on the Holy Bible that it was octopi. Please don't tell me I'm wrong about cactus/cacti, too. :tongue_smilie:

 

 

Very interesting...I thought it was octopi. So octopus is correct, but octopuses is accepted?

 

So now that we know, shouldn't we use octopus? Would you use octopuses out of habit or because more people think it's correct? Just curious.

 

 

It bugs me some when a form once acknowledged as incorrect becomes so widely used that the incorrect form becomes accepted. The word "curriculums" springs to mind. :glare: My mother always goes squirrely when someone uses the phrase "so unique". Although I saw not too long ago that this is also now generally accepted.

[Trixie]

My mother always goes squirrely when someone uses the phrase "so unique". Although I saw not too long ago that this is also now generally accepted.

 

AAAAAGGGGGGHHHHHH!!! :svengo: No, no, no, no, no, no, no!

[Ginevra]

Trixie, that was a perfect immitation of my mother. Do you know her? Are you her? :D

[EthiopianFood]

It bugs me some when a form once acknowledged as incorrect becomes so widely used that the incorrect form becomes accepted.

 

:iagree::iagree:

 

My mother always goes squirrely when someone uses the phrase "so unique". Although I saw not too long ago that this is also now generally accepted.

 

:confused: :blushing:

[sleepymommy]

I say octopus, although I've heard many say octopi.

[LizzyBee]

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/octopus

 

Dictionary.com has two listings (from two different dictionaries), and they both say the plural is octopuses or octopi.

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/octopus

 

Merriam-Webster also says octopuses or octopi.

 

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/424902/octopus

 

Wow, even britannica says octopuses or octopi. I guess I'll continue to say octopi. :-)

[Ginevra]

RaeAnne, are you asking for further explaination of why "so unique" is incorrect? Maybe you are or maybe you're not, but here's the explaination either way:

 

The root of unique is unus, Latin for "one". The precise meaning of unique is "one of a kind". Therefore, it should not normally have a modifier. It is improper to say something is so, rather, very, somewhat or kind of unique. If there's only one of it, there's only one of it. No need to say there is so only one of it. People use unique interchangeably with unusual or rare, but it's precise meaning precludes this.

[Tutor]

I use "octopodes," but "octopuses" is acceptable as well. Here's what my shorter Oxford says:

 

[ORIGIN Modern Latin from Greek oktōpous, from oktō eight + pous foot.]

 

 

 

[snip]

 

 

 

– NOTE: Standard pl. in English is octopuses, although the Greek pl. octopodes is still occas. used. The Latinate form octopi is incorrect.

This makes sense, since it's derived from Greek and not Latin.

 

This is grammatically accurate, however, scientists (in an attempt to unify and simplify scientific terms) Latinized Greek roots so that prefixes and suffixes could be standardized. Following this pattern, many scientists (like at the University of Michigan's Museum of Zoology) use "octopi." However, some choose to go with common grammar rules rather than the latinized, scientific version (like UC Berkley's Museum of Paleontology) and use "octopuses."

 

I prefer "octopi" to remain consistent with the Latinization, but it's not like the police are going to come arrest anyone for using their form of choice. As long as you know why you use the version you do, I don't think it really matters.

[nmoira]

This is grammatically accurate, however, scientists (in an attempt to unify and simplify scientific terms) Latinized Greek roots so that prefixes and suffixes could be standardized. Following this pattern, many scientists (like at the University of Michigan's Museum of Zoology) use "octopi." However, some choose to go with common grammar rules rather than the latinized, scientific version (like UC Berkley's Museum of Paleontology) and use "octopuses."

 

This gave me an idea.

 

I went to Science Daily and did a 10+ year search for:

octopi -- 2 results (one from 2003 and one from 2007)

octopuses -- 20 results (ranging in dates from 2001 to Dec. 2009)

octopodes -- 0 results

 

These are mostly either press releases from peer reviewed journals, or from various institutions about articles in peer reviewed journals.

 

I tried to do a search of New Scientist, because they have more comprehensive archives, but I cannot find a way to search articles and exclude the comments.

 

Google Scholar gives:

octopi -- 2600 results

octopuses -- 21,800 results

octopodes -- 418 results

 

Edited to add: The ratio is consistent between Science Daily and Google Scholar.

[EthiopianFood]

RaeAnne, are you asking for further explaination of why "so unique" is incorrect? Maybe you are or maybe you're not, but here's the explaination either way:

 

The root of unique is unus, Latin for "one". The precise meaning of unique is "one of a kind". Therefore, it should not normally have a modifier. It is improper to say something is so, rather, very, somewhat or kind of unique. If there's only one of it, there's only one of it. No need to say there is so only one of it. People use unique interchangeably with unusual or rare, but it's precise meaning precludes this.

 

Yes, I figured my smilies were a little unclear, but I decided to go with it. :D Thank you for the explanation. Now I have to think of something to say other than "so unique." :glare:

 

This gave me an idea.

 

I went to Science Daily and did a 10+ year search for:

octopi -- 2 results (one from 2003 and one from 2007)

octopuses -- 20 results (ranging in dates from 2001 to Dec. 2009)

octopodes -- 0 results

 

These are mostly either press releases from peer reviewed journals, or from various institutions about articles in peer reviewed journals.

 

I tried to do a search of New Scientist, because they have more comprehensive archives, but I cannot find a way to search articles and exclude the comments.

 

Google Scholar gives:

octopi -- 2600 results

octopuses -- 21,800 results

octopodes -- 418 results

 

Edited to add: The ratio is consistent between Science Daily and Google Scholar.

 

I was prepared to say "octopodes." I am NOT saying "octopuses."

 

I think I liked myself better BEFORE The Hive, when I was delusional enough to think I was well-educated and spoke using proper grammar. Sigh.

Edited January 23, 2010 by RaeAnne

[nmoira]

 

I was prepared to say "octopodes." I am NOT saying "octopuses."

There's a worse option than octopuses. :D :tongue_smilie: :lol:

[Renai]

 

The correct plural is just octopus. (Like deer or sheep or fish.) However, octopuses appears frequently enough that it is generally accepted.

 

Linguistics nerd here. I love questions like this.

 

Octopus as plural is what I thought was the standard as well, and what we've always used. (No linguists here.)

[EthiopianFood]

There's a worse option than octopuses. :D :tongue_smilie: :lol:

 

I was looking for that option on the poll, but it wasn't there. :001_huh: :lol:

[mcconnellboys]

Common usage is changing for words such as cactii (to cactuses, etc., as with octopii) and some dictionaries will list the fact that this is in flux right now....

[yslek]

Fowler's "Modern English Usage" says octopi is WRONG [as you say it is Greek, not Latin], and "octopodes" is pedantic [but not incorrect]. He favors "octopuses."

 

I kind of like pedantic myself :D

 

Bill

 

:iagree: Me, too. :D

 

I learned that this came from the Greek -pus (plura -podes) when I took Greek in college. B & T love saying "octopodes". :)

 

I've heard so many people correct children who say "octopuses" by saying, "no, it's octopi"...I used to be one of those people, but now it kind of bugs me. If the ending were based on the Latin -us, that would of course be correct, but it's not. (I'd much rather hear "octopuses" now than "octopi". It makes more sense to anglicize the ending than to pretend it came from Latin.) I imagine that so many dictionaries list "octopi" as the/an acceptable plural is that so many people say it. If a mistake is made enough times, it eventually becomes "correct". (Hmm...how many wrongs make a right, I wonder? :lol:)

 

(An example of a word that has changed due to error is the word "newt". It used to be called an "ewte". The "n" from "an" somehow became affixed to the "ewte" part to render the word "newt". Similarly, our word "apron" used to be "napron"; it's related to the word "napkin". I find this kind of thing fun and fascinating.)

[SonshineLearner]

I agree with the Octopus and then to confuse it... Why not add an (') ?

[Dinsfamily]

(An example of a word that has changed due to error is the word "newt". It used to be called an "ewte". The "n" from "an" somehow became affixed to the "ewte" part to render the word "newt". Similarly, our word "apron" used to be "napron"; it's related to the word "napkin". I find this kind of thing fun and fascinating.)

 

Wow, now I've learned 3 cool things today!

[Garga]

I think I liked myself better BEFORE The Hive, when I was delusional enough to think I was well-educated and spoke using proper grammar. Sigh.

 

My sentiments exactly!

[Spy Car]

I imagine that so many dictionaries list "octopi" as the/an acceptable plural is that so many people say it. If a mistake is made enough times, it eventually becomes "correct". (Hmm...how many wrongs make a right, I wonder? :lol:)

 

 

Essentially this is correct.

 

Most dictionaries today are "descriptive", which is to say they report "usage" (even "incorrect" usage) rather than being "prescriptive" dictionaries which describe "correct" usage.

 

This is a problem because many people think that if it's "in the dictionary" it must be correct, when that's not the case. All it means is there are enough people using words "wrongly" that the usage is included in the dictionary.

 

Octopi is a perfect example. It is WRONG to use this as the plural for octopus, but you will find it listed in descriptive dictionaries because many people use this (incorrectly) instead of octopuses (or octopodes).

 

Does this make sense?

 

Bill

[Daisy]

I was prepared to say "octopodes." I am NOT saying "octopuses."

 

I think I liked myself better BEFORE The Hive, when I was delusional enough to think I was well-educated and spoke using proper grammar.

 

LOL. I like knowing I have more to learn but occasionally I embrace the delusion and go along my merry way.

 

Originally Posted by nmoira View Post

This gave me an idea.

 

I went to Science Daily and did a 10+ year search for:

octopi -- 2 results (one from 2003 and one from 2007)

octopuses -- 20 results (ranging in dates from 2001 to Dec. 2009)

octopodes -- 0 results

 

These are mostly either press releases from peer reviewed journals, or from various institutions about articles in peer reviewed journals.

 

I tried to do a search of New Scientist, because they have more comprehensive archives, but I cannot find a way to search articles and exclude the comments.

 

Google Scholar gives:

octopi -- 2600 results

octopuses -- 21,800 results

octopodes -- 418 results

 

Edited to add: The ratio is consistent between Science Daily and Google Scholar.

 

My husband is laughing his butt off! Thanks for the entertainment. He's shaking his head saying, "Only on WTM do people have conversations like this." :lol::lol:

[MomToJediKnights]

I was going to say (as has already been said) that the plural is probably octopus. I am horrible with such things, but it just sounds right.

[lionfamily1999]

I was looking for that option on the poll, but it wasn't there. :001_huh: :lol:

Are you talking about the Bond version? :lol:

[nukeswife]

Using Octopus for plural just sounds odd to me.

 

 

"Did you see that group of octopus?"

 

It may not be linguistically right but I'll stick with Octopi.

[La Condessa]

Yes, octopus is technically the correct way, but octopuses has been so widely used that it is now generally accepted as correct by 'official sources', too. Just like the word curriculums, or pronouncing the word often "off-ten".

 

Someone asked about an official source, but I don't have it anymore. I researched the question a few years back when I was studying for my Linguistics major at BYU.

[lionfamily1999]

Yes, octopus is technically the correct way, but octopuses has been so widely used that it is now generally accepted as correct by 'official sources', too. Just like the word curriculums, or pronouncing the word often "off-ten".

 

Someone asked about an official source, but I don't have it anymore. I researched the question a few years back when I was studying for my Linguistics major at BYU.

Okay, how do you pronounce it correctly?

[La Condessa]

It was pronounced "off-fen" with a silent t.

[Trixie]

But I see no "official" sources that agree with this. I'd be interested to, though.

 

As would I.

[ElizabethB]

I like the

, also spelled oktapodi, you can find it under both spellings. We have a high-res version on iTunes, it was either free or cheap.

[Trixie]

It was pronounced "off-fen" with a silent t.

 

You seem to be saying that "often" used to be pronounced with a silent "t" and that the generally accepted pronunciation is now "off-ten," but maybe I'm misunderstanding you? Actually, the reverse is true. "Often" was originally pronounced "off-ten" (as it comes from OE "oft" and ME "ofte"); but the generally accepted pronunciation is now "off-en," with "off-ten" an increasingly common secondary (but--grudgingly--accepted ;)) pronunciation.