6

However wrong it may be, lots of people have pluralized virus as virii. I'd understand viri, but what misconception could lead one to write virii?

Community
  • 1
  • 4
    My guess is that radius, radii was generalized to virus, virii. People seem to have not noticed that the word is virus and not virius. – Peter Shor Apr 23 '11 at 19:51
  • @Peter Shor: You should probably write that as an answer. – Kosmonaut Apr 23 '11 at 20:34
  • 1
    Anyone who has ever said “virii” is so dumb. Really, really dumb. The plural is “virus”, since we don't even know what declension it was originally from. Some people think that it was 4th declension, which would make the plural also “virus”, but we really don't know. Just say “viruses”. Oh my goodness. –  Apr 25 '11 at 00:38
  • @Jonathan Sterling What is wrong with you? Someone who doesn't know archaic conjugations of dead languages is "really, really dumb"? Chill out. – Uticensis Apr 25 '11 at 03:06
  • But the deal is that “virus” is a barely attested word in Latin. So it's just an English word. So we pluralize it like any other English word. –  Apr 25 '11 at 03:48
  • 1
    Please read this, so I don’t have to copy it all into an answer. Again. – tchrist Aug 19 '12 at 03:42

2 Answers2

5

I suspect the confusion arises out of the fact that very few people now have any kind of understanding of Latin. Many words get turned into faux-Latin plurals, even when the word itself is not Latin in origin, or when the plural form is completely incorrect (octopi, platypi, penii). It seems to come up most often when the plural form of the word has an -ses construction. It feels uncomfortable to say, so people (often jokingly, in my experience, but occasionally earnestly) try to give it a faux-Latin plural.

Uticensis
  • 21,799
Loquacity
  • 1,988
4

On the Italian Wikipedia page for Virus, it seems that there are different plurals used in different contexts.

I can't quote it because it's italian and almost no-one will understand so I'll try to translate the important parts:

It should be singularia tantum (=it only has the singular form), like "rice" or "air".

Lwoff, Horne and Tournier, within their classification in 1962, proposed and used the form "vira". In the anglophone area of interest, virii (from vīriī) is rather used referring to Computer viruses, while within biological area the one used is "viruses".

Vīriī is wrong because it would come from a word *vīrius (such as radius, radiī) which does not exist.
Another plural could be vīrī which instead would require the singular form "vir" that means man and whose plural form is "vĭrī".

Alenanno
  • 18,136
  • 1
    +1 Note that the plural would be viri in Latin if it existed (quod apparently non), since the genitive viri, which exists, shows that it is of the second declension. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Apr 23 '11 at 20:00
  • A direct translation can be found on English Wikipedia's Plural forms of words ending in -us. I was hoping to see a theory on why virii became so wide-spread. As @Cer said, such a Latin plural would be viri. –  Apr 23 '11 at 20:02
  • Yes, I actually found the declension of the word Virus, in Latin, and it had the plural form written, so I guess it just got out of use? – Alenanno Apr 23 '11 at 20:09
  • 1
    Having worked with and around computers and programmers most of my life, I can safely call BS on the notion that "virii" is used with respect to computer viruses. – The Raven Apr 23 '11 at 20:49
  • @The Raven: What does BS mean? – Alenanno Apr 23 '11 at 21:00
  • 1
    @Alenanno: It means the solid excrements of a male cow. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Apr 23 '11 at 22:10
  • @Alenanno: Note that it is one singulare tantum, two singularia tantum (tantum = "only", an adverb). – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Apr 23 '11 at 22:13
  • @Cerberus: Oh lol. And about the Singularia/Pluralia Tantum. I don't remember hearing somebody using "singulare tantum" because you were referring to a "single" term. I suppose you're right, I mean, it makes sense what you say, but I never really thought about it. eheh :D – Alenanno Apr 23 '11 at 22:17
  • @Alenanno: OK. Perhaps you have heard of plurale tantum? That one is probably more common. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Apr 23 '11 at 22:23
  • @Cerberus: Same for that as well... I've always heard that other way. Anyway, now you've put doubt in my head, I'll need to ask other opinions about it, I'll let you know. :) – Alenanno Apr 23 '11 at 22:45
  • @Alenanno: Doubt about the plural of virus, or about the singular of singulare? – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Apr 23 '11 at 22:47
  • @Cerberus: Flatus? lol... No, doubt about which one is used/should be used. I've never questioned it, so I'd like to hear other "points of view", if you get what I mean. – Alenanno Apr 23 '11 at 22:51
  • @Alenanno: Sorry I am totally messing up my comments and references tonight. I edited my comment, but apparently I was too late. // So you mean you are not sure which plural of virus people use? I don't think I've ever heard anything other than viruses... but who knows what lurks in the dark corners of the internets! – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Apr 23 '11 at 23:18
  • @Cerberus: No no, I was referring to the "pluralia/singularia tantum" VS "plurale/singulare tantum" use... :D – Alenanno Apr 23 '11 at 23:26
  • @Alenanno: Oh, ok. Well, that is quite clear: you could say virus is a singulare tantum, but there are several singularia tantum in the dictionary. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Apr 23 '11 at 23:35
  • @Cerberus: That's what I was talking about, I've never used "singulare tantum" before... – Alenanno Apr 23 '11 at 23:54
  • @Alenanno: I assure you it is correct. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singulare_tantum#Related_terms — And I haven't just edited that in! – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Apr 24 '11 at 00:06
  • @Cerberus: Yes but like I said, what you say makes sense to me. I'm just wondering why I've never heard that use here? Uhm, let's see, what did you study? If you did Classic Studies, then we can see why you're more used to it then I am... I think we used this way inappropriately. :D – Alenanno Apr 24 '11 at 09:53
  • @Alenanno: Ah OK, I see. Yes I study the classics, that might explain why we use it more often. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Apr 24 '11 at 10:08
  • @Cerberus: I never did "classics", as in latin/ancient greek/etc... I studied Latin but not for long since it wasn't my study-career. That might explain many things ahah... Well I know a new thing now lol :D – Alenanno Apr 24 '11 at 10:43