Lotus's or Lotii?

[DeeAitch]

As some of you will know I own two Lotus cars. Now my wife has just dared me to ask you lot if I have 2 Lotus's or 2 Lotii. At least she is showing some interest in them

[Rob-C]

Loti is technically correct, based on the Greek derivation of the word.

But to English ears, Lotuses sounds "right" and therefore is "right ":)

[Doug]

my wife has just dared me to ask you lot if I have 2 Lotus's or 2 Lotii.

I'd say you have either 2 Lotuses, or you have Loti; but you don't have 2 Loti.

then tell her you have a rocket in your pocket and see if she shows interest in that . . .

[Enright]

Well if you follow the logic for the plural of hippopotamus (seeing as it also ends in "us"), then you probably have 2 lotos.

Don't think much to that - sounds a bit too much like something to do with scratchcards...

[Ade]

How about lucky b------

Just joking

[theelanman]

its in one of the books on Colin Chapman.......
and according to the founder himself......its Lotus......even in the plural....its Lotus....
so therefore you have 2 Lotus
there is no 'i' or 'es'.......

[Sy V]

Yet again, I agree with Mr Chapman.

Stupid question in the first place, if you ask me...

[GeoffSmith]

Final us becomes -i (second declension, [aI]) or -era or -ora (third declension), or just adds -es (especially in fourth declension, where it would otherwise be the same as the singular):
alumnus alumni
corpus corpora
focus foci
genus genera
prospectus prospectuses (plural prospectus is rare)
radius radii
viscus viscera

Virus had no plural ending in Latin; the plural in English is usually viruses. See plural of virus.

cactus cactuses/cacti (in Arizona many people avoid either choice with cactus as both singular and plural.)
fungus fungi
hippopotamus hippopotamuses/hippopotami
octopus octopuses (note: octopi also occurs, although it is strictly speaking unfounded[10], because it is not a Latin noun of the second declension, but rather a Latinized form of Greek ὀκτώπους. The theoretically correct form octopodes is rarely used.)
platypus platypuses (same as octopus: platypi occurs but is etymologically incorrect, and platypodes, while technically correct, is even rarer than octopodes)
terminus termini/terminuses
uterus uteri/uteruses

Colloquial usages based in a humorous fashion on the second declension include Elvii to refer to multiple Elvis impersonators and Loti, used by petrolheads to refer to Lotus automobiles in the plural.

How about lucky b------

Just joking

How about b-----

Not joking.

[nitroman]

I had 2 years of Latin, albeit way back in 1975/76! The temptation is very strong to apply Latin grammatical rules to words which appear to be rooted in Latin, but that is a mistake for "non Latin" words. That said, I would tend to believe 1 Lotus or 2 Lotuses, although to "apply Latin" in my thinking it would be 1 Lotus or simply Loti for more than 1 Lotus. "Loti" is our tip that we cannot apply our knowledge of Latin to this word, since Colin would rise from the grave & beat the crap out of us! Seriously, it's confusing to me because of the Genus Lotus. But that, and by extension Latin, only applies to the naming of organisms. A car is not an organism.

Enright,
Either the long hippopotami (plural Latin) or the longer hippopotamuses (plural English) is acceptable, but it's easy to see why some people simply prefer hippos!

[Sy V]

... or the longer hippopotamuses (plural American bastardized English) is acceptable, but it's easy to see why some people simply prefer hippos!

[theelanman]

according to Colin Chapman....the founder himself......its Lotus......even in the plural....its Lotus....
so therefore you have 2 Lotus
there is no 'i' or 'es'.......

[nitroman]

according to Colin Chapman....the founder himself......its Lotus......even in the plural....its Lotus....
so therefore you have 2 Lotus
there is no 'i' or 'es'.......

Since March I've had the same problem as Deeaitch. I have just settled on saying, "I have a yellow Lotus and a white Lotus." People get that and you don't have to explain.

[DeeAitch]

"I have a yellow Lotus and a white Lotus." People get that and you don't have to explain.

How did you know my +2 is White

How about b-----

Not joking.

divntknawotahsedbuditmustvbnbad


Only took 3 years to get this sorted

[GeoffSmith]

"I have a yellow Lotus and a white Lotus." People get that and you don't have to explain.

How did you know my +2 is White

Problem solved - you've both got two Elans!

divntknawotahsedbuditmustvbnbad

Nowtmeouldmarradivventlissentwusathowtitwusththerdyave.

[MattDon]

does this mean i have to change my sig??? ignoring the garmatical error.

[nitroman]

According to the rules Lotus should become Loti.
However, consider... "One Ferrari, two Ferrari, three Ferrari, four; five Ferrari, six Ferrari, seven Ferrari, more." Which sounds more correct than "One Ferrarus, two Ferrari, three Ferrari, four; five Ferrari, six Ferrari, seven Ferrari, more."

Besides, these are official names of a specific entity. Take for instance (Marcus Junius) Brutus. If his brothers had participated in Ceasar's murder, would Ceasar have said, "Oh no, the Bruti brothers!" or simply the astonished, "All the brothers Brutus?"
Brutus is an entire (official, legal) name, and no part of that name is subject to conjugation.
So: One Ferrari, two Ferraris. One Lotus, two Lotuses.
Press confirmation: http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/car_news_ar ... id=6496309

[dapinky]

According to the rules Lotus should become Loti.

But surely that only applies if Colin Chapman wrote in Latin?

English doesn't rely on the same rules of conjugation.......

[tweetdriver63]

According to the rules Lotus should become Loti.

But surely that only applies if Colin Chapman wrote in Latin?

English doesn't rely on the same rules of conjugation.......

I suppose I'll defer to Chapman's comment that it's one Lotus, or two Lotus, even though that sounds odd.

For those who keep bringing up the whole Latin rules thing, try this:

lo⋅tus   /ˈloʊtəs/ [loh-tuhs]

–noun, plural -tus⋅es.

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

[nitroman]

According to the rules Lotus should become Loti.

But surely that only applies if Colin Chapman wrote in Latin?

English doesn't rely on the same rules of conjugation.......

I suppose I'll defer to Chapman's comment that it's one Lotus, or two Lotus, even though that sounds odd.

For those who keep bringing up the whole Latin rules thing, try this:

lo⋅tus   /ˈloʊtəs/ [loh-tuhs]

–noun, plural -tus⋅es.

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

I guess I was expecting too much thinking people would read more than my first sentence.

Not only was Colin not Latin, he was also not an English major. The press, most of whom have been required to take some language studies, seem to get it right.

So: One Ferrari, two Ferraris. One Lotus, two Lotuses.
Press confirmation: http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/car_news_ar ... id=6496309

[ektrolleyboy]

It's LOTUS as far as I'm concerned!
1 LOTUS.
2 LOTUS. Etc...