(no subject)

[spatch]

I just used the phrase "dorkus malorkus" in conversation but needed to pluralize it. So I wrote "dorkus malorkuses" but then I thought you know, that can't be right.

I mean, "dorkus" is the obvious noun in this. One can be a dorkus and one can be a dorkus malorkus but I don't think anyone outside of Dr. Seuss could've called someone a standalone malorkus. So obviously "malorkus" is the modifier here. And considering the proper plural of "Whopper Jr." is "Whoppers Jr." I am now well and truly stymied so I turn to you, the smart ones.

[Poll #773299]

LET'S DO IT! FOR ENGLISH!

Comments

[fancycwabs.livejournal.com]

Since it seems to have a latin root, and is obviously a separate genus and species, it probably pluralizes like h. sapiens or h. erectus, and you should hereafter refer to it in print as d. malorkus. Singular or plural.

Then if someone isn't quite malorkic enough to qualify for the complete species, he might just be referred to as d. sapiens, and you can write your doctoral thesis like so:

"Analyzing Societal Predilictions Towards Gay Marriage Amendments Among D. Sapiens: Something Clever and Rhyming."

[signsoflife.livejournal.com]

Assuming one accepts that specific epithets can be pluralized at all, which is hardly an uncontroversial philosophical position.