Viruses

[Sean Edwards]

Dear all,

I have yet again collated your comments about little slimy thing(s),
and forwarded them to the long-suffering Owen LeBlanc. He has
replied, hardly even the slightest bit tetchy now, the following
which I copy below (his comments not inset):

> According to Allen & Greenough, _New Latin Grammar_ (Ginn & Co.,
> 1888, 1903, 1916, 1931) Art. 48a, page 22, "virus" is a neuter nown
> in the _second_ declension.  Thus the plural is "viri."

All neuter nouns in Latin have their plural in -a.  The plural
'viri' is the plural of a masculine second declension noun,
the noun 'vir'.  The declension you give:

> virus      viri      nom.
> viri       virorum   gen.
> viro       viris     dat.
> virus      viros     acc.
> viro       viris     abl.

is almost correct for 'vir'; the nominative singular is 'vir' instead
of 'virus', and the accusatuve singlular is 'virum'.  I suspect you
have confused the two words.

> So now we're back to 'viri' for the plural, which should hearten all
> the people who have been saying that for years...

I would suggest that people who are not Latin scholars are likely
to come up with the wrong plural and to confuse quite different
words.  I assure you, as someone with a degree in Latin, who has
taught hundreds of students and read many, many texts in Latin,
the word 'virus' is fourth declension, is masculine, and does not
have a plural in Classical Latin.  If it did, that plural would
be 'virus', and not 'viri', which is the plural of 'vir'.

     -- Owen
     LeBlanc at mcc.ac.uk

Sean

Sean R. Edwards BSc PhD,
Keeper of Botany,
The Manchester Museum, Manchester University, Manchester M13 9PL, UK
'Phone: +44 (0)161-275-2671/2; fax: +44 (0)161-275-2676
Email: sean.edwards at man.ac.uk
Website: http://www.man.ac.uk/museum/