Login or register


Last status update:
Date Signed Up:1/02/2011
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#13155
Highest Content Rank:#13159
Highest Comment Rank:#3429
Content Thumbs: 175 total,  359 ,  184
Comment Thumbs: 1813 total,  2372 ,  559
Content Level Progress: 50% (5/10)
Level 17 Content: New Here → Level 18 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 54% (54/100)
Level 215 Comments: Comedic Genius → Level 216 Comments: Comedic Genius
Content Views:19820
Times Content Favorited:5 times
Total Comments Made:702
FJ Points:1753

latest user's comments

#60 - Some of the reports say they wern't recent refugees but immigr… 01/19/2016 on AND NOTHING HAPPENED +3
#148 - Why does it have to be a young actor? Why can't it be played b… 01/18/2016 on Truth laying down some truths +2
#8 - it says in the book that harry's parents prepaid tuition. 01/18/2016 on Harry was rich though +1
#992 - It's beautiful 01/09/2016 on MEMES falling from the sky! +1
#18 - That's not a bribe. You just ran a one room motel. what a litt… 01/04/2016 on Part 1 +4
#246 - November and December(with school and the holidays) are busy m… 12/28/2015 on How to revive dying FJ? 0
#24 - It isn't a beat for beat remake. It just has superficial thing… 12/21/2015 on Logic 0
#32 - I am assuming you are a troll but Octopus is not a Latin based…  [+] (3 new replies) 12/21/2015 on Octopus 0
#36 - Stevethewizard (12/21/2015) [-]
Doesn't matter the actual root word origin. As stated, English started off as being bastardized beyond all recognition (as happens when you smash together two languages with literally nothing in common and decide to call it one language). The instant "octopi" was accepted as the correct English plural of "octopus", it was officially an English word. "Octopuses" wasn't a word in English until people decided to fuck with an already fucked up language, without realizing you can't unfuck what's already been fucked up beyond all recovery.

tl;dr: In trying to adhere to the word's true origin, people made a new word that was completely unnecessary, because there was already a shorter extant word. It's one syllable shorter when spoken, and three letters shorter when written. With brevity being the single category to judge a potential replacement with difference in neither denotation nor connotation, "octopuses" is a failure as a replacement.
User avatar
#69 - dopeydoo (12/21/2015) [-]
that's kinda how languages work...
you ever heard old english? it's the "original" english, but people started saying stuff wrong or differently, and the language changed.

Plus, look at your own argument:

"People accepted octopi as the correct word, so now I'm mad when people accept octopuses as the correct word instead."

A.) That's how languages work. People talk, languages change based on how people start talking. that's WHY we don't speak old english anymore, so if you want to be that uptight about it, I expect you to go learn old english and abandon modern English entirely, since that's the original accepted version of all our words, and therefore in your terms, the "right" version

B.) The word is Greek, so the plural form should be "Octopuses" anyway.

C.) Since both forms are in the dictionary, as well as octopodes, they're all technically correct... wow, it's almost like sometimes languages have different words for the same thing?!? Plus, a cursory google search tells us that all three words have existed in English for about the same amount of time, so your argument of "Original root" isn't even right, since they all were invented together.

Also, just real quick, let's look at "With brevity being the single category to judge a potential replacement with difference in neither denotation nor connotation, "octopuses" is a failure as a replacement."... that's just stupid... if you're replacing a word with a new word, there's ALWAYS no difference in denotation or connotation, since the new word isn't yet a word... there is, however, the subject of the NORMALITY of the word. For example, by your logic, we should replace the plural form of dictionary (dictionaries) with dictionarys, because it's slightly shorter. However, by EVERYBODY ELSE'S LOGIC, that's stupid, because the rule is change y to ie, so that's what we do.

tl;dr: In trying to make an argument, you pulled things out of your ass that were completely unnecessary, because nobody cares that much, and still managed to be wrong. It's only 5 minutes to read wikipedia, and even shorter to just look at the first Google links. With facts being the single category to judge a potential rant with neither interesting topic nor relevant place to post, your argument is a failure as a rant
User avatar
#41 - tropenthatshtup (12/21/2015) [-]
Steve, please don't tell me I know you. I swear I've heard this exact rant before and it shames me to see you pull this stunt in public.
Come home Steve, Jacob and I are very worried about you.
#48 - No child left behind had it's own problems. (who thought takin…  [+] (1 new reply) 12/20/2015 on American education +4
User avatar
#50 - Shiny (12/20/2015) [-]
Sure, but that's what makes the whole thing so disgusting, all they do is change how kids' heads are fucked with to give the illusion of reform. I finished formal ed in 2012 and noticed the subtle changes in policy over my high school years.
#29 - imagine thinking that something that happened to you is so bad… 12/16/2015 on Friendzoned 0