Page 5 of 6 First 1 2 3 4 5 6 Last
Results 41 to 50 of 54

    • Join Date: Sep 2010
    • Posts: 1
    #41

    Re: Plural of the word "status"

    i always thought it was status' :) guess not...

  1. emsr2d2's Avatar
    Moderator
    English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jul 2009
    • Posts: 51,225
    #42

    Re: Plural of the word "status"

    I have come to this discussion rather late, but I'll add my two pennies' worth in anyway:

    Plural of status = statuses

    In my previous job, I frequently had to refer to someone's legal status in a particular country (ie whether or not they were legally entitled to be present in a specific country).

    There were three possible statuses - legal, illegal and undefined. Sometimes it was difficult to differentiate between the second and third statuses, but there was never any confusion between the first and second statuses. On our computer system, we had to choose one of these three statuses.

    (Note: the above is not a realistic description of my job, per se, but it shows how regularly I had to use the word "statuses" at work so, to me, it's the correct term.)


    • Join Date: Nov 2010
    • Posts: 4
    #43

    Question Re: Plural of the word "status"

    Quote Originally Posted by MrPedantic View Post
    I would be sorry to see Greek and Latin reduced to the stati of mere appendages to Linguistics and English plural-formation...
    Now why would you go and use "stati" when it's been established in the thread that it's clearly the most incorrect of the three choices you gave just a few posts previously???
    *sigh*


    • Join Date: Nov 2010
    • Posts: 4
    #44

    Lightbulb Re: Plural of the word "status"

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkHA View Post
    My twopennyworth: I'd like to suggest that the word status is reserved for where we mean a quality that can be attributed to either one or many. As in: "members of the royal family have status" and the "Prince of Wales has status". You would talk about different degrees of status. I'd like to think that the word status does not have a plural. The temptation to pluralize would indicate that another word is probably better. e.g. water can exist in one state or another - 3 states: ice, water or steam. i.e state, not status ... and, in the example above, not a plurality of status but a plurality of degrees of status. I imagine that literate Romans would have reserved the 4th declension for nouns of this sort - abstract, qualitative and not amenable to being pluralized.
    Of course status can be plural!!! Let's use Facebook as a relevant example of when you might run into the plural of status.

    Facebook allows it's users to post their "status" yes? A short (420 characters) note about what your doing or how you're feeling or whatever. Okay well let's say someone was going to make a list of the funniest Facebook status they've seen, they would want to title their list no? Something like:

    Best Facebook Status

    This you see, is what brought me to this thread in the first place!

    Now, can we all just agree that it's
    Status if you want to be correct (and sound funny in conversation)
    and
    Statuses if you want to be in the majority (and sound retarded in conversation)

    (I'll be using "status" in speech and text from now on thank you!)

  2. 5jj's Avatar
    VIP Member
    Retired English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 27,915
    #45

    Re: Plural of the word "status"

    So far we have had 44 posts on this - mine is #45.

    The discussion has been going on for many months, because nobody can give the definitive answer.

    Why? Because we use the plural form so rarely that no form has become fixed. If we have to use it, most people would accept statuses even if it is technically incorrect.

    The same goes for words like octopus. Neither octopus (by analogy with many aquatic beasts) nor octopuses would raise many eyebrows, but octopod(e)s might, even if it's technically correct.

    We can be too precious sometimes.

  3. Key Member
    Academic
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Japan

    • Join Date: Jan 2009
    • Posts: 1,482
    #46

    Re: Plural of the word "status"

    Quote Originally Posted by FiatLux View Post
    Statuses if you want to be in the majority (and sound retarded in conversation)
    Hypercorrect musings aside, statuses is listed as the (standard) plural of 'status' by both the Oxford English Dictionary and Webster's - arguably the two foremost English-language authorities in the world (and generally considered to be not in the least 'retarded'!).



    • Join Date: Nov 2010
    • Posts: 4
    #47

    Post Re: Plural of the word "status"

    Quote Originally Posted by philo2009 View Post
    Hypercorrect musings aside, statuses is listed as the (standard) plural of 'status' by both the Oxford English Dictionary and Webster's - arguably the two foremost English-language authorities in the world (and generally considered to be not in the least 'retarded'!).

    Okay, here's how I see it.
    Some new words start out as either improper forms of real words or as slang and slowly become more and more commonly accepted until an "authority" (Oxford, Webster, etc.) makes it "official" and puts it in their fancy book.

    This is all well and good but I see a distinction between adding "new" words, such as "ringtone" or "ginormous" and adding bastardized versions of real words, especially when the "new form" trying to be created already exists in a proper way.

    I say all that to raise this point:
    In the beginning there was the Latin "status" (singular) and beside it sat it's plural form "status" (long u), and all was well.

    Then over the decades and centuries the languages grew and evolved and a new language was established and it was English, and it was good.

    Over time the infrequency of use of, or need for, the plural of this word caused it's existence to be all but forgotten in common vernacular so that when it's use was called for people would fall back on the default "add and -es to it!" and come up with "statuses", and it was bad.

    Eventually so few people remembered the correct plural "status", and so many people used and accepted the bastardized "statuses" that the "authorities" penned it into their books making it now the "standard" form of the word.

    So, if this counts as a "hypercorrect musing" then so be it, but if being right is wrong then I don't wanna be right!!! (wait WHAT!??!?)

    Bottom Line:
    "status" (long u) is the most technically correct form, even if Ox and Web want to make everyone feel all warm and snuggly about having crapped out a deuce like "statuses"

  4. 5jj's Avatar
    VIP Member
    Retired English Teacher
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • England
      • Current Location:
      • Czech Republic

    • Join Date: Oct 2010
    • Posts: 27,915
    #48

    Re: Plural of the word "status"

    Quote Originally Posted by FiatLux View Post
    Bottom Line:
    "status" (long u) is the most technically correct form, even if Ox and Web want to make everyone feel all warm and snuggly about having crapped out a deuce like "statuses"

    status (long u) is the correct form when writing Latin. If Oxford and Webster and probably 99% of the English-speaking world (or at least of those people who feel the need for a plural form of this word) feel that the correct form in English is statuses, then it is.

  5. VIP Member
    Student or Learner
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Polish
      • Home Country:
      • Poland
      • Current Location:
      • Poland

    • Join Date: Jul 2010
    • Posts: 5,074
    #49

    Re: Plural of the word "status"

    Quote Originally Posted by FiatLux View Post
    come up with "statuses", and it was bad.
    It was good.


    • Join Date: Nov 2010
    • Posts: 4
    #50

    Wink Re: Plural of the word "status"

    Man, I feel like I jumped into the shark tank and only found a bunch of goldfish inside

    I mean, I thought this place would be grammar nazi central! You know, sifting through the sorted history of it all to find the hidden truth! Taking everything back, back, way back to the origins for answers!

    What is this the "liberal" grammar nazi site?? lol

    Okay, all kidding aside, I think I may just be a little late to the "save-the-plural-status!!!" party. Perhaps 50 or more years ago, before "statuses" gained an unstoppable amount of public use and acceptance, I would have been able to more successfully argue my point.

    I respectfully concede the point to "statuses"
    ...*sigh*

    (on a side note, I'm blown away at the responsiveness of posters on this forum!!! I may have to visit more often [if that's cool])

Page 5 of 6 First 1 2 3 4 5 6 Last

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •