this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2025
21 points (100.0% liked)
New York Times gift articles
1751 readers
8 users here now
Share your New York Times gift articles links here.
Rules:
- Only post New York Times gift article links.
Info:
- The NYT Open Team. (2021-06-23). “A New Way to Share New York Times Stories”. open.nytimes.com.
- “Gift Articles for New York Times Subscribers”. (n.d.). help.nytimes.com.
Tip:
- Google "unlocked_article_code" and limit search results to the past week.
- Mastodon: Use control-F or ⌘-F to search this page. (ref)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
By using the plural form I'm going to assume multiple spices of octopus, or octopi, were observed.
Not very sane of an individual to purposely be misunderstood from lack of schooling. Perhaps said individual should look for an easier job then writing, if grammer and proper spelling is too difficult.
Why bastardize a language? "Octopuses" makes my toenails curl up. It's octopi.
Except it’s not Latin, it’s of Greek origin. So it’s octopodes.
Now I'm just plain embarrassed. I use Octopoden in German. No idea why I thought it should be octopi... I may have it mixed up with one of our customers (octopi brewing Co). Thanks for the correction!
English speakers do all kinds of weird things with the plural of 'octopus'
I think I've seen everything except octopussies
Really any of those interpretations is just fine. Although I have my preference, I’m not gonna say anyone else is wrong.
It's Latinized Greek, and in English as a further bastardized loan word multiple plural forms are correct, including octopi, octopodes, and octopuses!
I prefer octopussesi, personally.
Octopussoir.
How about 'Octopus army invades English coast'? instead.