In article ,
"Jeff Layman" writes:
|
| Aside (not to you): God. British botanical loons, again. So
| ignorant that they pluralise the obviously Greek-derived word
| "mycorrhiza" to "mycorrhizae". And the OED confirms that it is
| precisely a British botanical delusion.
|
| Seems that mycorrhizae is in common use. Probably far more so than
| mycorrhizas. (Would you prefer "mycorrhizata"?)

I think that you will find that "mycorrhiza" was both singular and
plural until some, er, considerably sub-genius decided to Latinize it.
The earliest plural of that form I can see is "pileorrhize".

Why the hell that usage couldn't have continued is beyond me. But
the whole way that the British botanical loons attempt to abuse the
English language is ridiculous.

After all, the very concept of singularity and plurality is completely
alien to mycorrhiza - yes, there is the concept of a single species
versus multiple species, but you need to say "species of mycorrhiza"
to disambiguate it anyway. And then the number is associated with
the word "species" :-)


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.