Since when have they changed all the plural endings for the "-us" words?
961115
Actually, octopi was never the correct plural for octopus.  People thought it was because many Latin nouns use "i" at the end to create a plural, but octopus was a Greek loan word.  So, neither octopi nor octopuses was actually the original way to pluralize octopus, but at least octopuses follows the typical English method of pluralization!\n\nThe plural of apparatus is apparatus (via Latin) or apparatuses (via English), because in Latin, apparatus is part of a set of nouns that does not use the "i" ending to make a plural. :)
847083
As a matter of fact, in OLD English the plural of "house" was similar to that for mouse.  We can still see this in German which has singular "Maus", plural "Maeuser" (mouse/mice) and singular "Haus", plural "Haeuser" (house/houses).  \n\nMost of the older forms in English have done as "house" did, adopting the Middle to Modern English way of forming plurals by adding -(e)s.       But there was a group of them --   foot/feet, goose/geese,  tooth/teeth,  louse/lice,  man/men, etc. -- that did not make the change.   Then there are those whose older forms may co-exist alongside the new forms, like the somewhat archaic form "brethren"  (and if you have a King James Bible, you can find "kine" as the plural of "cow").    \n\n(Note that the -(e)n is another remnant of an older, Germanic way of forming the plural.    We see it again in plurals like "oxen".)\n\nSome of the older forms survive as "irregular plurals".    Many of them do so because of the different vowel\n\nActually, the changed vowel in Old English plural noun forms (and various other parts of the language) was NOT invented as a way to mark the plural.   It was an indirect result.\n\nHere's how it happened:\n\n1) In most of the ancient Germanic languages, adding a suffix with an i-vowel in it caused the vowel in the preceding syllable to change to be a bit more like the i-vowel ("vowel harmony" -- a comon, very natural change in human speech).  This change is called "i-mutation" or "umlaut".\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanic_umlaut\n\n2) Old English had a whole system of case endings  Some of these endings had i-vowels in them and caused the change in the preceding vowel noted in #1.  (These changes took place in various forms, not just plurals.)   \n\nWe can see the same sort of change in many other words that took various suffixes:   hale/health,  long/length, old/elder, eldest, food/feed. \nhttp://www.wmich.edu/medieval/research/rawl/IOE/pronunciation.html#pronounce:imutation\n\n3)  The system of case endings died out amidst the massive changes that gave us Middle English  (for which you may blame the Norman French invaders if you like!)    But the vowel changes in many of these old noun forms survived..     Without the endings, the changed vowel itself began to function as a marker of the plural form.\n\n4)  The "new" system of forming plurals by adding -(e)s was adopted for MOST English nouns.   But many of the most common, familiar words were NOT changed.    (This is typical of human language.    Note how all our irregular VERBS are COMMON words - have, be, bring, come, go...    Rarer words are easily forced into a consistent pattern.)
1035783
The english language changes over time. Words that once ment one thing can mean a totally different thing a few years later. We don't hi-jack words. Society as a hole changes them and accepts them. I could give you countless exsamples of how words and thier means have changed. If you don't believe me, go ask a High School engilsh teacher some of the most recent changes that they hear every day.
447392
They are spelt differently
98856
I think it's time for people to accept that there's no point in making data plural when we never use the singular.  Technically stamina is plural too (like opera and agenda which you mention) but no one says "the stamina are" or "the opera are".  We're not ancient romans.  \n\n"there has been a growing tendency to use it as an equivalent to the uncountable noun information, followed by a singular verb. This is now regarded as generally acceptable in American use, and in the context of information technology."\nhttp://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutgrammar/data?view=uk\n\n\n\nOnly pretentious pedants still use it as plural\nhttp://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=pedant
971290
Yes, emails is correct plural form of email.  Most nouns can be made plural by adding either 's' or 'es'....  there are other rules such as if your original word ends in 'y', drop the 'y' and add 'ies'..... and of course for every "RULE" in English,..... we have one or more exceptions.\n\nNote:  some nouns change form when pluralized:\neg: person / people  ( :-)) - although, just to further confuse things,..... 'persons' is also a technically correct term in certain instances)
109850
It has to do with the the older versions of English. For example, back in the 16- and 1700 (possibly into the 1800s as well) the English "S" looked like an "F".
164501
the "z" way is the American spelling, the "s" way is the European spelling
583079
I'm a grammar tyrant so think I should firstly correct two mistakes in your statement.  It's country's (singular noun with possessive apostrophe s) and cultures' (plural noun with possessive apostrophe after the s).\n\nI think part of the problem is that spelling is no longer taught in schools.  Additionally, the English language is still developing with new words and variations being added to the dictionary every day.  I'm English and cringe when I see non UK "english" in texts but understand that is how other countries spell words - eg, humor instead of humour - I don't like it but that's the way it is.\n\nThe use of "qk txt 4 mbl fn txts" has also caused a deterioration in spelling.  Add to this the fact that many TV presenters presenting programmes aimed at children say things such as "much worser" rather than "much worse" or just "worse" and this teaches a new generation bad habits.  My old english teacher said that it's easier to spell a word if you pronounce it correctly - take "inspector" - if people spelt it the way some people say it they'd spell it "inspecter".  Teach children to speak properly and they will spell properly - this doesn't mean the destruction of regional accents and everyone reverting to old BBC English, just the ability to include the letters T and H in words.\n\nWell, that's my rant for the time being.  Thanks for asking the question.
1133499
The correct answer is your second phrase: "Three dogs' bowls".\nThe rule, in this case, is to simply add the apostrophe to the end of any plural noun ending in -s. The conventions for  apostrophe use in English are complicated at times. The first link below should help you out.\n\nThe apostrophe is used to indicate where an historical letter has been removed. In Olde English, 'a dog's bowl' would have been written as 'a doges bowl', but in an effort to tidy up orthographic (writing) conventions, and minimise confusion the E was removed and replaced with an apostrophe.
852243
Could it be that they're using Eng (US) rather than Eng (UK)?  Being a Brit, I'd write "misspelt" rather than "misspelled" - but this wouldn't be incorrect.  I think we all have our favourite (favorite?) hates in written English, but we mustn't let this affect our blood pressure!
793777
Not any more=not any longer \n(it's past, the situation has changed)\neg I get a divorce, meet an old friend, she says "I thought you were married!" I say "Not any more/not any longer"\n\n"No" can be used with comparative adjectives,\neg Today is no hotter than yesterday.\n\n\n\nIn American English: \n\nIn standard American English the word anymore is often found in negative sentences: They don't live here anymore. But anymore is widely used in regional American English in positive sentences with the meaning “nowadays”: “We use a gas stove anymore” (Oklahoma informant in DARE). Its use, which appears to be spreading, is centered in the South Midland and Midwestern states, as well as in the Western states that received settlers from those areas. The earliest recorded examples are from Northern Ireland, where the positive use of anymore still occurs.\n \nRef American Heritage Dictionary\n\n\nIn British English:\n\nany more (never spelt "anymore")\nIf you do not do something or something does not happen any more, you have stopped doing it or it does not now happen:\nI don't do yoga any more.\n\nRef Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary
621802
As a matter of fact, the "our" and "or" in these words WERE pronounced differently.\n\nIn Old English (and many other Germanic languages) adding of an ending with and i/y type vowel (in this case it was originally -ig,  now -y) caused a type of "vowel harmony" (or "metaphony")  in which the vowel of the accented syllable became more like that of the suffix.  This specific type is called "umlaut"  of "i-mutation".   It typically causes the changed vowel to become shorter and/or move toward the front of mouth ("fronting")\n\nIt is easier to see in the case of "five" vs. "fifty".   German did the same sort of thing.   One of the best examples that English speakers may know is the word "Frau" ("woman") which is pronounced "frow", but when it adds the suffix "-lein" to became "Fräulein", pronounced "froyline" (notice the i/y sound in the first syllable!)\n\nThis shift in English is also the origin of some of our unusual plural forms:  goose > geese; foot > feet; mouse > mice;  man > men.  Also a result of this change:  long > length; hale > health; old > elder.
1105752
they mite have replaced it with the word 'american' .... since all those americans must be very gullible that they are still following GW Bush.......
564528
"Whats wrong with Americas schools?"\n\nI think they have stopped teaching the apostrophe and proper grammar. Not to mention geography.
1049044
Since when are Countries being referred as "His" --- you've got serious English Language issues dude
1078571
Where! Where! Aaaaaaargh!\n\nno\n\n\nPS Well done for getting the plural right.