Why is walri not the correct pluralization of walrus?
closed as off-topic by Mari-Lou A, FumbleFingers, Drew, Chenmunka, tchrist♦ Feb 27 '15 at 23:17
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Please include the research you've done, or consider if your question suits our English Language Learners site better. Questions that can be answered using commonly-available references are off-topic." – Mari-Lou A, FumbleFingers, Drew, Chenmunka, tchrist
locked by tchrist♦ Dec 4 '16 at 20:12
This question exists because it has historical significance, but it is not considered a good, on-topic question for this site so please do not use it as evidence that you can ask similar questions here. This question and its answers are frozen and cannot be changed. See the help center for guidance on writing a good question.
Read more about locked posts here.
Only some words of Latin extraction ending in -us, which were second declension nouns in Latin, take -i as plural.
Walrus comes from Dutch, and is akin to Danish and Norwegian hvalros. It is not a Latin second declension noun, so there is no reason it would be pluralized with -i.
The plural of walrus is walruses.
Edit: I just want add an additional note to clarify that even in cases where an English word does come from a Latin second declension noun, its plural might not necessarily end in -i. For example, the plural of campus is campuses not campi, and the plural of bonus is bonuses not boni.