this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
253 points (100.0% liked)

196

16511 readers
2473 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] LordAmplifier@pawb.social 114 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Wiktionary says

In the original result of the Wug Test, children consistently produced wugs for the plural. However, plurals other than the standard wugs are sometimes used humorously, including wuggen (by analogy with oxen), weeg, and wuggi (by analogy with Latinate plurals).

Wuggi sounds nice. Huggy wuggi :3

[–] mipadaitu@lemmy.world 39 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] LordAmplifier@pawb.social 17 points 5 months ago

That's Greek to me

:3c

[–] Absolute_Axoltl@feddit.uk 9 points 5 months ago

Wuggingtons

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 5 months ago

Wuggi is the first thing that came to muh brain

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 69 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

My immediate thought was wug, like the plural of fish is fish.

[–] KingJalopy@lemm.ee 45 points 5 months ago (5 children)

Unless you're sleeping with them. Then it's fishes.

[–] TotallynotJessica@lemmy.world 24 points 5 months ago

It's when there are multiple species of fish. Mob guys are actually saying it correctly, as there are likely multiple types in the ocean when they lay people to rest there.

[–] cuchilloc@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Or when they are weird

[–] pancakes@sh.itjust.works 6 points 5 months ago

I thought the plural of fish was "wet guys"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 64 points 5 months ago (5 children)

This test screwed me up in first grade. I thought it was some kind of grammar test so I kept asking if it was a verb, a noun, or an adverb. The test giver was some researcher and was convinced I wasn't taking the test seriously because I wouldn't say wugs. He got kind of angry and I found the whole thing to be kind of distressing. I asked to stop and he just got even angrier and said something like, "No one has ever had trouble with the wug test before". I was convinced I was bad at grammar for years after that. Anyway, wugs! =)

[–] Stamau123@lemmy.world 35 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like somebody was bad at giving out tests

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 5 months ago

I mean, that could have been it, but it seemed like everyone else got through unscathed. I was older than average, I was 7 and the rest of the kids were 6. I think that was his explanation anyway.

[–] CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Based on the sentence construction it has to be a noun regardless of the meaning tho

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What a shite researcher. The whole point is to judge children's inferrence - that's why they don't use real words. There is no right answer. There's just an expected answer based on similar words.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

I wouldn't be too hard on him. I was a weird kid who grew up into a weird adult. I ended up doing lots of tests as a kid with him or researchers just like him. I did the test where you're told to electrocute a person if they answer a question wrong and they pretend to scream. And the test where they use a wire to knock over water bottles. I gave weird responses to those tests as well. I just started pressing the button for the electrocution and laughing. I apologized after. And when the water bottles got knocked over I just sat there and waited for him to come back. It occurred to me that I might get in trouble, but then I figured he would just take my word on it. I was like, "Your structure fell over!". These tests make for fun stories.

edit: With the electrocution test I definitely tried to reason with the researcher that electrocuting people wasn't scientific, but I very quickly realized he wasn't going to listen to me. I realized it was an opportunity to electrocute a person and that I was never getting another opportunity to do that ever, so I just went for it. Egg on my face when it turns out it's both not real and I'm a awful person. I did feel bad though.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 59 points 5 months ago
[–] Chef@sh.itjust.works 42 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] XTL@sopuli.xyz 6 points 5 months ago
[–] name_NULL111653@pawb.social 39 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Wugs, if its an Anglo root, unless it's derived from Latin "Wug*, wugīs" in which case there are two Wugi (wûg-eye). Unless its one of the random Latin words where we don't do that and it's still "wugs." Unless it's a loanword from germanic then we might anglicise it or we might say "wugar." Because eNgLIsH iS EaSY...

[–] originalfrozenbanana@lemm.ee 18 points 5 months ago

Ooh sorry this is a weird one it’s actually “wugopodes”

[–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The correct plural is actually wug, or dialect weg.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] drspod@lemmy.ml 9 points 5 months ago (2 children)

unless it’s derived from Latin “Wug*, wugīs” in which case there are two Wugi (wûg-eye).

Wouldn't a wug, wugis group noun be wuges plural?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] almost1337@lemm.ee 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

My daughter does the opposite in such an intelligent way. Kix cereal for example - one piece of it is a kik. And the singular for clothes is a cloe.

[–] Randelung@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And the singular of sheep is shoop.

YES IT IS SHUT UP

[–] FakeGreekGirl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 5 months ago

Brings new meaning to the Salt-N-Pepa song.

[–] manucode@infosec.pub 25 points 5 months ago
[–] Randelung@lemmy.world 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This feels like a word that would be both singular and plural. Like sheep.

Two wug.

[–] Robaque@feddit.it 6 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Only if the amount of wug is a prime number.

This is because non-prime numers of wuggi are highly unstable and will split into separate prime factors of wug if there's enough space (and in most atmospheric conditions).

[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 24 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] Stamau123@lemmy.world 33 points 5 months ago (3 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Berko_Gleason

Gleason devised the Wug Test as part of her earliest research (1958), which used nonsense words to gauge children's acquisition of morphological rules‍—‌for example, the "default" rule that most English plurals are formed by adding an /s/, /z/, or /ɪz/ sound depending on the final consonant, e.g. hat–hats, eye–eyes, witch–witches. A child is shown simple pictures of a fanciful creature or activity, with a nonsense name, and prompted to complete a statement about it

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] synapse1278@lemmy.world 20 points 5 months ago
[–] tkk13909@sopuli.xyz 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] Magnetar@feddit.de 9 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Ĉu vi parolas Esperanton?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] popcap200@lemmy.ml 11 points 5 months ago
[–] DaCrazyJamez@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] imPastaSyndrome@lemm.ee 10 points 5 months ago
[–] sparkle@lemm.ee 9 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Is this the r/linguistics logo bird

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 9 points 5 months ago
[–] Theme@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] Stamau123@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Twugs the night before Christmas

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Tamkish@programming.dev 8 points 5 months ago

There are two plimben

[–] Kayday@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago
[–] guillem@aussie.zone 8 points 5 months ago

OMG I just learned that there are also bik, kazh, and gutch.

[–] Snoopey@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago
[–] Sorse@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 5 months ago

There are two √ﷺ½⚠

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 5 months ago

Wugim is biblically correct.

[–] t_berium@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›