<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Word of the Day: Stigma</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dailywritingtips.com/word-of-the-day-stigma/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dailywritingtips.com/word-of-the-day-stigma/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 02:00:10 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://www.dailywritingtips.com/word-of-the-day-stigma/comment-page-1/#comment-13761</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 05:22:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dailywritingtips.com/word-of-the-day-stigma/#comment-13761</guid>
		<description>About the plural thing...

As I was reading your article he first time I saw the &#039;stigmas&#039; form and immediately I corrected mentally &#039;stigmata&#039;. The problem is that I was thinking about this issue just yesterday, and how so many people stick to the original plural form of foreign words without understanding why. The &#039;English&#039; plural forms are often seen as incorrect or uneducated, but I think they have their validity. In German, we have he words Hobby and Baby, and their plurals are &#039;Hobbys&#039; and &#039;Babys&#039;, as we don&#039;t have the -y to -ies rule. Sure, for any English speaker it looks horrible, but it&#039;s fully OK for us. But we still say normally &#039;Kommata&#039; instead of &#039;Kommas&#039; (German for comma).

BTW, I think many people will associate the word stigmata with the holes left by the nails on the hands and feet of Jesus after the crucification (just a ref so short before Easter).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>About the plural thing&#8230;</p>
<p>As I was reading your article he first time I saw the &#8217;stigmas&#8217; form and immediately I corrected mentally &#8217;stigmata&#8217;. The problem is that I was thinking about this issue just yesterday, and how so many people stick to the original plural form of foreign words without understanding why. The &#8216;English&#8217; plural forms are often seen as incorrect or uneducated, but I think they have their validity. In German, we have he words Hobby and Baby, and their plurals are &#8216;Hobbys&#8217; and &#8216;Babys&#8217;, as we don&#8217;t have the -y to -ies rule. Sure, for any English speaker it looks horrible, but it&#8217;s fully OK for us. But we still say normally &#8216;Kommata&#8217; instead of &#8216;Kommas&#8217; (German for comma).</p>
<p>BTW, I think many people will associate the word stigmata with the holes left by the nails on the hands and feet of Jesus after the crucification (just a ref so short before Easter).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
