In message , AndyW
writes
On 19/05/2016 19:07, Mike Ross wrote:
On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 8:28:38 AM UTC-4, gareth wrote:
"joe" wrote in message
...
gareth wrote:

I have in my possession a book entitled, "Antennae", published in 1942
by a lecturer to both King's College, London, and also to various Brit
government
establishments.

At some point since then, the ignorance of either engineers or of Yanks
has tried
to pass off, "Antennas" as the plural.

If we pride ourselves on the exactness of our principles, then it is high
time to correct this glaring error by the Yanks.

(Book being studied avidly, although with some necessary revision
ov vector field theory; div, curl and grad, anyone?)

From an online dictionary:

I guess that it would be a fair assumption, bearing in mind the development
of
computers and, much later, the Internet, that your online dictionaries
originated
several decades after 1942, and long after the ignoramuses' error arose?

Um, wouldn't that be "ignorami"??

It would depend on the commonly accepted root and whether it was Latin
or Greek (as many Latin words derive from Greek which can confuse
things more).
It also depends upon how Anglicised the word has become as the more it
is accepted as an English word then the more likely it is conform to
the many and often conflicting rules of English. Like the Italian word
Pizza. Italian plural of Pizze but it has become Anglicized and is now
Pizzas..... and don't get me started on people buying 'A' panini...

Bottom line: English evolves constantly and Antennas and Antennae are
both correct but one is in the ascendancy and the other is on the wane.
Neither can be said to be the correct one and neither can be said to be
wrong.

Andy

One thing is absolutely certain - and that is that the ancient Romans
didn't use the plural 'antennas' for what we British traditionally call
'aerials' (regardless of how high or low they might be).
--
Ian