On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 16:31:39 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

In message , Custos Custodum
writes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:12:47 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:


The same goes for 'bacteria'. I was listening on the radio to programme
about language, and when the use of 'a bacteria' was challenged, a
doctor seemed completely nonplussed as to what the problem was. I'm sure
that neither Dr Findlay nor Dr Kildare would make such a mistake.

Speaking of bacteria, one of my pet peeves is when all those
Oxbridge-educated meedja types pronounce Clostridium Difficile as if
it were French. Well, it ain't; it's Latin, where all vowels are
sounded and all C's are (well) hard.

In message , Custos Custodum
writes
On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 16:31:39 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:

In message , Custos Custodum
writes
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 14:12:47 +0100, Ian Jackson
wrote:


The same goes for 'bacteria'. I was listening on the radio to programme
about language, and when the use of 'a bacteria' was challenged, a
doctor seemed completely nonplussed as to what the problem was. I'm sure
that neither Dr Findlay nor Dr Kildare would make such a mistake.

Speaking of bacteria, one of my pet peeves is when all those
Oxbridge-educated meedja types pronounce Clostridium Difficile as if
it were French. Well, it ain't; it's Latin, where all vowels are
sounded and all C's are (well) hard.

Even though the soft C before I and E was adopted in the middle ages,
does anyone really know for certain that all Ancient Roman C's were
hard? It's just as probable that they were, as in modern Latin-based
words, soft before I's and E's. They might also have been a bit like the
Italian ch or the Spanish th. On the other hand, if the C's were like
Esses, why didn't they simply use a Esses?

--
Ian