Oxford & Merriam-Webster list both plurals and the author calls out that octopi is "the quite beautiful plural form of 'octopus' " which could be interpreted as "while there are multiple correct plurals of octopus, octopi is the beautiful one."

  While “octopi” has become popular in modern usage, it’s wrong.

I would argue that it used to be wrong, but language, unlike physics and code, is what the majority say it is.

I used to be a stickler for correct vocabulary usage and then I saw a documentary about dictionaries (can't remember what it was) and someone from OED said basically this (from https://www.oed.com/public/oed3guide/guide-to-the-third-edit...):

  The Oxford English Dictionary is not an arbiter of proper usage, despite its widespread reputation to the contrary. The Dictionary is intended to be descriptive, not prescriptive. In other words, its content should be viewed as an objective reflection of English language usage, not a subjective collection of usage ‘dos’ and ‘don'ts’. However, it does include information on which usages are, or have been, popularly regarded as ‘incorrect’. The Dictionary aims to cover the full spectrum of English language usage, from formal to slang, as it has evolved over time.

Now I think it's something that is just fun to argue about, but I don't take any of it seriously.

(edited for formatting)

I'd be interested in knowing what that documentary is called if you remember.

Also https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=The+Professor+and+the+Madm...

I haven’t watched it, but the subject is fascinating.

I’ll scour my watch history, I’m pretty sure it was on Amazon Prime.

Meanwhile, if you think that sounds interesting I’d highly recommend the documentary Helvetica.

No luck. I scoured Prime, Hulu, and Netflix and the only possible one was "The Booksellers."

It's a loan word, there isn't any 'correct' or 'incorrect' answer. Language is always evolving, which is why dictionaries are often descriptive instead of prescriptive.

To wit: A blog post from Merriam-Webster: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/the-many-plura...

Actually the plural is "octopuppies."

You're all wrong. The plural of octopus is hexadecipus.

and mayhaps the plural of the plural of octopus is trigintidipus?

Decahexipus*

They only think "octopi" is least correct, because they have yet to encounter "octopussen"!

This is definitely off topic:

I really dislike the latin plural rule, that some misguided but powerful people decided on centuries ago.

"Indexes" is much more natural English than "indices", and we should, when possible, use those those forms.

Somehow I recall being told that indexes is the correct plural of the section at the end of a book, and indices is correct for subscripted things in maths and therefore programming.

I don't think a particularly convincing reason was advanced other then "technical things are more Latin-adjacent".

> While “octopi” has become popular in modern usage, it’s wrong.

What a silly thing to say! Where does this poor fool think language comes from?

This is one of the cringiest Well-Actually-isms. It tries to look pedantic while completely missing the point.

Octopi is also THE epitome of the "i" pluralization. I see people using focuses more than foci, but it's a common callout that octopus plural is octopi

An AI couldn’t generate a more off topic comment if it tried.

The way the author specifically calls out the plural of octopus makes me think they might be trolling (Hanlon's Razor notwithstanding).

Shoot, you’re right! If we dont adhere to this, the perfectly consistent English language will be ruined!

Similarly: cyclops -> cyclopodes

I much prefer octopodes over octopuses (which sounds dirty, somehow). Agree that octopi is an abomination.

My brain always want to pronounce that as “oct-AH-poh-deez” like some Greek hero from the Odyssey.

That's the correct pronunciation.

Achilles, Ulysses, Archimedes, and Octopuses.