# What is the plural of "Apocalypse"? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 11, 2020, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420 "2020-06-11T00:48:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/1 "2020-06-11T00:48:18Z")
Need to know ASAP. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/2 "2020-06-11T00:52:36Z")
Here’s a start: [grammar - What is the plural form of 'apocalypse'? - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange](https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/229610/what-is-the-plural-form-of-apocalypse#:~:text=As%20for%20the%20plural%20form,a%20different%20etymology))%20is%20eclipses.&text=Unless%20I’m%20mistaken%2C%20there,defeated%20once%20and%20for%20all. ---
**Author:** ![Fretful\_Porpentine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fretful_porpentine/32/2873_2.png) [@Fretful\_Porpentine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fretful_Porpentine)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/3 "2020-06-11T01:02:18Z")
Isn’t an apocalypse, by definition, something you can only ever have one of? ([Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apocalypse) sez “apocalypses,” though.) ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/4 "2020-06-11T01:22:20Z")
> [@Fretful\_Porpentine](#): > > Isn’t an apocalypse, by definition, something you can only ever have one of? > > ([Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apocalypse) sez “apocalypses,” though.) There’s the Biblical apocalypse. The zombie apocalypse. And, of course, the already completed [disco apocalypse](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LM8loQ9M4Dk). ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/5 "2020-06-11T01:23:49Z")
> [@Fretful\_Porpentine](#): > > Isn’t an apocalypse, by definition, something you can only ever have one of? > > ([Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apocalypse) sez “apocalypses,” though.) You’d think so, but “universe” has a plural. So does “infinity” and “Trump” ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/6 "2020-06-11T01:24:09Z")
> [@Fretful\_Porpentine](#): > > Isn’t an apocalypse, by definition, something you can only ever have one of? > > ([Merriam-Webster](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apocalypse) sez “apocalypses,” though.) The original meaning of _apocalypse_ was a written revelation from God. So you can have plural apocalypses with no problem. The Book of Revelation is an _apocalypse_ in that sense, which is why the definition has morphed to include a world-ending calamity. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/7 "2020-06-11T01:39:18Z")
> [@Fretful\_Porpentine](#): > > Isn’t an apocalypse, by definition, something you can only ever have one of? This year has disproven that theory. ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/8 "2020-06-11T01:49:57Z")
When you are speaking English, you can always safely pluralize a loan word with an S. You can have octopuses, dachas, cherubs, mensches, antennas, and gelatos. Sure, you can sound like you went the extra mile if you have octopodes, dachi, cherubim, menschen, antennae, and gelati. But you can also sound pretentious. You do need to be careful with words that come down from Old English, and have archaic plurals, like mice and children. Mouses (except for computers) and childs aren’t right no matter how how you slice it, but archaic words are different from loan words-- very different. I could insert several paragraphs about why some archaic forms haven’t changed, but I won’t. PM me if you care. The upshot is that four-yr.-olds usually know most of the irregular archaic plurals. They may not even know the singular of loan words. Apocalypses. Also, there are some things that you technically only have one of, but may metaphorically have many of. Whether they are loan words or not, the metaphorical concept is usually modern, while the words are old. Use S to show the fact of the modernness of the construction. Even when it is possible to go back to the source language and say “_If_ they had used it this way, this _would have been_ the plural,” that’s not really considered kosher. Use S to show that they did not, in fact, use it that way. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/9 "2020-06-11T02:29:20Z")
> [@friedo](#): > > The original meaning of _apocalypse_ was a written revelation from God. So you can have plural apocalypses with no problem. The Book of Revelation is an _apocalypse_ in that sense, which is why the definition has morphed to include a world-ending calamity. It’s still listed as the primary meaning in both Merriam-Webster online and [Dictionary.com](http://Dictionary.com) online (and wiktionary, too). There are various apocalypses: the Apocalypse of John (which became known as the Book or Revelation, though some bibles do have Apocalypse of John), the Apocalypse of Peter, the Apocalypse of Paul, the Apocalypse of Zephaniah, the Apocalypse of Ezra (known more commonly as 2 Esdras), etc. You don’t even have to use the word metaphorically to have a need for its plural. ---
**Author:** ![Schnitte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/schnitte/32/9033_2.png) [@Schnitte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Schnitte)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 9:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/10 "2020-06-11T09:15:18Z")
Another vote for “apocalypses”. I see no reason why that word should be exempted from the standard way of pluralisation in English, namely, the addition of an S. It wouldn’t even be that far from the Greek roots. The Greek word is ἀποκάλυψις, which would be latinised as apocalypsis, and takes the Greek plural ἀποκάλυψες, latinised as apocalypses. ---
**Author:** ![Peter\_Morris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/peter_morris/32/359_2.png) [@Peter\_Morris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peter_Morris)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 10:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/11 "2020-06-11T10:07:41Z")
> [@Fretful\_Porpentine](#): > > Isn’t an apocalypse, by definition, something you can only ever have one of? > [@CalMeacham](#): > > You’d think so, but “universe” has a plural. So does “infinity” and “Trump” I’m not sure why you think any of those are unique. In each case, it is perfectly sensible to speak of them in the plural. According to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, there are a huge number of universes with diverging histories. It’s perfectly sensible to speak of universes, plural. There are many different infinities. There’s an infinity of odd numbers, an infinity of even numbers, and infinity of prime numbers, an infinity of square numbers. As for Trump, he has several family members that share his surname. It is perfectly sensible to call them collectively the Trumps. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/12 "2020-06-11T10:38:49Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > When you are speaking English, you can always safely pluralize a loan word with an S. No you can’t. Consider alumnus, axis, bacillus, basis, diagnosis, ellipsis, graffito, hypothesis, minutia, series, and thesis. All loan words, but you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who agrees that simply adding -s (or -es) would be a valid plural. ---
**Author:** ![Schnitte](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/schnitte/32/9033_2.png) [@Schnitte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Schnitte)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 10:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/13 "2020-06-11T10:54:09Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > No you can’t. Consider alumnus, axis, bacillus, basis, diagnosis, ellipsis, graffito, hypothesis, minutia, series, and thesis. All loan words, but you’d be hard-pressed to find anyone who agrees that simply adding -s (or -es) would be a valid plural. At least for graffito, the regular -s plural is acceptable ([Cambridge Dictionary](https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/german-english/graffito)). Alumnus is a really interesting case, since its correct plural, alumni, is so frequent that it is now sometimes used in the singular too. Bottom line: The -s pluralisation doesn’t work every single time, but it is still the default in English, so you can assume for any given loan word that this is correct unless you have indications to the contrary (mostly, a different pluralisation borrowed from the word’s original language; and even then there is a tendency for the pluralisation to be regularised in English - viz. circuses as the plural of circus; nobody in their right mind would say circi). ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 11:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/14 "2020-06-11T11:25:35Z")
> [@Peter\_Morris](#): > > I’m not sure why you think any of those are unique. In each case, it is perfectly sensible to speak of them in the plural. According to the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics, there are a huge number of universes with diverging histories. It’s perfectly sensible to speak of universes, plural. There are many different infinities. There’s an infinity of odd numbers, an infinity of even numbers, and infinity of prime numbers, an infinity of square numbers. As for Trump, he has several family members that share his surname. It is perfectly sensible to call them collectively the Trumps. It’s not that _I_ think they’re unique – I’ve used the plural forms of each very often. But “universe” was originally meant to mean “everything”. Conceiving of multiple collections of everything is a pretty recent concept. Ditto for “infinity”. In both cases, as with “apocalypse”, the original use pretty much assumed that it was a single entity. But, of course, once you create that single word, it’s easy to pluralize the concept. “Trump” was just thrown in as an afterthought – we’d like to think he was singular. But even before the Trump Brood was around, we had his abysmal father. ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/15 "2020-06-11T11:28:59Z")
> [@Schnitte](#): > > Alumnus is a really interesting case, since its correct plural, alumni, is so frequent that it is now sometimes used in the singular too. Yes, in an attempt to be gender-neutral people use the Latin masculine plural in place of the masculine singular. (The feminine plural would be _alumnae._) ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/16 "2020-06-11T12:15:56Z")
**[Moderating]** This is not the place for discussing the merits of the President. That’ll be a Warning, **CalMeacham**. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 12:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/17 "2020-06-11T12:20:19Z")
Add “bacteriums” to the list of plurals you’ll never see. And if you want to make “alumnus” gender-neutral, the simple solution is “alumn”. Which, since it’s not a Latin word any more, pluralizes as “alumns”. ---
**Author:** ![Ulfreida](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ulfreida/32/8014_2.png) [@Ulfreida](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ulfreida)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/18 "2020-06-11T12:43:11Z")
What I enjoy is when a word has two plurals which indicate a difference in meaning. For example fish is the plural of fish (how many fish did you catch?) except when talking about species, especially those kept in captivity (what fishes are in this tank?). It isn’t always used but I’ve read it enough times to think that it is a thing. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/19 "2020-06-11T12:59:55Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > In both cases, as with “apocalypse”, the original use pretty much assumed that it was a single entity. But, of course, once you create that single word, it’s easy to pluralize the concept. Except that is not the original meaning of the word “apocalypse.” The original meaning is “revelation, disclosure” and it still listed as the primary meaning of the word in the dictionaries I’ve checked. And, besides, with a word like “universe,” even if you use it to mean “everything that is,” you can have need for the plural in a sentence like “the author explored many different kinds of universes in his work,” for example. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2020, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420/20 "2020-06-11T13:02:19Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Add “bacteriums” to the list of plurals you’ll never see. > > And if you want to make “alumnus” gender-neutral, the simple solution is “alumn”. Which, since it’s not a Latin word any more, pluralizes as “alumns”. I’ve only seen “alum” used, never “alumn.” Both Merriam-Webster online and [Dictionary.com](http://Dictionary.com) only list the former, not the latter. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-the-plural-of-apocalypse/855420.md?page=2)