>But I have scanned the Web in the meantime, and "virus" seems to be a somewhat contentious case, not concerning its gender, which is recognized throughout as neuter, but with respect to its declension. There are no instances of its plural in the old literature.
ws:
My point is that virus (unless it is a very irregular noun) would take a masculine declension, even though it is considered to be neuter in gender. Nauta (sailor) and agricola (farmer) are feminine in declension but are considered masculine in gender. Their plurals are nautae and agricolae, not nauti and agricoli. I'm not familiar enough with Latin any more to be certain, but I do not remember any words with a singular -us ending in the nominate singular which became -a in the nominative plural.
Being neuter in gender, virus would take a neuter adjective. Virus malum (bad poison, which is a bit of a redundancy of course) would be viri mala in the plural. Bottom line: I believe that the plural of virus is going to be viri not vira (at least in classical Latin).
Now where IS that Bill Buckley fellow when we need him?
Ted
