Deconceptualist

Ugh that sounds incredible. I love cinnamon rolls in the first place, so with croissant pastry, hell yeah.

Big Money Wasted

Man I love croissants, they must be one of my top 5 things to eat. Fresh ones don't really need anything at all. They're already buttery. These mango croissants look amazing.

They make a great side for almost anything too. With eggs? Hell yes. With a glass of wine? Duh. Add them to an Irish breakfast with black pudding? Totally works. Cold, on a chicken waldorf sandwich? Of course. With a dollop of ice cream or crème fraîche? If only I could be so lucky.

There's really no wrong way to enjoy a croissant, unless you're putting something totally inedible like drain cleaner with it. There are some foods I would never add, like spray cheese or olives, but that's really just personal preference.

Hey alright. I didn't know if you just wanted something available pre-1900 or specifically a horse. If I knew how to get you the hookup on equestrian pizza I'd be happy to tell ya, but I don't.

It's pretty commonly delivered by bicycle in NYC.

You're going to have to define "real magic" here, otherwise this makes no sense IMO

Testing herbs for effects sounds like folk medicine or alchemy at best, but those have been replaced by more rigorous fields like chemistry and pharmacology.

No it's an umbrella, it's even labeled

Hm, I don't care for that. Magic is flashy and fun because it's entertainment. But science doesn't look like they depict in movies and shows.

As a process, science looks more like that nerd with the clipboard taking notes on mushrooms or nuclei whatever for 20 years. Then they edit papers from other mushroom / nuclei nerds and go to a conference to give seminars and debate the others and ultimately publish more papers and eventually some books, and if we're lucky a documentary. They're exploring hidden worlds in a way that is very opposite of the showmanship and illusions we popularly call magic.

Appeal to authority popping up again? Fry is not an expert in usage. You are ceding him credibility he has not earned.

That part was my opinion. Sorry I didn't label it with a big red marker. You're welcome to your own opinions.

Overall though, I think you're missing the forest for the trees a bit. This is tiresome so I'll just leave it at that.

If you enjoy linguistics, I'm happy for that, and glad we have it in common. The minor quibbles don't really matter. It's been fun; take care.

We don’t use it in English. We just retain the latin plural for Latin words.

The English plural of alumnus is alumni. Yes of course it's retained from Latin. But it's also become a word in the English dictionary. We actively use that form in English written and spoken communication. It's been absorbed into the language. I've never once heard "alumnuses".

No, we generally don't use the "i" ending on new words, but we could. There's no rule against it.

You made an appeal to authority when you provided the Steven Fry video

I never claimed he was an English professor, though he's certainly an expert when it comes to usage. I shared it because I like his point, and I think you're a bozo for ignoring it, since it makes a strong case against proscriptivism.

But ok, if you like authority, here's a similar point made by a PhD sociolinguist.

The “i” as a plural is only for words taken straight from Latin.

Sure, but we use it. We adopted those words without altering that form. You said we don't use it in English, full stop, so I gave 13 counterexamples.

I don’t place any value on youtube videos made by people speaking outside their expertise.

I don't think my eyes can roll any harder.

Sure we do, on occasion anyway. Cacti, fungi, alumni, syllabi, loci, foci, radii, moduli, stimuli, uteri, papyri, nuclei, termini.

Language isn't about being "correct", as there's no truly objective standard. Rather, it's about being understood. But I guess you didn't watch that video.