Track_Shovel to Lemmy ShitpostEnglish • 2 months agoHome Depotslrpnk.netimagemessage-square124fedilinkarrow-up1909arrow-down113cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1896arrow-down1imageHome Depotslrpnk.netTrack_Shovel to Lemmy ShitpostEnglish • 2 months agomessage-square124fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-square@Viking_Hippielink1•2 months agoPretty sure that’s Italian for genre. Or a weird typo/autocorrect error/both 😁
minus-square@BluesFlink5•2 months agoThe plural of genre is genres. The singular of genera is genus… Which might make sense here, but not as a plural.
minus-square@TropicalDingdonglink0•edit-22 months agoNope. Its genera in this context because they are discussing it as species. They are pluralizing genus. Its a reference to it being a new “species” of image. Your assumption of the word they are pluralizing was wrong.
minus-square@BluesFlink1•2 months agoStill wrong because they are refering to an individual “species” of image, so it would be genus not genera.
Pretty sure that’s Italian for genre. Or a weird typo/autocorrect error/both 😁
deleted by creator
nope. it’s the plural.
The plural of genre is genres. The singular of genera is genus… Which might make sense here, but not as a plural.
Nope. Its genera in this context because they are discussing it as species.
They are pluralizing genus. Its a reference to it being a new “species” of image.
Your assumption of the word they are pluralizing was wrong.
Still wrong because they are refering to an individual “species” of image, so it would be genus not genera.