3 ms·
Oh? Can you point me to an instance of that usage, where "stigmata" is used as a plural of "stigma" (meaning: a socially-ostracizing feature or trait), in a co
by jnbiche 11y ago
Oh? Can you point me to an instance of that usage, where "stigmata" is used as a plural of "stigma" (meaning: a socially-ostracizing feature or trait), in a contemporary, edited publication?
A will grant that it's sometimes used in the medical literature to mean "a clear, diagnostic sign of some illness", but the allusion there is to the stigmata of Christianity.
I've never, ever seen it used to mean the plural of stigma as the word is commonly used in English.
- zeveb 11y agoIt's just like idiom/idiomata.
- zem 11y agoi internalised it as the regular plural of stigma, so i'm guessing i've seen it in books. here's a 2010 Google books result from googling "societal stigmata". https://books.google.com/books?id=xXTcQ-TyK6MC&pg=PA947&lpg=PA947&dq=societal+stigmata&source=bl&ots=V3YTNA1DAL&sig=QQCL9N7_3R0JqwyjtdJmmrOMVSs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjn9PuQlIfMAhUI7B4KHVxwDUIQ6AEIMDAE#v=onepage&q=societal%20stigmata&f=false https://books.google.com/books?id=xXTcQ-TyK6MC&pg=PA947&lpg=...
- jnbiche 11y agoOK, well done. I'm surprised it's still used by some writers in this manner, and it's very rare. It's definitely not the regular plural of "stigma". Still, I was wrong.