>>26894521That's true.. I'll keep that in mind while writing.
>>26894541I get what you mean, but it's always nice to get some input on what some of you might think while reading and seeing it pluralized differently.
Just a curiosity that always crosses my mind while writing, so I thought I'd get some input.
It definitely seems bizarre to refer to Wooper as Woopers, but I only pondered the thought more and more after considering how we refer to animals in real life, you know?
But as the other anon said, however, it might be just fine to keep it the way it's always been since there are nouns that are pronounced the same, singular and plural.
>>26894897>If pluralizing eliminates ambiguity, do it. If you need the capital form to serve as a proper name for an unnamed pokemon, use lowercase for the species.Yes! That's exactly what I was thinking at first, but I'm still not sure.
I'll deifnitely capitalize for unnamed Pokemon that are called upon by their trainers, but I feel that it would be only natural to not capitalize them when being referred to just as you were to refer to an animal in real life.
Example sentences:
"Yeah, Chikorita hasn't been the same ever since we lost that battle."
"As I was walking, I noticed a chikorita pass by."
That's the kind of usage I was thinking about.
Now, as far as pluralization goes -- that's the only thing I haven't decided on yet. Like I said, the first anon kind of has a point, but it seems relatively natural (not considering what we've learned thus far from the anime and whatnot) to say something like:
"In the yard, the professor cared for a small group of bulbasaurs."
versus
"In the yard, the professor cared for a small group of bulbasaur."
Do you see what I mean, guys?
Give me your input regarding capitalization, and the whole pluralization thing.
I'd like more of your input.
I feel that going with something a bit more unorthodox is more characterizing of what I'm writing, but I don't want to offset anyone.