I was going to use "sine qua non", but then realized I needed a plural. My huge Webster's didn't have it; neither did OED online. So I googled "plural "sine qua non"". I stumbled upon this site, which says the plural is "sine quibus non". Two questions: (1) Is that right? (2) Would using "sine quibus non" be wholly moronic, even within in a fellowship application that will be seen by only, well, you know, that kind of academic?
Posted by Paul at January 9, 2005 08:22 PMYes to both, but it's your application.
Posted by: chris (not that one) at January 10, 2005 05:36 AMI used "essential elements". I just couldn't stomach "sine quibus non".
Thanks.
Posted by: Paul at January 10, 2005 11:03 AMIt is right because 'sine' is 'without' which doesn't have a plural, even in Latin; ditto 'non'/'not' but qua which is the ablative (I think, it may be the dative) of 'which' does have a plural form as it refers to a thing and 'quibus' is the ablative (or possibly dative) plural.
I'd have used it. They might have given you an interview, if only to call you a 'smartass.'
Posted by: Backword Dave at January 10, 2005 05:45 PM