I know I've heard "a homo sapien" before, and although incorrect, it doesn't really strike me as an egregious error. Just my two cents.It also explains that it is an (erroneous) back formation from the correct, homo sapiens.
Homo sapien has two possible uses.
(1) As a flippant comment in a context where everyone knows that the correct term is homo sapiens.
(2) As a non-standard term demonstrating clearly that you have no comprehension of the correct usage.
Unless you are very certain that you will succeed in (1), do not risk the possibility of being assumed to be (2).
The choice is yours.
I agree with you. I know I've heard that but I can't say I've heard "a homo sapiens." I remember in Grade 3 or 4, we used to go around asking people "are you a homo sapien?" and they'd say no, and this was supposedly funny, and it only stopped once everybody learned what the word meant.I know I've heard "a homo sapien" before, and although incorrect, it doesn't really strike me as an egregious error. Just my two cents.
"Nonstandard" is often politicallycorrectspeak for "wrong".
The Latin plural of homo sapiens is Homines sapientesThe entry shows how any idiot can post any nonsense to Wikipedia!
Back-formation from Homo sapiens taken to be a plural.
Homo sapien (plural Homo sapiens)
(nonstandard) A member of the species Homo sapiens.
He was going to explain all this, but he never got around to his Theory of Devolution. Considering the uproar and controversy, he may have been a little disheartened withal.Montaigne said:Shall someone start a new thread enquiring about "homo habili (habilee?), homo erectu (erectoo?)" ?
And is Darwin only the name of a city in Australia?
I know some people who are raising what they believe to be children, but whom the neighbours think of as right little monkeys — and ugly ones at that!He was going to explain all this, but he never got around to his Theory of Devolution. Considering the uproar and controversy, he may have been a little disheartened withal.