apparatūs

See also: apparatus, apparatûs, and apparátus

English

Alternative forms

• apparatûs

Etymology

From Latin apparātūs, the nominative plural form of apparātus; the macron exists to distinguish the long vowel of the plural from the short vowel of the singular, avoiding homography.

Pronunciation

• (Received Pronunciation) enPR: ăpərăto͞os, IPA^(key): /æp.əˈɹæt.uːs/, IPA^(key): /æp.əˈɹeɪ.tuːs/

Noun

apparatūs (rare)

1. plural of apparatus
   • 1950, Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, volume 43, page 791:

     Such work is important not only because it fills out the first part of the mammalian physiological story, but also because the functional apparatūs come into service seriatim during intra-uterine life, so that it is possible, for instance, to separate the earlier, […]

   • 1980, F. Bradford Wallack, The Epochal Nature of Process in Whitehead’s Metaphysics, Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press, →ISBN, page 265:

     For Whitehead, human organs of perception are similarly physical apparatūs, and like those of quantum physicists, part of the external world that has to be taken account of on the same principles as the objects under observation.

   • 1988, Leofranc Holford-Strevens, Aulus Gellius: An Antonine Scholar and His Achievement, London: Gerald Duckworth & Co. Ltd., →ISBN, pages 41–42:

     Singular nouns are paired with plural: ‘a uocabulis non a uerbo’ (3. 12. 3), ‘ingenio … atque doctrinis’ (13. 5. 3), ‘tabemque et morbos’ (19. 5. 3).⁵⁶ […] 56. Wasse 402–3 (Lat. tr. 433), cf. Müller 28, 34. Joseph Wasse, the ‘uir doctus’ of our apparatūs at 6. 3. 55, 19. 12. 3, is identified by Oudendorp on Apul. 8. 6. 1 ‘defuncto [immo definito] iuuene’ and by Saxius i. 311, who also states that ‘A.’, the annotator of the Latin version, was Burman, not (as Hertz on 17. 10. 7, 19. 1. 1) Abresch.

     The 2003 edition uses apparatûs.

   • 1988, W[ilfred] G[eorge] Lambert, “Old Testament Mythology in Its Ancient Near Eastern Context”, in J[ohn] A[dney] Emerton, editor, Congress Volume: Jerusalem, 1986 (Supplements to Vetus Testamentum; XL), Leiden: E. J. Brill, →ISBN, page 124:

     Very little serious work has been done on textual criticism of the O.T. despite the fact that every scholar feels competent to dip into synthetic apparatūs to help solve difficult passages.

   • 2013 January, Brian W. Dunst, Embodying Social Practice: Dynamically Co-Constituting Social Agency‎^[1], dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Digital Commons @ University of South Florida, pages 231–232:

     As mentioned previously, the systems posited by DST are an expression of the epistemic and conceptual constraints of the positor and do not purport to describe or explain the metaphysical contours of the world as it really is, in itself. Explanations are always explanations for someone. The world “as it is in itself” does not need anything explained; only that which is epistemically constrained does. DST provides a framework through which particular kinds of epistemic interrogators with specific types of epistemic constraints (such as humans with their unique sensory and conceptual apparatūs) can be explanatorily satisfied.

   • 2015, Anja Kraus, Scholarly Principles in Teacher Education: What Kind of Science Serves a Practice-Oriented Teacher Education? (European Studies on Educational Practices; 6), Münster: Waxmann, →ISBN, page 24:

     In general, scientific research is ruled by a strong mandate for objectivity, freedom from value judgement and validity, while teaching has a moreover subjective, normative and situated character. However, assessment in school uses quantitative test apparatūs without satisfying its scientific requirements.