Instal Steam
login | bahasa
简体中文 (Tionghoa Sederhana) 繁體中文 (Tionghoa Tradisional) 日本語 (Bahasa Jepang) 한국어 (Bahasa Korea) ไทย (Bahasa Thai) Български (Bahasa Bulgaria) Čeština (Bahasa Ceko) Dansk (Bahasa Denmark) Deutsch (Bahasa Jerman) English (Bahasa Inggris) Español - España (Bahasa Spanyol - Spanyol) Español - Latinoamérica (Bahasa Spanyol - Amerika Latin) Ελληνικά (Bahasa Yunani) Français (Bahasa Prancis) Italiano (Bahasa Italia) Magyar (Bahasa Hungaria) Nederlands (Bahasa Belanda) Norsk (Bahasa Norwegia) Polski (Bahasa Polandia) Português (Portugis - Portugal) Português-Brasil (Bahasa Portugis-Brasil) Română (Bahasa Rumania) усский (Bahasa Rusia) Suomi (Bahasa Finlandia) Svenska (Bahasa Swedia) Türkçe (Bahasa Turki) Tiếng Việt (Bahasa Vietnam) Українська (Bahasa Ukraina) Laporkan kesalahan penerjemahan
Is it in the same family? Yes. No one's arguing that.
As someone who is a scientist who studies puppers, doggos, yappers, and even woofers, I am telling you, specifically, in doggology, no one calls puppers doggos. If you want to be "specific" like you said, then you shouldn't either. They're not the same thing.
If you're saying "doggo family" you're referring to the taxonomic grouping of Doggodaemous, which includes things from sub woofers to birdos to sharkos (the glub glub kind not the bork bork kind).
So your reasoning for calling a pupper a doggo is because random people "call the small yip yip ones doggos?" Let's get penguos and turkos in there, then, too.