Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor - Vicipaedia

# Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor

### E Vicipaedia

## [recensere] Salve

Salve!

Gratus aut grata apud Vicipaediam Latinam acciperis! Ob collata tua gratias agimus speramusque fore ut delecteris et manere velis. Cum Vicipaedia nostra parva humilisque sit, paucae et exiguae sunt paginae auxilii, sed quid ni his incipias?

- Ops nexusque usoribus novis ( en, de)
- Auxilium pro editione (latine) ( en)
- Translator's Guide
- Taberna
- Porta communis
- Lexica Neolatina
- Fontes nominum locorum
- Vicipaedia:Regulae propositae

Si plura de modis et moribus Vicipaedianis scire vis, tibi suademus, ut Vicipaediam aliam adeas, exempli causa:

- Formula salutandi Anglica
- Pagina advenarum salutandorum Anglica

In ipsis paginis mos noster non est nomen dare, sed in paginis disputationis memento scriptis tuis subsignare, litteris imprimendis ~~~~, quae sua sponte et nomen tuum et diem dabunt. Etsi in paginis ipsis lingua Latina tantum uti liceat, in paginis disputationis qualibet lingua scribas. Si quid interrogare volueris, vel apud Tabernam vel in pagina mea disputationis rogato. Ave, spero te "Vicipaedianum" aut "Vicipaedianam" fieri velle!

Liberus esto mihi aerumnas seu quaesitiones ferre.--Ioshus Rocchio 13:34, 2 Iunii 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Centrarchidae & phylogenesis

Salve! Thanks for fixing some of my errors at Centrarchidae. I'm curious about phylogenesin non phylogenesem, though. I would have thought that it would be treated as a normal third-declension noun if used as a Latin word (as opposed to writing it as Greek φυλογένεσις), much like we write ecclesiam non ecclesian. Tkinias 10:24, 11 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

    Either way is probably OK, but I see in Lewis & Short (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu) that Pliny, famous for writing on scientific subjects, used genesin; a third possibility is genesim, as in Suetonius. Maybe there's something to be said for regularizing such terms throughout Vicipaedia. If you prefer phylogenesem, that's fine with me!
    Btw, the last paragraph of the article seems to have derived from the use of the English word sunfish---so as originally written, that paragraph didn't belong in this article. I hope my fix made it relevant!

## [recensere] theoria musicae

Hmmm, I saw you made several edits to BACH thema. Many of them were good changes, many of them were clearing up absolutely careless errors of mine, and others seems as if you may either have a different dictionary than mine, or know a bit about the proper lexicon for this area of study.

  I left untouched a few constructions that seemed dubious to my dim lights, but for which I don't have the linguistic authority to offer emendations. Why do you prefer transcribier to transcribi? Isn't that archaic or poetic or something? IacobusAmor
    Well, r is the characteristic letter of the passive voice, so for me this construction has always made more sense, and aesthetically I like it as well. My preference is not much more serious than say fuere for fuerunt, or finii for finivi, or amasset for amavisset, but the main reason I changed back was because you emended to "transcriberi" instead of "transcribi".--Ioshus Rocchio 20:21, 12 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
      And to answer, yes poetic and archaic...used alot by poets because in pentameter at the end of a line, ier scans better than i.--Ioshus Rocchio 20:21, 12 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
        How so? Since the i of scribo is long, scribier can't end a pentameter, and since the a of transcribo is also long, transcribier can't occur anywhere in the second half of a pentameter (it could occur in the first half, in the pattern of non transcribier nunc). Do you have examples?—IacobusAmor

I have proposed in the taberna a music theory project but I got no response, it seems there are few learned musicians here. I even said as a warning, I know plenty about music theory but not alot about terminology, and my lack of a proper dictionary for it has kept my pace and tenacity for this project rather low. Have you any interest in such a project? There a bunch of pages, see my user page, that I think might be the most important to get us off the ground.--Ioshus Rocchio 18:39, 12 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

    My Ph.D. is in music, though I teach anthropology. The project could be a useful exercise for the little gray cells, but finding the time is the problem. My entire formal academic experience of Latin occurred in tenth & eleventh grades (in high school). Of course I've browsed here & there when the occasion has permitted, and I'm dipping into Propertius this summer. What you might want to do to familiarize yourself with musical terminology is to read something by an important Renaissance theorist or two. I'd suggest Johannes Tinctoris and his archenemy, Franchinus Gafurius. Maybe your university's library has something along those lines, or could get something by interlibrary loan. IacobusAmor
      Nice, what was your focus? My BA was in theory, with percussion as my main instruments. I will read up on these fellows, thanks.--Ioshus Rocchio 19:50, 12 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
        See my encyclopedia. (Search for Australia and the Pacific Islands.) I've taught history, theory, and "world music."—IacobusAmor

## [recensere] Oceania and Viti

If you think Fiii (blue link, therefore an existing page) is wrong, and Viti (red link, not an existing page) were right, please move the Fiii page with "movere" (the button on top of each page) to Viti. Providing sources for the chosen name is highly appreciated. You can add sources with <ref>...</ref> and a "Notae" section with <references/>. See Vicipaedia:Fontes. --Roland2 15:29, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

  I'm so new to this operation, you don't want to trust me yet to move things around! See my comments under Disputatio:Fiii (or whatever it's called). For sources, G. B. Milner's Fijian-English dictionary should be dispositive, but I don't have it at hand. The English Wikipedia should have something relevant. Fiii is impossible and surely worse than Fidzi. IacobusAmor

    Unfortunately I cannot contribute much to the discussion itself, but two technical things:

1. In this edit (Oceania), a blue link was turned into a red link. If you edit a red link (= a link to a not existing page), this will not be a problem, however, if you change a link to an existing page (a blue link) without doing something with the target page, someone might create that page a second time. The best would be, not to change the link, but put a note on the referenced page. Later, when the page might have been moved, the references to the old name can be easily corrected (because the software supports backlinks ... "Nexus ad hanc paginam").
2. In this edit (Disputatio:Fiii) you deleted parts of other edits, hopefully unintentionally, because it is ok to edit a page, but it is not ok to edit other people's contributions on talk pages.

Please tell me, if I can help you. - Speaking of the moving of a page: It will not be a problem if you do something wrong, I'll be able to repair it. Moving is quite simple and I am sure, you will have success. That's the technical aspect. The more important thing is, that changes which the majority might not accept, should be discussed before the change will be applied. So, if you think a change is ok, just do it. Even moving a page. If you think others will not like it, discuss it before. --Roland2 19:51, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

  I don't think I did what you say under #2. Someone or something has "restored" my comment beginning "In ipso loco," but it wasn't there when I was typing, or I'd have begun my addition there (and corrected a tiny grammatical error in it). Maybe simultaneous things were happening in the machinery and one cancelled the other out. IacobusAmor

    Yes, that's possible. In some cases "the machine" tells about other users having started to edit the article.

      The editing page was open for possibly more than an hour, while I had tea etc., so maybe Iustinus's comment came in during that time—and when I posted my comment, my addition to the conversation wiped his out. IacobusAmor 20:34, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

        It looks like we have found out the reasons ... ;-)

  Further: the questions from Iustinus weren't there when I started typing, or I'd have answered them directly. A time-stamp might show that. Why doesn't my signature include one? IacobusAmor

    Maybe you are using just 3 tildes.
    3 = Name, 4 = Name + Timestamp, 5 = Timestamp.
    --Roland2 20:28, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

      Ah, thanks. I'll try it: IacobusAmor 20:34, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

        It works. :-) --Roland2 20:42, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Gen*tivus

          And thanks for fixing the redirect from "genitivus," but I seem to have made a mistake: both my dictionaries say it's genitivus, but L&S (online at Perseus) apparently prefers genetivus. So maybe it should be switched back. Have people discussed the spelling of this word? IacobusAmor 21:01, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

There is a redirect from Genitivus to Genetivus, so the link is blue in any case and people can see, if there is a note on the target page ... ;-) I think it has not been discussed what the "better" form is. They should be both provided on the target page. Please see my suggestion at Disputatio_Vicipaediae:Redirectio#Templates_for_some_types_of_redirects. --Roland2 21:28, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Eius v. Suus

Forgive me as a newbie, but over & over again in browsing in Vicipaedia, I'm seeing eius where a form of suus is required. Rule of thumb: if the concept of 'his/her/its' refers to the subject of the sentence or clause, it wants to be rendered as a form of suus. Example in Allen & Greenough (299, macrons omitted and other adjustments made):

    Caesar suas copias subducit, Caesar leads up his troops.

(A&G don't point this out, but "Caesar eius copias subducit" would mean that Caesar leads up somebody else's troops.) Bradley's Arnold adds (#354(iv), macrons omitted):

    Suus corresponds to 'his own' rather than to 'his'; consequently it is not used in many circumstances where we use the unemphatic English 'his.'
      Animum advertit, 'he turned his attention'; filii mortem deplorabat, 'he was lamenting his son's death.'
    But suus is often used emphatically as opposed to alienus: suo tempore, 'at the time that suited him'; and always in the phrase sua sponte, 'of his own free will.'

Is it possible to search Vicipaedia for a single word? If so, maybe somebody could search for eius and regularize the idioms. IacobusAmor 13:19, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

      Well using eius for "his" certainly didn't bother many latin writers, and Roman ones at that. Look at De vita Divi Augusti. Suetonius uses eius to mean "his" ie "agustus'" in nearly every chapter.--Ioshus Rocchio 19:37, 2 Augusti 2006 (UTC)
        Hey, don't blame me: I didn't invent the rule! You'll find it again in Wheelock, chapter 13, p. 84 in the sixth edition (2000), which has examples including these (macrons omitted):
          Cicero laudavit amicum suum, Cicero praised his (own) friend.
          Cicero laudavit amicum eius, Cicero praised his (Caesar's) friend.
        I gave the Loeb volume with Augustus in it to my nephew, but I have the second volume, and right at the start of Nero, I see Quod insigne mansit et in posteris EIUS, ac magna pars rutila barba fuerunt, 'This sign was perpetuated in HIS descendants, a great part of whom had red beards.' This his isn't reflexive, so it's in posteris eius, not in posteris suis. Right? IacobusAmor 20:01, 2 Augusti 2006 (UTC)
      Quite. I misread your objection above, pretend I never mentioned it.--Ioshus Rocchio 17:45, 4 Augusti 2006 (UTC)
  It certainly is, I've done a similiar hunt and destroy for various other single word like "vulgo" for instance. Talk to Roland about the specifics, his wikipowers are much greater than mine.--Ioshus Rocchio 13:39, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
    Is that the vulgo that means 'commonly known (as); ordinarily'? What's wrong with it? Cicero & Ovid used it. Or is it a vas vermum in this forum? ;) IacobusAmor 14:09, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
      Hahaha, Iustinus and I have disputed the matter here and here, indeed. Here's my take: I perfectly well realize "vulgo" to be perfect grammatically, and certainly attested. However, you can't link vulgo to anything... I think it much more behooves a comprehensive encyclopaedia like the one in which we toil to be able to link towards language of origin, and it certainly tells a user much mroe than vulgo. Like I assured Iustinus, though, I was not on a search and destroy for every instance of the word, hell bent on its eradication, but in the first sentence of an article, I think, for instance:
      "Guilelmus Gates (vulgo Bill)", is much less helpful or useful than "Guilelmus Gates (Anglice: Bill)
      In the second one the reader actually knows the language, and can go read about it at that language's wiki.
      Iustinus, I don't think, replied to my reply. What do you think? This policy has earned a bit of favor, Roland, Petrus, UV a few others have started practicing this too.--Ioshus Rocchio 14:26, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
        Oh, sure, in that case, yes, I agree with you—as long as you don't go getting rid of vulgo where the context is all in Latin. Is "Tullia (vulgo Tulliola)" right for nicknames? or would it be better to use a form of appello? or something else? IacobusAmor 15:02, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

          No, absolutely in such a case vulgo is appropriate. I have no intention of weeding out such a usage.--Ioshus Rocchio 15:12, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Francia ~ Francogallia ~ Gallia?

What's the standard form in Vicipaedia? IacobusAmor 15:38, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

  Another vas vermum. Francogallia seems to be France, cf Lingua Francogallica. It is a bit less than consistently adhered to, though.--Ioshus Rocchio 16:33, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

The rule I usually go by is this: strictly speaking, Gallus = Gaul, Francus = Frank, Francogallus = Frenchman, however Latinists of all eras (in which there were Frenchmen, at least ;) ) have used these terms very loosely, and almost interchangeably, at least in contexts where there is no chance of confusion. As for the name of the country, well I think the term Francogallia is unnecessary: when speaking of countries and territories, people often use outdated names anyway, so really I think it's just a question of Francia or Gallia. --Iustinus 17:04, 7 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Searching for a single word

Yes, this is possible: Instead of "Ire" click on "Quaerere". You'll find 458 results for eius. Another thing: If you have general information for all users, it might be better to put it on your user page (which is empty at the moment) and not on the talk page of your user page. Or you might want to create an article in the "Vicipaedia" namespace. These are pages where the title starts with "Vicipaedia:". See Vicipaedia:vulgo (which is a redirection page, see Vicipaedia:Redirectio) as an example. --Roland2 17:35, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Volker Beck

Hey, just a quick note about your edit summary. I know it's often infuriating the lack of knowledge or effort people put into articles, but maybe only lose cool if you remind someone a couple of times of a rule first =]. If I were judged publicly for the caliber of my first edits, I'd have a village full of people hurling stones.--Ioshus Rocchio 21:07, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] populatio

Traupman, populatio-nis, f ravaging population multitudo-inis, f multitudo-inis, f great number, multitude, crowd, throng; rabble, common people; population

Whitaker, populatio N 3 1 NOM S F populatio N 3 1 VOC S F populatio, populationis N F [XXXCX] plundering, ravaging, spoiling; laying waste, devastation; plunder, booty;

N&H population, populus-i, m, multitudo-inis, f

L&S population, popularitas-tis, f, populatio-nis, f, pubes-is, f

Populatio

Caesar Gallico I.15, Caesar suos a proelio continebat, ac satis habebat in praesentia hostem rapinis, pabulationibus populationibusque prohibere. I.33, ne maior multitudo Germanorum Rhenum traducatur.

Livy 1.6 Et supererat multitudo Albanorum Latinorumque. III.68 nisi paucis diebus hos populatores agrorum nostrorum fusos fugatosque castris exuero

Ecastor quibus credamus?!?!--Ioshus Rocchio 04:07, 19 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

  ??? What's this verbiage doing on my page?! IacobusAmor 00:08, 20 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

    Well, it was responding to the verbiage on my page. This is a wiki, dude, you have the power to remove what verbiage you'd like. I'm sorry, do you prefer latin? Remove quae vellis, puer.--Ioshus Rocchio 00:30, 20 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

      Why not move it over to the page where the discussion started? Then the proffered pieces of evidence would be together. IacobusAmor 13:10, 26 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Igo

IacobusAmor: You keep making the same changes, which I believe to be unnecessary, and in some cases incorrect, to igo. Please read (and if necessary, respond to) my comments at disputatio:igo before you consider reinstating those same changes. --Iustinus 17:01, 7 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Contemptful birds

It might be useful to remember that an absolute construction is verbiage that has no grammatical connection with the sentence in which it occurs. Consider this sentence: "He cut the tree down, the birds looking on in contempt." The boldfaced matter is an absolute phrase. You're likelier to find absolute constructions in modern English poetry than in modern English prose. In Latin prose, they pop up all over the place. IacobusAmor 20:37, 10 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

  Well your example is helpful, and I most certainly wouldn't have had an english language comparison if it weren't for your help because I'm not into Modern English Poetry (not much poetry at all for that matter, but especially not "poetry" that doesn't rhyme). I'll try to keep it in mind—but does this invalidate my attempt at the ablative absolute? Alexanderr 02:02, 11 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

    If memory serves, your Latin phrase nailed it: your ablative absolute was fine. Here's an example in an excerpt from a modern English poem, one published (by a woman) in 2006; all three phrases after the first line are absolute:
      She lies in the grass,
      her hair in a torn web,
      the ribbons that laced her dress
      drifting,
      her shoelaces gone.
    Curiously, absolute constructions seem to turn up more in English poetry composed by women than in English poetry composed by men. I wonder (a) whether that's really true, and if so, (b) whether psycholinguists have researched why.

    Further examples of ablative absolutes, from Bradley's Arnold, #420:
      His auditis[,] rediit, having heard (or hearing) this[,] he returned.
      te praesente, in your presence.
      hoc comperto scelere, in consequence of discovering this crime.
      te repugnante, in spite of (in the teeth of) your resistance.
      illo manente, as long as he remains.
      Antonio oppresso, if Antony is crushed.
      patefacta porta[,] erupit, he had the gate opened and sallied forth.
    I suppose the familiar "Deo volente" is another one. Also note: "The proper place for the ablative absolute is early in, or at the very beginning of, a sentence" (Bradley's Arnold, #426). IacobusAmor 02:48, 11 Augusti 2006 (UTC)
  Caesar is the master of ablative absolutes as far as latin prose authors go, Cicero almost as notably. As far as poetry, Plautus makes extensive use of this construction as well. Read any 5 lines of Caesar, and I almost guarantee one will have an abl abs. Nota bene, other languages make use of this construction, as well. Greek has a genitive absolute, and Russian a nomitave participial absolute.--Ioshus Rocchio 02:59, 11 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

      A personal favorite, at the end of Horace's Odes I.2, illustrates Latin's famous economy with words; I'll boldface it:
        . . . hic magnos potius triumphos,
        hic ames dici pater atque princeps,
        neu sinas Medos equitare inultos,
          te duce, Caesar.
      "Here may you love glorious triumphs, here be called father and prince, nor suffer the Medes to raid unpunished, while you are our leader, O Caesar." I suppose beginners would want to translate that English clause as something like Dum tu es dux noster. IacobusAmor 03:17, 11 Augusti 2006 (UTC)
    Yeah, that is quite a nice example of just how efficient the absolute construction can be, 5 words become 2.--Ioshus Rocchio 03:20, 11 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Somoa Americana

Everybody can change this. You have to edit the page Formula:Civitates foederalis. It is just a special namespace like "Usor:xxxxx". --Roland (disp.) 22:28, 12 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

  I didn't know that. Now I do, and I've fixed it. Thanks! (It's rather odd that the linkname was correct, but somebody, using the pipe character, had "corrected" it to the wrong form.) IacobusAmor 00:14, 13 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

    Maybe it was a typo, see [1]. --Roland (disp.) 06:57, 13 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Kiribati

I have moved Kiribatum to Kiribati ... according to your information. --Roland (disp.) 13:49, 14 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

  And for more details on countries in Oceania, see the commentary elsewhere (in Taberna?). IacobusAmor 16:07, 14 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Oceania

I've added (most of) your suggestions to {{Oceania}} and created the missing pages to make it easier to discuss the names. I'll post a note in the taberna. --Roland (disp.) 19:06, 14 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

    Euge! Gratias tibi ago. IacobusAmor 21:24, 14 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Jose Rizal

Correxisti res iosephus recidivus gratias ago. Doleo inferio latine meius.--Jondel 10:25, 18 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Annus bisextilis

Re vera, Allen & Greenough melius fons est. Sed vicipaedia voce "bisextilis" saepe utitur (et discrimen sine momento mihi est: ambos modos videram). Cave ne nexus fractos facias. Nexus fractos, qui antea non fracti, valde odi! Quod aliquid de tempore edidisti, amabo te si in hanc disputationem quoque spectes et scribas. Sinister Petrus 20:31, 26 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Contact information

Iacobe, you haven't provided wikipedia with your email address. Would you mind getting in touch with me? --Iustinus 04:49, 4 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  I did, the same day, but you haven't responded. IacobusAmor 15:47, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
    That's odd! I never received it (even in my spam filter). I had thought you were ignoring me. Would you mind trying again? Hopefully it was just a random fluke and it will work this time. --Iustinus 17:06, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] genus names

Yeah, check this from Petrus.--Ioshus (disp) 15:09, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  OK, but genus names & species epithets weren't italicized in the article as I found it, and I didn't italicize them; maybe later. IacobusAmor 15:50, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Auden

Bene facis! Thanks for the corrections and improvements. Locatives are not my strongest point. Xn4 18:46, 10 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  The article caught my eye because Auden is one of my favorite poets, metrically the greatest English-language poet of the twentieth century (and I once had lunch with him). You must be at Gresham's School? IacobusAmor 02:15, 11 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Another O.G., anyway. I'm just wondering if you met Auden at Oxford in 1973? In 1975, I bought a book at Thornton's by Loren Eiseley which he had inscribed to Auden, but that's the nearest I came. Xn4 06:34, 11 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  It was at Harvard, on Ash Wednesday in 1965 (if memory serves); he wore slippers. IacobusAmor 11:00, 11 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Tolkien was also a man for slippers. Xn4 11:14, 11 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Deus Caritas Est

Thanks for your help on the Deus Caritas Est page. Alexanderr 03:58, 11 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

    You're welcome. Anything to help. IacobusAmor 14:28, 11 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] The placement of est/sunt

Is the placement of est/sunt at the end of phrases, as in the title of the encyclical Deus Caritas Est (instead of Deus Est Caritas), a marker of Roman Catholic Latin? In a previous thread I've pointed out having often encountered such late placement in Vicipaedia and asked about where it comes from. Is this the answer? IacobusAmor 14:28, 11 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Britannia Spears

Gratias propter auxilium tuum in hanc rem tibi ago. Meminisse "nubere" non potui, ergo verbo "duci" usus sum. "Nubere" melius est. De Britannia Spears scribo non quia illam amo, sed magis a marito ilius stupefacior. Sinister Petrus 16:34, 18 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  Stupefio ego quoque. Est in Vicipaedia res de grege musicali (in casu nominativo:) "Dies Viridis"? IacobusAmor 18:13, 18 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
    Non credo Iacobe, vide Categoria:Musica rockica.--Ioshus (disp) 21:17, 18 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
      Neque ego. Fortasse aliquis facturus esse rem de Diebus Viridibus debet. Sinister Petrus 04:39, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] A B est / A est B

I wonder about this. You often bring it up, so I figured I'd form my thoughts outtyped to you. In a few of the southern Italian dialects, a b est is the prefered form, especially when b is an adjective. This obviously has rubbed off of late due to modern Italian influence, but certainly in most breed of Sicilian and Calabrian I have encountered, especially the old people say "a b est". I wonder then about spoken latin, especially as it progressed to the vulgar forms, and away from the refinement of a cultural mecca like Florence. I have nothing profound here, just rambling...--Ioshus (disp) 21:21, 18 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  Then let's ramble along with Cicero, whom, in a continuous passage, we'll see keeping his prose flowing by varying the positions in which 'to be' occurs. Here's his description of Syracuse ("In C. Verrem"), analyzed for 'to be':
    Urbem Syracusas maximam esse Graecarum . . . audistis.—MEDIAL
    Est, iudices, ita ut dicitur.—INITIAL (for emphasis)
    Ea tanta est urbs ut . . . constare dicatur,—MEDIAL
    quarum una est Insula,—MEDIAL
    in qua domus est—PHRASE-FINAL
    quae Hieronis regis fuit, qua praetores uti solent.—PHRASE-FINAL
    In ea sunt aedes sacrae complures . . .—MEDIAL
    quae fuit ante istius adventum ornatissima, Minervae.—MEDIAL
    In hac insula extrema est fons aquae dulcis—MEDIAL
    cui nomen Arethusa est, incredibili. . . .—PHRASE-FINAL
    Altera autem est urbs Syracusis,—MEDIAL
    cui nomen Achradina est,—PHRASE-FINAL
    in qua forum maximum . . . est curia templumque. . . .—MEDIAL
    Tertia est urbs quae,—MEDIAL
    quod in ea parte Fortunae fanum antiquum fuit,—PHRASE-FINAL
    Tycha nominata est,—PHRASE-FINAL (with a participle, pronounced "nominatast")
    in qua gymnnasium amplissimum est et complures aedes sacrae.—MEDIAL
    Quarta autem est quae,—MEDIAL
    quia postrema coaedificata est, Neapolis nominatur. . . .—PHRASE-FINAL
    Praeterea duo templa sunt egregia. . . .—MEDIAL
  A rich array in a short passage!—twenty instances, of which one is initial, twelve are medial, two are phrase-final with a participle (as part of a composite perfect), and five are otherwise phrase-final. None of the instances of 'to be' is sentence-final. A final est especially would be a thin reed on which to lean a sentence, as it has no stress, and it often loses its vowel. (Some modern editions, e.g. the Loeb, write the prodelision, as in famast, for fama est.) This is a small sample, but it may have lessons to teach. We might want to be wary of phrase-final 'to be', except when it immediately precedes a relative pronoun, and of sentence-final 'to be', except when it's part of a composite perfect, or has some other idiomatic rhythm, as in the sentence Meumst ("Meum est") 'It's mine'. IacobusAmor 01:16, 20 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

    OK, now I've tried out this question on a retired classics professor in the United States. Here's what I told him:
      In Vicipaedia, one often sees entries whose first sentence takes this form (as, say, in an article on Aetna):
        Aetna mons in Sicilia est.
      This bothers me because putting est at the end (1) makes an ambiguity between "Aetna is a mountain in Sicily" and "Mount Aetna is in Sicily," and (2) to my ears, sounds clunky. . . . Are there any rules for the placement of forms of esse? I don't see any in Bradley's Arnold, but I've checked some prose by Cicero, Suetonius, Tacitus, and (of all people) Angelo Poliziano, and rarely find a sentence-final form of esse, unless it follows a participle, as in factus est. (For example, in Cicero's oration In Verrem, the paragraph describing Syracuse has twenty instances of esse, and none is sentence-final.) I have a feeling that many of the authors of articles in Vicipaedia have been told by their teachers that it's always safe to put verbs at the end, and so, being diligent students, that's what they do, no matter what the result sounds like. Here's an actual example from Vicipaedia:
        Stephanus VI aut V (natus Romae die ignoto – obiit die XIV Septembris DCCCXCI), episcopus Romae Papa Ecclesiae Catholicae Romanae a mense Septembris DCCCLXXXV erat.
      Isn't erat there a rather thin reed on which to lean a sentence?
    And here's his reply (emphasis added):
      You are absolutely right to question the placement of forms of esse in sentences. It never comes under the postponed placement (periodic) tendency. If it and sunt and erat and erant are first in a sentence, they are the way Latin expresses ‘there is’, ‘there are’, ‘there was’, etc. So, to express your thought about Aetna, you could say, Est mons in Sicilia, Aetna (‘there is a mountain in Sicily, Aetna’). Or you could say, Aetna est mons in Sicilia (‘Aetna is a mountain in Sicily’). Putting est at the end creates the ambiguity you cited. The placement of erat in the Stephanus citation is utterly false. It belongs before episcopus.
    Could we have comments here from other authorities? I'm particularly interested in where the sentence-final placement of copulative forms of esse is coming from. Is it being taught somewhere in the world as a desirable stylistic choice? Is it Germanic Latin? modern Roman Catholic Latin? or what? IacobusAmor 13:11, 26 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

### [recensere] Autem...

- Ammianus Marcellinus: "Cuius disciplinae Tages nomine quidam monstrator est,..." —PHRASE-FINAL

  Nothing unusual there: "The copula final type is quite common when the subject is or includes a relative pronoun . . . ; in this structure the whole predicate phrase is in the focus position" (Devine & Stephens, Latin Word Order, 2006:198). In the passage analyzed above, Cicero's only phrase-final uses of copulative esse occur in such clauses ("when the subject is or includes a relative pronoun") :
    in qua domus est.
    quae Hieronis regis fuit.
    cui nomen Arethusa est.
    cui nomen Achradina est.
    quod in ea parte Fortunae fanum antiquum fuit.
  In the last example, quod functions as a conjunction, but it could still have been heard as the accusative neuter of qui. IacobusAmor 13:42, 3 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Laus Deo solo (Anglice: Praise to God alone)

Your correction is good, but the motto is in English and not Latin, viz., Al worship be to God only. Laus Deo solo was my stab at it. I also toyed with veneratio. Maybe you can advise? Regards, Xn4 21:53, 18 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  Why do you keep spelling all with one ell? (Do you have a problem with it?) You left it out of your Latin translation, so I didn't know to add it into the English version! The Latin word for 'worship of God' is (according to my dictionary) adoratio. IacobusAmor 00:00, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
    Duos nummos meos profero: Bach signed his works "sola deo gloria". This is something of a transferred epithet, but I wonder if that's the norm for latin. Ie, "sola deo adoratio" instead of "adoratio soloi deo".--Ioshus (disp) 00:13, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

don't forget: the dative of solus is soli. --68.28.147.114 00:43, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  It is? IacobusAmor 01:12, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
    (That anonymous user was me, btw)
    Yup, like unus. See here, for instance. This of course causes the embarassment that deo soli can mean either "to God alone" or "to the sun-god" (look what happens if you google it). And although I make a big deal about not using nouns as adjectives in Latin, Sol Deus is a well attested exception (not even an exception, really: the words are in apposition). --Iustinus 02:47, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
          Ah, so it goes along with ullus, unus, uter, and suchlike. That means the genitive singular should be solius. Did those irregularities last through the Renaissance and beyond? or did later authors regularize solus? IacobusAmor 13:29, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
            Yeah... odd that solius strikes me as more weird than soli. As for regularization, such things were bound to happen in the middle ages (I speculate), but by the renaissance I'm sure they were going back to the classical forms. Note that the OCD already lists classical sources that "regularize" it:
              `I. gen. regular. solius; dat. soli; gen. m. soli, Cato ap. Prisc. p. 694 P.; dat. m. SOLO, Inscr. Orell. 2627; f. solae, Plaut. Mil. 4, 2, 28; Ter. Eun. 5, 6, 3), adj. [orig. the same with sollus, q. v.; cf. salus. By Pott referred to sui, Kühn. Zeitschr. 5, 242] .`
            --Iustinus 15:46, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
      Any insight on the nuance of syntax, Iustine? Is it praise to the only god, or the only praise to god? As I said, if I hadn't grown up seeing sdg on the bottom of scores I never would have thought of it. I try to avoid ecclesiastical writings =].--Ioshus (disp) 03:01, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
        You're just asking about the semantics? Well Laus Deo Soli could literally translate to either "Praise to God alone" or "Praise to the only God" (or, of course, "Praise to the Sun-God"), but I don't think I've ever seen it taken any way but the first. Of course a Roman would doubtless think we were splitting hairs if we were to ask which one he (or, I suppose she) thought it was. --Iustinus 06:40, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
      Thanks for all this thoughtful advice. In googling, I have found a web site about Bach called [Soli Deo Gloria. This site says that what Bach signed was simply SDG, so perhaps he, too, was not too sure! On the al, I guess the English motto had (and has) only one -l- because the College of Arms in the 1550s thought one was enough. As you know, in those days English was seen as a lesser language and no one thought its spelling would trouble posterity. Now, perhaps, the single -l- is a kind of heirloom. In any event, it makes no odds to the Latin and I should have put in omnia, but then I'm only an la-2 user and in worrying which word to use for 'worship' I forgot it. How about Omnia adoratio soli Deo? Xn4 21:54, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
        Others may rule on that, but if you're going to give the English, I wonder whether you shouldn't add a "[sic]," lest 99.99 percent of your readers think you've misspelled the word. IacobusAmor 22:02, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

      Admonitio tua mihi placet. Xn4 15:33, 20 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] C. Iulius Caesar

Hi, Iacobe, did you revert my changes for a reason or can I go ahead and re-add them? Greetings, --UV 00:52, 9 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

  Hi, UV. I didn't revert anything specifically thinking of you, but I noticed that the article contained numerous unnecessary examples of "a.C.n.," and (per a previous conversation with Ioshus) it seemed reasonable to get rid of them. (I made other changes too.) Had you just added them in? If so, then we all need to have a discussion. Maybe years like "(double bracket)44 a.C.n.(double bracket)" could be given as "(double bracket)a.C.n.|44(double bracket)." Do others have relevant opinions? Mine is that, once the text gives an instance of "a.C.n.," readers will understand that the years are counting down to 1, and they need no additional reference to the Christ. IacobusAmor 01:52, 9 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
    ok, now I understand. I like and I support your proposal: Let the first place a year is mentioned read e. g. [[78 a.C.n.]] and subsequent years generally e. g. [[72 a.C.n.|72]]. Greetings, --UV 21:51, 9 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Position of the verb (at the end or in the middle)

You correct the pages when the verb at the end is, but now (see mutationes 15.10 in the morning) I see that Finnicus writes "in school. classical latin usually puts verbs last. verbs in the middle in an anglism and should be avoided". What's the correct solution? Could you help me? Thank you and ciao--Massimo Macconi 09:42, 15 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

  Yes, Maxime, Latin prose usually puts verbs last, but esse is a special verb, with special tendencies of its own. Scroll up a little bit in this disputatio and you'll find relevant discussion under the title "A B est / A est B." The late placement of bare forms of esse (that is, not in association with a past participle as part of a verb in the perfect system, like paratus est) is the first stylistic thing about Vicipaedia that I noticed. If it occurred seldom, it wouldn't attract attention to itself, because Latin uses word order for special effects, or just for rhythmic variety (for example, "Et regressus est Jesus," not "Et Jesus regressus est," in Matt. 4:14); but in Vicipaedia, the late placement of esse occurs so frequently that one suspects that authors have been taught that it's the best way to write. I've asked where it was coming from, but responses haven't materialized. More thorough browsing—noting the topics covered and the location of their authors—suggests that it may mark a Central & Eastern European dialect of modern Latin—perhaps Germanic or, as we see today, Finnish. It's not a mistake that native speakers of English, Dutch, Spanish, and French would likely make. German can in some constructions put its cognate (ist, sind, etc.) at the end (e.g., "Er muss dabei nicht nur verbergen, dass er ein Mann ist, sondern auch, dass er Christ ist), so I wonder if terminal esse sounds natural to Germans; it appears in the Ratzingerese of the encyclical title "Deus Caritas Est," but it isn't a prominent feature of the text that follows.
  Examine extended passages of genuine classical prose and see what you see. Here, for example, from Seneca (De Providentia):
    Infelix est Mucius, quod dextra ignes hostium premit et ipse a se exigit erroris sui poenas? . . . Felicior esset, si in sinu amicae foveret manum? Infelix est Fabricius . . . ? Felicior, si in ventrem suum. . . . Infelix est Rutilius . . . ? Quid ergo? Felix est L. Sulla. . . .
  None of these forms of esse is sentence-final. Incidentally, this is a good passage to show that questions of this type don't have to begin with Est or Estne.
  Also, esse is often so unnecessary that it can be left out. See the Beatitudes: "Beati [sunt] pauperes spiritu" (Matt. 5:2). Note also the continuation of that verse: "quoniam ipsorum est regnum caelorum" (not "quoniam ipsorum regnum caelorum est"). On omission, see also Seneca's "Felicior [esset], si in ventrem suum" (above). For a later example, see Angelo Politziano's summary of Lorenzo de' Medici: Vir ad omnia summa natus (letter dated 18 March 1492), for which in English we have to supply a verb: "[He was] a man born for every excellence."
  The rhythm of simple sentences (which we often find at the start of articles in Vicipaedia) almost demands medial placement of esse, as in this continuous passage (Gen. 1:8).
    Terra autem erat inanis et vacua,—MEDIAL (not "inanis et vacua erat")
    et tenebrae erant super faciem abyssi. . . .—MEDIAL (not "super faciem abyssi erant")
    Dixitque Deus: Fiat lux. Et facta est lux.—MEDIAL (not "Et lux facta est")
    Et vidit Deus lucem quod esset bona. . . .—MEDIAL (not "quod bona esset")
    Factumque est vespere et mane, dies unus.—MEDIAL (not "Et vespere et mane factum est")
    Dixit quoque Deus: Fiat firmamentum. . . . Divisitque aquas quae erant sub firmamento,—MEDIAL (not "quae sub firmamento erant")
    ab his quae erant super firmamentum.—MEDIAL (not "quae super firmamentum erant")
    Et factum est ita. Vocavitque Deus firmamentum Caelum.—MEDIAL (not "Et ita factum est")
    Et factum est vespere et mane, dies secundus.—MEDIAL (not "Et vespere et mane factum est")
  So the first nine instances of esse in Genesis are medial, not sentence-final, and not even phrase-final; and if you keep reading, the pattern continues.
  Note the instances of esse at the start of a paragraph from Pliny's famous letter to Trajan:
    Alii ab indice nominati esse se Christianos dixerunt, et mox negaverunt;—MEDIAL
    fuisse quidem, sed desisse, quidam ante triennium. . . .—PHRASE-INITIAL
    Omnes et imaginem tuam deorumque simulacra venerati sunt et Christo male dixerunt.—PHRASE-FINAL but not SENTENCE-FINAL
    Adfirmabant autem hanc fuisse summam vel culpae suae vel erroris,—MEDIAL
    quod essent soliti stato die ante lucem convenire carmenque Christo quasi deo dicere secum invicem. . . .—MEDIAL
  In short, a rule like "verbs in the middle [is] an [Anglicism] and should be avoided" should be taken with more than one grain of salt. Read good authors and notice their habits. IacobusAmor 13:22, 15 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
    Clara exempla, e texto missae Catholicae Romanae:
      Et incarnatus est de Spirito Sancto ex Maria Virgine.—Non "Et de Spiritu Sancto . . . incarnatus est" (though that formulation might also be OK).
      qui locutus est per prophetas.—Non "qui per prophetas locutus est" (though that formulation might also be OK).
      Vere dignum et justum est, aequum et salutare. . . .—Non "Vere dignum, justum, aequum, et salutare est. . . ."
      Pleni sunt caeli et terra gloria tua.—Non "Caeli et terra pleni gloria tua sunt."
      Hoc est enim corpus meum.—Non "Hoc enim corpus meum est."
      Hic est enim calix sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti.—Non "Hic enim calix sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti, est."
      Pater noster, qui es in caelis—Non "Pater noster, qui in caelis es."
      Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum.—Non "Pax Domini semper vobiscum sit."
      In principio erat Verbum,—Non "In principio Verbum erat."
      et Verbum erat apud Deum,—Non "et Verbum apud Deum erat."
      et Deus erat Verbum.—Non "et Deus Verbum erat."
      Hoc erat in principio apud Deum.—Non "Hoc in principio apud Deum erat." IacobusAmor 15:56, 15 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to intrude, but putting the esse verb in the middle after the noun makes it so much easier to read and even similar to romance languages. It is much easier o function and use Latin this way.--Jondel 03:51, 16 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

  Recte dicis, Jondel. IacobusAmor 13:09, 22 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
    Quid de "errare humanum est"? --Alex1011 17:10, 20 Novembris 2006 (UTC)
      1. Beats me. We'd have to ask Seneca. ;) Seriously, if Wikipedia is right, the copula, though standing at the end of a phrase, is actually in the middle of a rhetorical rhythm, which we might punctuate as pronounced: errare humanumst; perseverare, diabolicum. The comma stands for a suppressed est. Making the syntax of the phrases strictly parallel ruins their sound: both errare humanumst; perseverare diabolicumst and errarest humanum; perseverarest diabolicum lack a deft rhetorical touch. I haven't read much Seneca (though see above), so I can't speculate more.
      2. Not to be ignored is that the Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary reverses the terms: Humanum est errare. Where could that version have come from?
      3. I've been browsing in Tacitus, who seems to be waging war on esse, killing it wherever he can. When it occurs early, it seem to have emphasis, as in section 3 of the Germania: "Fuisse apud eos et Herculem memorant. . . . Sunt illis haec quoque carmina. . . ." But it also, and rarely, occurs late: "quae neque confirmare argumentis neque refellere in animo est: ex ingenio suo quisque demat vel addat fidem." Note, however, that its tardiness here is not occurring in a phrase of the structure "A est B." IacobusAmor 18:13, 20 Novembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Gratia...

tibi ago propter perfectam explicationem. Nunc emendabo paginas meas. Salve --Massimo Macconi 16:21, 15 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Salve, munde!

Does the page en:Hello world program answer your question? ;-) --Roland (disp.) 20:50, 17 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

  Why, yes it does. Gratias! IacobusAmor 00:04, 18 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Scutum fidei

Thanks for catching the Orientis vs. Occidentis thing -- I looked at that more than a dozen times without ever noticing! For the difference between the placement of node labels in the 13th century versions vs. the most usual post-13th-century versions, see en:Shield of the Trinity... AnonMoos 13:32, 21 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Haedui

Ave, Jacobe.

- Scripsisti in Haeduorum pagina :"Cum Caesar in Galliam veniret, ...factiones erant", potius quam Cum Caesar in Galliam venit, ...factiones erant. Insisto tamen constructionem meam validam esse, nam cum haud semper subjunctivum appellat, et dico in hoc casu indicativum utendum esse.

    Fortasse recte dicis, Verbex, nam hac verborum structura est perdifficilis, quia cum usitate subiunctivum, sed nonnunquam indicativum, gubernat. Secundum Bradley's Arnold (#430): "When the clause introduced by cum refers to a past action[,] the verb is generally subjunctive. Caesar, cum haec videret, milites impetum facere iussit. Caesar, seeing this, ordered his troops to charge. Legati, cum haec non impetrassent, domum redierunt. The ambassadors having failed to obtain this, returned home." Sed nota proximam sententiam (#431): "But in some circumstances a cum-clause referring to a past action has an indicative verb. (a) When the relation between the clause and main sentence is solely one of time. This relation is often impressed on the reader by the presence of tum or eo tempore in the main sentence. Cum tu ibi eras, tum ego domi eram. At the time you were there, I was at home." In sententia originali, hoc tum non vidi. IacobusAmor 13:04, 22 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
  Recte quidem est, nam Caesar ipse scripsit in Comm. VI,12 : "Cum Caesar in Galliam venit, alterius factionis principes erant Haedui, alterius Sequani". Licet autem constare grammaticae libros in Francia hanc structuram non tam verecunde docere, quam Bradley's Arnold (quod confiteor numquam legisse!) docet. Priscianus haec dixit : (cum + ind.) utandum quoties cum mutare possumus cum eo tempore quo.--Verbex 15:21, 22 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
    Haha. Ne Caesarem emendemus! IacobusAmor 00:25, 23 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

- Reversisti significationem sententiae meae de Diviciaco. Nam Romanos non pugnavit (ut apparet in Commentariis Caesaris), sed Germanos et Helvetios, et econtra auxilium Romanorum petiit. Ordo verborum mutare potes, nam rarissime poetor, sed significationem serva.
- De vergobreto mox declarabo : officium apud Gallos erat, quod proxime Romanus praetor par est.--Verbex 21:44, 21 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

    Bene; adde explicationem, fortasse: apud Gallos, "vergobreto" erat officium praetoris Romani simile.

    IacobusAmor 13:04, 22 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

  Notulam ergo addam. Puto autem nexum meliorem fore. Gratiam tibi ago pro diligentia. --Verbex 15:21, 22 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Complimenti!

Sei un grande grammariano! You really know your Latin grammar! Thanks for your help on the Derthona page. Grazie mille, mille fois merci, vielen Dank! GiovaneScuola2006 14:54, 23 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] "Savum Oppidum Alpinum"

vide en.wiki et it.wiki "Savona". Apud et non locativum, quia Franciscus Della Rovere non in urbe sed in vico apud hanc urbem natus est, ciao--Massimo Macconi 21:47, 24 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

  Dicisne nomen vici esse "Savonam" (unum verbum), quae est oppidum quod est alpinum? sed res ipse dicit nomen esse "Savum Oppidum Alpinum" (tria verba). Ergo coniicio rem errare, et locutionem rectam esse "Savum, oppidum alpinum" (Anglice: Savum, an alpine city), non "Savum Oppidum Alpinum" (Anglice: Alpine City Savum). IacobusAmor 23:44, 24 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Quid est imago?

You mean the images need a title or do you think the images are inappropriate? I clicked on that images and - from the description - they seem to be ok. --Roland (disp.) 11:29, 26 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

  If I ask that, it means (a) an image has no caption, or (b) the caption is confusing or confused. IacobusAmor 11:31, 26 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
    What about a template similar to {{Nexus carentes}} which says something like "Image needs a better caption"? --Roland (disp.) 11:35, 26 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
      If something like that would be useful, it's fine with me. Maybe there ought to be a general caution somewhere, urging people who insert images to insert captions too. IacobusAmor 13:32, 26 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
        Please do add such a general caution to Vicipaedia:Imago#Ad imagines includendas. I like the idea of a template as well (but maybe we should make it a little less eye-catching and eye-hurting than {{Fontes carentes}} ;-) ) Greetings, --UV 15:02, 26 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Res publica Romana

emendavi paginam. Wtha do you think about it?--Massimo Macconi 20:27, 27 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Sancta Caecilia

Maybe you will not like that edit: [2] It seems that it was not you, who made this change. --Roland (disp.) 00:36, 29 Octobris 2006 (UTC)

  That's OK. It's a bizarrely sourced article anyway! (If I had time, I'd scrap it and start over.) IacobusAmor 17:40, 20 Novembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] de pronuntiatione Latina

Adnotationem tuam non intellego. Longitudo et vocalium et consonantium eodem modo iam significatae sunt, scilicet ː. usor:Bohmhammel, 23.31 h, 6 Idus Dec. 2006

## [recensere] Horch and Audi

Referring to [3]. Normally we do not translate company names but some companies do it themselves: Horch (germ.) = Audi (lat.). There is also a story behind it. --Rolandus 11:46, 17 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

  Then it would be useful for that little article to mention it. At the moment, the illustration doesn't illustrate anything specifically mentioned in the text. IacobusAmor 11:49, 17 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

    The German WP says for de:Horch: August Horch verließ seine Firma 1909 und gründete in Zwickau die Audi Automobilwerke GmbH („audi“ ist die Übersetzung des Firmennamens „Horch“ in das Lateinische. Der Imperativ Singular von audire (hören) lautet audi! (höre! oder eben horch!) Many years ago I heard that the daughter of Mr. Horch, told him about this and he chose "Audi" for the new company. You are right, this should be mentioned. Some sort of insider joke now. ;-) --Rolandus 11:59, 17 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] == Middle names ==

I believe that the middle names are used to differentiate Petrus Cosimi Medices from Petrus Laurentius Medices , recte Petrus Laurentii Medices (I have to correct it) (cfr. others wikis). They were not kings or dukes and therefore it's not possible to give them the names Piero Medici I and Piero Medici II. Historians use instead as middle names their fathers names (di Cosimo and di Lorenzo).--Massimo Macconi 20:40, 19 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

  This is plausible—but in his lifetime, was he called "Petrus Cosimi Medices"? I'd rather have expected "Petrus, filius Cosimi Medicis," or something like that. IacobusAmor 20:46, 19 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] deus/Deus

Well, in this case it is not just one religion for whom god represent a sense of the infinite, so I didn't want to capitalize it. Furthermore, I never capitalize it. I don't know the guy's name, so I don't see why we should capitalize the word we pick to describe him. In english maybe I can see it, but in latin?--Ioshus (disp) 15:16, 20 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

  Oh, OK. Then lowercase her! ;)
  Why not make the generality of this deus clearer by making it 'their god' or 'their supposed deity' or something like that? IacobusAmor 17:25, 20 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
    Well, I left it lowercase in the sentence "in rebus theologicis, infinitas fiat deus..." but took your capitalization in the part about in theologia Iudaea-Christiana, Deus est...". Maybe I could change the former to "infinitas aequet et videatur esse deum..."--Ioshus (disp) 17:38, 20 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
      Or "in rebus theologicis, infinitas fiat suprema entitas vel potestas vel virtus, quae theologiae professores Deus appellant." Or whatever. This issue doesn't excite me today. IacobusAmor 17:53, 20 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Aristarchus

His geographical epithet really is Samius, as I used on Astronomus. Note the number of google hits for "Aristarchus Samius" vs. "Aristarchus Samotrhacius" --Iustinus 21:01, 21 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

  Apparet fuisse duos Aristarchos:
    Aristarchus Samius, 310–c230
    Aristarchus Samothracius, c220–c143
  The latter is the one involved with Crates Mallotes. The similarity threw me for a moment too. IacobusAmor 02:48, 22 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Gratiae

Thank you for fixing my latin, as of yet it is abysmal- could I (in the future) bother you with some questions about latin? --BiT 15:47, 22 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

  Bother everybody! That's what we're here for! (However, it might be useful first to learn the difference between nominative & accusative case, and similar distinctions.) IacobusAmor 15:55, 22 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
    I know the diffrece between the two (I'm from Iceland, and icelandic has declensions so declining is easy for me). It was merely a rare lapse in judgment. --BiT 17:29, 22 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Consolus, ludi consolus

Is consolus OK? English "game console" is effectively "gaming console, console for gaming," but ludi consolus is more like "a game's console" (assuming consolus is a legitimate word). Somewhere a Neolatin site has a list of these words, but I don't have the URL at my fingertips. IacobusAmor 15:55, 22 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

  Hmmm... I tried googling "consolus + computer", "consolus + video", "consolus + game", "consolus + est"... I got things like "xboxicus", "video gamicus", etc... Nothing here] either.--Ioshus (disp) 16:42, 22 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
    The English noun console seems to have begun (in 1664) as an architectural term, referring to a projection from a plane (a wall or a keystone), forming a bracket on which an object might be placed. From there, it developed into the term for a case involving the works of an organ; and from there, it got extended to denote a panel or cabinet for controlling mechanical or electrical devices. It apparently comes directly from French, where it's been assumed to have developed from a word whose cognate in English is consolidate. So there's a clue. (Would consolidator work?) Alternatively & preferably, since console as an architectural term was in use in Europe in the 1600s, we'd expect to find a seventeenth-century Latin word for it—but where can we find it? IacobusAmor 17:25, 22 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
      Well assuming consolus is legitimate, I think declining "ludus" in genitive is ok. Genitive of quality i.e. Like "Day of wrath" (Diēs irae). Of course if there is a Latin word for console, that would be great- and I do know that it's not wikipedia's job to make up words, but if no other word exists.. --BiT 18:18, 22 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
        Barring anyone who can make 'consolus' legitimate, Modern Greek has it feminine: κονσόλα consŏla... in full κονσόλα παιχνιδιών (i.e. consola ludorum). —Myces Tiberinus 17:41, 23 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
        The modern Romance languages have it in feminine 'consola' too, judging from interwiki links (except apparently Italian). Where'd this weird second-declension form come from? —Myces Tiberinus 17:48, 23 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
          If to take consola, might we prefer dative consola ludis?--Ioshus (disp) 18:23, 23 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
            I would caution against using datives adjectivally. It does sometimes happen, but it's considered poor style unless you have some adjective governing the dative, e.g. consola ludis apta or destinata or whatever. I'd rather see a genitive, or better yet a pure adjective here. --Iustinus 19:32, 23 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

If it's of interest, there's a general case here: for noun-noun compounds in Germanic languages, Romance languages reverse the order of the nouns and insert a connecting word between them; so, where "x" is a connecting word, Germanic AB is Romance BxA. Example: English question mark vs. French point d'interrogation. The Romance equivalent in Latin could be with a genitive, the Genitive of Quality (A&G #345), which, as Iustinus points out, occurs only or usually with an adjective or a numeral; e.g., murus sedecim pedum, 'a sixteen-foot wall'. Maybe the Partitive Genitive is relevant here too. IacobusAmor 19:57, 23 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Ars convertendi verba Polynesiana in Linguam Latinam

In Latinizing Polynesian words, we face a grave problem: the final vowel of Polynesian nouns is almost invariably part of the ROOT of the word. In at least some attested words, the tradition has been to lop off such vowels when necessary for attaching Latin suffixes. Example: Polynesian Samoa yields the well-established Latin taxonomic adjective Samoensis, not Samoaensis. (With -ensis, other vowels appear to be exempt: Fijian Viti yields Vitiensis.) From the viewpoint of the Polynesian languages, this procedure may be puzzling. For some words ending in -a, like Samoa, a quick solution is to use the first- and second-declension suffixes: Samoanus, -a, -um. But constructing Latin nouns out of words whose ROOTS end in -e, -i, and -o will strongly jar indigenous phonologies. (I suppose nouns whose roots end in -u can be considered fourth-declension nouns.) I've confronted several examples in a new article, on Savaium,* which I wrote partly to test what solutions to the problem might "feel like." I'm not satisfied at all, but need to think further. Meanwhile, any suggestions? IacobusAmor 20:14, 23 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

- Which, by the way (at least for the moment), is more accurate & far more complete than the matching article in the English-language Wikipedia, to which I'd link it if I knew how. IacobusAmor 20:14, 23 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

Possible examples (some obvious, some problematic):

  Alofa'aga = Alofaaga, -ae, 1. <---But Samoan G is pronounced "ng."
  Asau = Asau, -us, 4.
  Auala = Auala, -ae, 1.
  Fa'asalele'aga = Faasaleleaga, -ae, 1. <---But Samoan G is pronounced "ng."
  Fa'ato'afe = Faatoafeus, -i, 2. (Personal name.) <---Hmmm.
  Falealupo = Falealupum, -i. <---This conversion looks weird (the O being part of the root).
  Matavanu = Matavanu, -us, 4.
  Moso = Mosus, -i, 2. <---This conversion looks weird (the O being part of the root).
  Mulinu'u = Mulinuum, -i, 2.
  Pagoa = Pagoa, -ae, 1. <---But Samoan G is pronounced "ng."
  Pumele'i: I avoided the problem by using an adjective, Pumeleianus, but the problem is still there.
  Sale'aula = Saleaula, -ae, 1.
  Salelologa = Salelologa, -ae, 1. <---But Samoan G is pronounced "ng."
  Savai'i = Savaium, -i, 2. <---Hmmm.
  Tafua, -ae, 1.
  Taoa, -ae, 1.

Does the double A in Faasaleleaga bother anybody? The G could be a problem: would Latinists prefer Alofaanga, Faasaleleanga, etc.? For words ending in -e, -i, and -o, would it be best to leave the nominative singular alone and to decline only the other cases? or to treat the whole @#$% word as indeclinable? IacobusAmor 20:37, 23 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

OK, now that I've spent a few hours keyboarding articles containing Polynesian words, I'm really not satisfied with turning names ending in -o into second-declension nouns. Saveasiuleus looks bizarre. I suppose some of these could become -o, -onis, 3. But which ones? all of them? For another model in -o, there's echo, echus, 4. Hmmm. IacobusAmor 03:28, 24 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] factorizatio

What's the right word? =] --Ioshus (disp) 22:53, 28 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

  Idaho, but I'd guess factor. My question, though, was about the word order, factorizatio cuius. I've started reading Latin Word Order: Structured Meaning & Information, by A. M. Devine and Laurence D. Stephens (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), which Santa Claus brought me—and there's a danger I'll soon be bristling with word-order quibbles. ;) IacobusAmor 22:58, 28 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
    "cuius factorizatio" probably better you're right. Where did Santa Claus find that book, out of curiosity? I have an Amazon gift certificate...--Ioshus (disp) 01:17, 29 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
      Via Amazon; but I found a bargain with a secondhand copy that has a negligible (one-inch) tear on one page. The book is heavy on linguistic theory & terminology ("If a phrase takes with it some element that it should have left behind when it raises, that is called piedpiping: cepit quam urbem? ---> quam urbem cepit?, where the interrogative piedpipes the noun although that is not part of the query but part of the presupposition," p. 29), but it's got many good examples on many subjects. I'll bring these forward as the occasions arise. IacobusAmor 01:39, 29 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Seeing as you're here...

For the article Lingua Cambriana I wanted to translate the sentence "Due to the increasing use of the English language the numbers of Welsh speakers had been declining for decades". And I got to "Lingua Anglica locuta, illa qui potest linguam cambrianam dicere" but when it came to saying "has been declining for decades" I didn't know how to say it. I don't even have the foggiest idea how to say "has been -ing" only "has been -ed" nor do I know how do say "for decades". Is there anyway you can help me? Thanks, Alexanderr 23:05, 28 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

    "Due to the increasing use of the E. language" = "Because use of the E. language had been increasing." + "The numbers of those who spoke W. had for decades [accusative of time during which] been declining." Sorry, that's all I can write right now: the dinner bell just rang! IacobusAmor 23:13, 28 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] Pro-vita

Iacobus, I am unsure of the original source of the quoted sentence on the pro-vita page but it is a translation a quoted sentence on the German wikipedia's article for Pro-life. The original sentence reads "für den Schutz des menschlichen Lebens in allen seinen Phasen von der Zeugung bis zum natürlichen Tod einsetzen". That said I remember reading a similar mission goal in English or at least think I do :) Alexanderr 05:27, 29 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Do you have any new contributions to my last question. I still don't know how to say "has been -ing" in latin :P

  Alexandre, render "has been -ing" by the present tense, with an appropriate adverb and/or the length of the duration in the accusative:
    Multos iam annos hic domicilium habeo.
    I've now been living here for many years.
  Bradley's Arnold adds (#181): "Since the Latin Perfect cannot express 'I have been doing' . . . , the Romans used the Present in its continuous sense and expressed the idea of the past by the adverbs iampridem, iamdiu, iamdudum. . . . Similarly, since the Latin Pluperfect cannot express 'I had been doing,' the Romans used the Imperfect (a continuous tense of past time) with the adverbs iampridem, etc." It has a note that "Greek and French have a similar idiom: palai legw. Depuis longtemps je parle." Happy New Year! IacobusAmor 05:13, 31 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

## [recensere] sol deus

I forget where we were talking about Sol Deus and the possibility of two nouns in latin, but is this another example?--Ioshus (disp) 13:28, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

  Almost—but here, the second part of Aqua Virgo resembles a proper name or a brand name: 'the aqueduct that's named "Virgo"'. To my ear, this pattern resembles that of Aetna mons and Rhenum flumen (and, for that matter, Antiques Roadshow, the roadshow named "Antiques"). So in Aqua Virgo, both terms decline. But Coca-Cola doesn't work that way: it's not a cola that's named "Coca": it's a cola that's named "Coca-Cola." The whole entity is the trademark, and trademarks are legally adjectives. (I'm not making this up: it's the law!) So we're always supposed to say something like "a Coca-Cola soft drink," just as the law requires us to say something like "a Kleenex facial tissue," not merely "a Kleenex." (Believe it or not, copyeditors enforce this law in print.) The reason we can say "an aspirin" instead of, say, "an Aspirin analgesic medicament," and "an escalator" instead of "an Escalator moving stairway," and "linoleum" instead of "Linoleum canvas flooring" is that the owners of those trademarks failed to take the legal steps to stop us from turning their adjectives into nouns. So, to refine my prior question: what are some examples of double-barreled adjectives in Latin? IacobusAmor 15:57, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Christopher Benfey

This article is ligitimate and real and should not be deleted. 159.250.23.2 14:59, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

  Well, legitimacy and reality are not the only criteria necessary. --Iustinus 15:18, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
    It's apparently trying to say: "Christopher Benfey is an English-teacher. He has written many books about America of the fourteenth century. He lives in Amherst." (But it postposes est for no reason and ignores the locative case.) If it's a legitimate encyclopedia article, perhaps it needs the tiro marker, or something new, equivalent to "this article has been written for nine-year-olds." Or maybe there should be a separate Vicipaedia for kids. IacobusAmor 15:21, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
    Like Simple English? Latina simplex? I quote from Ecce: "In pictura est Vicipaedia, nomine simplex"--Ioshus (disp) 15:32, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
      See my comments at the disputatio page. It does look like the article has a genuine claim to legitimacy. But it's a substub, and even the English version needs a lot of work. --Iustinus 15:27, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
            I have created Vicipaedia:Gravitas to discuss relevance. --Rolandus 17:09, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
  By english teacher it is meant professor. My friend wrote this durring class.-159.250.23.2 20:28, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
    Do you want to keep this page or was it just a joke? Or was it a joke and now you want to keep this page? --Rolandus 20:53, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
      I would like you to keep this page and it was never a joke in the first place. My user name on wikipedia is Vcelloho. -159.250.23.2 21:52, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
        Vcelloho, what about having a user here as well? ;-) --Rolandus 21:56, 12 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
          done. -Vcelloho 03:09, 13 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
            Thanks, I have added a note to page Christopher Benfey. I hope we will read more about Mr. Benfey there. ;-) --Rolandus 07:57, 13 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] cau

it never ends...--Ioshus (disp) 19:49, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

  And have you searched for Unitae, Unitas, Unitis, Unitum? Aiiieeee! IacobusAmor 19:50, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
    I am Ahab.--Ioshus (disp) 22:45, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
      We still have about 70 pages linking to "Civitates Americae Unitae" … --UV 23:36, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
        Like hell we do! =] --Ioshus (disp) 02:19, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
      Yes I made a dent earlier. Ghastly and boring stuff that.--Ioshus (disp) 23:46, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
        Iterum dico: Ego sum Ahab!--Ioshus (disp) 02:19, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
          It's worse than you think, because there was only one white whale, but the unitae thing keeps coming back to life with new contributors! IacobusAmor 05:11, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
            Worse is USA USAe, which I have seen a couple of times (especially from Europeans). When those creep into Wikipedia they are harder to search for! --Iustinus 06:16, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
              I suppose that's [ūsa, ūsae], much as Americans render NATO as [neitou] (or, in parts of the upper Midwest, [neito:]).

## [recensere] Archibaldus

When you want to link to other Wikipedias, you have to look up the pages and praefix them with the language codes, like [[en:Archibald]]. --Rolandus 21:01, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

  And if you want to link to something in line of text put a colon in front of the language prefix like this: [[:en:Archibaldus]] which will put old Archie right in your sentence.--Ioshus (disp) 22:43, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
  notice the slightly different blue color, too--Ioshus (disp) 22:44, 14 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Septimania et archaeologia

Gratias tibi ago, pro contritionis et correctionis. Semper erro litteras duplas (divissa, appellata...) --Medievalista 13:52, 22 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

  It may help to learn the pronunciation. Latin had two i-vowels: a long vowel, [i], and a short vowel, approximating [ɨ]: so divisa is pronounced [divisa], but divissa would sound quite different: [divɨssa]. If you're spelling the word divissa, you're probably shortening the "i" to [ɨ] and lengthening the "s." Good luck! IacobusAmor 13:33, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
    [ɨ]? I've never seen that reconstruction. But note that unlike Italian, Latin is perfectly capable of having a long vowel in a closed syllable. --Iustinus 18:44, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
      Maybe not exactly, but something approaching it, in my interpretation of W. Sidney Allen's chart & discussion; here's part of his evidence: "The qualitative similarity of short i and long ē is also illustrated from early times by the tendency of inscriptions to write e for short i and i for long ē, e.g. trebibus, menus, minsis for tribibus, minus, mēnsis; and by the frequent use of Greek ε to render Latin short i, e.g. Λεπεδος, κομετιον, Δομετιος, Τεβεριος = Lepidus, comitium, Domitius, Tiberius" (p. 49). I take this to mean that the difference between Latin long i and short i is somewhat like the difference between the vowels of English teen and tin. Others may of course disagree. IacobusAmor 19:47, 23 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
        Well, yes, but the vowel in English tin is [ɪ]. [ɨ] is rather the sound of Russian ы. Well, at least in IPA. I can't speak to the NOrth American System, which may well use the symbol ɨ that way. --Iustinus 19:59, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Reykjavík

I had pondered about what Iceland's capital (Reykjavík) would be called in Latin. The gymnasium of Reykjavík is called [Sigillum] Schola[e] Reykjavicensis (I got it from the school's coat of arms- so I leave the "sigillum" part in, if I had made any mistakes). How would the name be in nominative (as I am new to Latin I can only gather that 'Reykjavicensis' is in the third declension- but that's about it)? --BiT 20:44, 22 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

  Well, Reykjavicensis is a nominative adjective, not a noun (and, if it is used here should alter j=>i, so Reykiavicensis). As for the noun of the capital, it shouldn't be too hard to find. Iceland is not so new that people didn't write about it in latin =]. I'll see what I can find.--Ioshus (disp)

## [recensere] Vetus Testamentum

You can edit the formula on formula:Vetus Testamentum, ciao--Massimo Macconi 13:30, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

I had to correct myself the formula (I forgot actually the orthodoxe churches). I hope that now also the language is correct. Could you please check it? Thank you--Massimo Macconi 19:58, 24 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Recaredus

Ita vero, pater Recaredi fuit Liuvigildus, qui arianus erat. Arianus est ille qui Haeresiam Arii credidit!--Medievalista 14:04, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

  Fair enough, but what do you mean by "quod" here (fuit Christianus quod pater erat haereticus)? IacobusAmor 14:14, 25 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
    It is just quod as a conjunction: because, simply explaining the facte that he was the first catholic king because his father was an Arian
      That's what I thought it meant, but it's illogical in any language : "X was the first Episcopalian in the family because his father was a Baptist" ; "Y was the first president because his father was a farmer" : there's no logical connection between the ideas. Not all men whose fathers were Arians were the first Catholic king. IacobusAmor 21:00, 4 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Sgt Peppers Lonely hearts club band

See Disputatio_Usoris:Leo_rain#Sgt_Peppers_Lonely_hearts_club_band and Disputatio_Usoris:Rolandus#ITA_EST_ROLANDE. --Rolandus 20:53, 4 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Gratias

Thanks for voting for me, IacobusAmor. I hope I'll justify your confidence. A nd rew D alby 21:07, 5 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Quick (hopefully) Question

Iacobus, I was told by Iustinus & Ioshus how "that" as in "I thought that" but they didn't get too involved with how to use verbs other than esse, so I wanted to know if this is right. To say "it was said that they were broken" providing that the they is feminine would be "dictus est eas fractas sint", right? If not can you explain. Thanks, Alexanderr 05:25, 7 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

  Not quite. What you need to look up is oratio obliqua (indirect discourse). The basic idea is that, in reported speech, the subject and any complement are accusative, and the verb is infinitive. However, there's a complication: the Romans treated the passives of simple verbs of saying & thinking personally—which led to a slightly different construction, for which Bradley's Arnold's example is Dicitur Cicero consul fuisse, Cicero is said to have been consul. The active forms dicunt, ferunt, tradunt go with accusative & infinitive. So you can say Dicitur eae fractae fuisse or Dicunt eas fractas fuisse, and (more commonly with compound verbs) Dictum est eas fractas fuisse, but you can't say Dictus est eas fractas sint. HTH. IacobusAmor 05:47, 7 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
    Thank you for your answer. It was really helpful, and I'll be sure to look up oratio obliqua. Alexanderr 06:00, 7 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Roman Catholic Church

Iacobus, I usually just use "Catholic Church", however you seem to prefer to use the name "Roman Catholic Church" for one reason or another, however the Catholic Church also includes several smaller sui iuris Eastern Rite Churchs, such as the Maronite Church located in Lebanon. And thus for the most part the Catholic Church only uses "Roman" when discussing the Latin Rite Church in particular - for example when discussing the age of reason, a concept not in the Eastern Rite Churchs. So the point I'm trying to make is by using Ecclesia Catholica Romana all the time you are basically saying only according to the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church - and thereby excluding all the Eastern Churchs which are bound to accept the same dogmas, as encyclicals, being members of the same Church. So either we'll have to leave of Romana or if you prefer use something like "Ecclesia Catholica Romana et sua Ecclesiae Rituales Occidentales" which'd be a bit long, but still good. Alexanderr 04:58, 8 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Fiction

I do not think we should delete fiction. For several reasons. The main reason: Such articles do not hurt and some people like them. I mean, "fiction" should not be the reason to delete an article. --Rolandus 20:37, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

  Texts should be truthful. "X is a student in Y School" in this case is a lie: it's a statement that X is a person, alive, and Y is a school, one that exists. Perhaps an author whose mind is so young as not to understand this point shouldn't be writing encyclopedias. Harrumph. ::winkwink:: IacobusAmor 20:48, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
    You're right, of course. An encyclopaedia shouldn't say a thing is if it isn't. However, like Rolandus, I'm doubtful about deletion as the answer.
    In French you could just change the verbs to conditionals and it would be fine. In Latin I suppose we could make old Ioanna Rowling the subject, give her a scripsit, and change the verbs to infinitives? A nd rew D alby 20:54, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
      Iacobus, I understand what you mean and your arguments are right. But we should be nicer. I guess the author has problems with Latin and does not really believe that this school exists in the real world. Maybe he has just forgotten to use a {{tiro}}. We should avoid this {{delenda}} when there are other solutions. We might rate the article bad in several aspects and give the author a chance to come back and improve the article or ask for help. We should have templates which tell this. When the author does not care about the article and nobody else cares about the article, ok, it might be deleted after some time. I am just trying to be as nice as possible. I think this will be good for us in the long run ... even if we might have some very bad pages for some time. --Rolandus 21:08, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
        Re: "I guess the author has problems with Latin."—As the en: article most excellently cited below by Iustines implies, inept writers have a similar problem with writing in their native language. So one suspects that, with our young & artless authors, the fault, dear Rolande, lies not in their Latinity, but in themselves ; and there's little we can do about it other than tidy up after them. IacobusAmor 22:09, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

Here's what en: does: Wikipedia:Manual of Style (writing about fiction) --Iustinus 21:21, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

  Interesting. I hadn't seen that en:Template:In-universe in use. A nd rew D alby 21:44, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
    Good alternative for {{delenda}} in this case! We should avoid {{delenda}} where possible. It is not nice. Our templates should explain the problem and we should have a policy for each problem. However, the policy might say that the page will be deleted after xx weeks. "delenda" is not the problem, it is the solution ... when we do not have a better option for the page. --Rolandus 21:59, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Latinitas

Iacobus, what about this: Formula:Latinitas#Another_try? --Rolandus 14:29, 11 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Falealupo (movere)

For the renaming of a page see Vicipaedia:movere. --Rolandus 20:58, 13 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

  Still it seems clumsy. Why is there no way simply to rename the title of a page? By contrast, renaming subtitles (subheads, within pages) is easy. IacobusAmor 21:28, 13 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Tangaloa

I put in the link to ru: You should be able to add these links simply by copy-paste from an edit screen on the English Wikipedia -- does that not work for you? At the same time as doing that, one can add the link to la:, which I have also done in this case. They say it's important (but I must admit I have been known to forget it!) A nd rew D alby 09:43, 14 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

  Thanks, Andrew! I tried something like that, but it didn't work ; maybe I got distracted in the middle of the process. If you glanced at en: and the others, you'll have noticed that la:'s article is the most comprehensive in the wikis. Now I'm looking for an illustration ; the one in en: doesn't seem at all apt. IacobusAmor 12:45, 14 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
    Yes, it's nice when Vicipaedia becomes the definitive source. A nd rew D alby 13:19, 14 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
      Yeah, my friend I said I would show the article to also requested an illustration ;) --Iustinus 14:50, 14 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
        Actually, how about this one? At least it seems better than what en: has for the time being. --Iustinus 15:03, 14 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
          Looks like it might be aptest for an article on gods in general. I've copied it to an expert on the subject of ancient Polynesian art, with a general request for references to illustrations of Tangaloa. Objects known as "stick gods" also come from East Polynesia outside Aotearoa (New Zealand), but being sure about what they formerly designated is a tricky business, as their main collectors were missionaries, who sometimes mutilated them and didn't always get their identifications right in the first place. ¶ Meanwhile, I've received an authoritative reference from a scholar of another Polynesian outlier, and shall add a paragraph after he's approved its translation. (I need to know what his published article means by "cosmological" and other concepts) IacobusAmor 15:54, 14 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] significet

Compare the english...

1. This means that or that.
2. This may mean that or that / this can mean that or that.

In my head, it has always sounded like the second one. So i'm the one to blame, you could say...--Ioshus (disp) 15:45, 15 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

  OK: I blame you! As for me, I hear it indicatively: "This means A & B & C (and maybe D & E, but we're not bothering to mention them)." I hear the subjunctive as saying something more like "Let this mean A & B & C" and so on. But it's a small point. Maybe a native speaker will someday arise and choose for us. IacobusAmor 17:16, 15 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Didacus Roderici filius

I took the quote from the Spanish wikipedia. The date is correct, because it is not an AD date, it is an Aera Hispanica date!--Xaverius 14:32, 19 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

  I was well aware of that, but how many of your readers are going to be? Note that Ioshus has fixed the problem, though he should have put the fix in (square) brackets instead of (curved) parentheses. IacobusAmor 14:58, 19 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Disputatio:Theoria musicae

What do you think?--Ioshus (disp) 02:04, 20 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] thumb

There needs be the tag |thumb in the string of an image for the caption to work. Compare:

[[Imago:Bresaola-Valt-IGP.jpg‎|200px|right|Bresaola]]

and then

[[Imago:Bresaola-Valt-IGP.jpg‎|200px|right|thumb|Bresaola]]

Bresaola

--Ioshus (disp) 18:50, 3 Martii 2007 (UTC)

  PS, the image means nothing more than that I'm hungry. =] --Ioshus (disp) 18:51, 3 Martii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] est grex est

Error fuit meus... in anIMo habui movere est ad frontem gregis, at impressi ctrl + c loco ctrl + x...--Ioshus (disp) 00:36, 13 Martii 2007 (UTC)

  Ioshe, UBI habuisti movere est ad frontem gregis??? ;-) --UV 09:05, 13 Martii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] columnae duae

In disputatione Andreae nuntium posui quod ad te magis pertinet: rogavisti de columnis duabus in fontum partibus:

     <div class="references-small" style="-moz-column-count: 2; column-count: 2;">
     <references/>
     </div>

Vide Infinitas#Fontes. Ave, nunc!--Ioshus (disp) 17:19, 19 Martii 2007 (UTC)

  Well, but this effect is just what I was trying to avoid:
    Pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idam
    pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate
    pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya
    pūrṇam evāvasiṣyate
    Quae est Latine conversa:
    Plenum illud, plenum hoc ;
    ex pleno plenum tollitur.
    Cum pleni plenum aufertur
    plenum quidem manebit.
  By my lights, setting translations of poetry in parallel columns is more effective typography. IacobusAmor 17:56, 19 Martii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] thinsp

Iacobe, why do you add thinsp before some semicolons? I haven't noticed anyone else doing it. It must do something nice on your browser, I guess, but on mine (Firefox) it makes a very wide space, a real big gap in the text. Might there be a work-round? Andrew Dalby 18:40, 21 Martii 2007 (UTC)

  If the 'thin space' character is making a wide space, there might be a bug in the font you're using. It should be a thin space, or if unavailable in that font, an ordinary-sized one. —Mucius Tever 10:48, 22 Martii 2007 (UTC)
    You must be right. I find that with Opera I get a normal space, but with IE, Firefox and Netscape I get a very wide space. Evidently others don't -- and since my fonts work well in every other way, it's not worth playing with: I'll just accept the wide spaces in the pages that Iacobus has edited! But I'm still curious as to why you add these thinspaces, Iacobe. Is it something we all need to be doing? In what circumstances? Andrew Dalby 12:43, 22 Martii 2007 (UTC)
      It's just a semiexperiment to improve the typography. In most books published before World War II, printers inserted a thin space to the left of semicolons, colons, exclamation points, and question marks. After midcentury, something happened to change that ; my guess is that it was the rise of automatic machinery using fonts designed by nonprinters. (Compare, in another domain, Word's defaults, which seem to have been designed by nonwriters.) As a result, people are now unfamiliar with the elegance of well-set type. In some fonts, combinations of certain letters with unspaced punctuation marks are hard to read ; for example, an "r" plus an unspaced ";" (i.e., "r;") may be almost indistinguishable from an "r" plus a "," (i.e., "r,"). Certainly "...r;" is harder to read in a hurry, especially in smallish type, than "...r ;" (or so it seems to me). In the French-speaking world (and Canada?), space to the left of those punctuation marks widened, and it survived on typewriters as a full space. To my eye, that's too much, but it stands as proof of divergent evolution from a common aesthetic & concern. If people prefer, I won't add thinspaces (except in numbers with more than three digits), as they're more a matter of aesthetics & tradition than anything else. ¶ Is it possible for an administrator to make systemwide typographic changes? If so, there's no necessity for individuals to be typographically finicky about the pages they edit. ¶ FYI : with the colon after language-names in parentheses, I've resisted adding thinspaces. The presence of that colon seems questionable to me : all it's doing is following a usually one-word adverb, and we seldom otherwise have cause to insert colons after such adverbs ; but it's the established style, so I've gone along with it. IacobusAmor 13:30, 22 Martii 2007 (UTC)
    On that last point, I quite agree with you: the colon seems unnecessary to me.
    Very interesting, thanks. Yes, indeed, I have noticed the French habit; since my computer, and some of my software, is bought in France, Word occasionally starts thinking I'm typing French and puts in the spaces before the colons whether I like it or not. Well, if I'm the only one who has the problem -- and it's hardly a problem after all! -- don't change your practice, Iacobe. I was just curious, really. Andrew Dalby 14:28, 22 Martii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Savo

paginam discretivam creavit. Vale--Massimo Macconi 10:20, 24 Martii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Ars Germanistica

Ex Anglico Vicipaedia:
In English the terms Germanistics or Germanics are sometimes used, but the subject is more often referred to as German studies, German language and literature, or German philology.

Ergo Germanistik/Germanistics = ars Germanistica? --Alex1011 14:32, 27 Martii 2007 (UTC)

  So you see why the term jolts a native English-speaker. It's the double suffix -istus + -icus = -isticus that I wondered about. Germanistic can apply only to Germanists. I suppose then we could have Anglisticus (what Anglicists are) and Italisticus (what Italicists are) and such, and wonder if similar terms are attested. Hellenisticus 'pertaining to Hellenists' presumably is. IacobusAmor 17:46, 27 Martii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Disputatio:Scaccarium

Iacobe amice, inspician hunc nexum? Volo scire quod significasti.--Ioshus (disp) 12:59, 28 Martii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Legio (urbs)

Dear IacobusAmor

Excuse me, but I don't read your objections until yesterday. I reply in Spanish because I writed my text in Spanish.

in viam est?

Está en la Vía Jacobea, dentro de la Vía Jacobea, forma parte de la Vía Jacobea, y no circula por la Vía Jacobea, no tiene sentido de movimiento sino de pertenencia y creo que debe de ir en acusativo via, ea = viam.

ad ostios?

Junto a la desembocadura. Ad = junto a. Near to

nominem?

Lleva su nombre. «Su nombre» es complemento directo y va en acusativo ¿no?

genuinam?

Es considerada la «genuina» fundadora de la ciudad. Voz pasiva. «Genuina» es complemento directo y va en acusativo ¿no?

archaeoligia antiqui est?

occupata? Fue ocupada. Voz pasiva. occupata... est

considertur? Es considerada. Voz pasiva.

in urbem permanent? En la ciudad quedan = Dentro de la ciudad permanecen.

sub Romam? Es un error, mejor «ab Roman».

I try not to abuse verb sum, and to use verbs more precise.

The text in Spanish is this:

«Ciudad española perteneciente a la comunidad autónoma de Castilla y León. Se sitúa en la desembocadura de los ríos Bernesga y Torío. Es punto clave en el itinerario del Camino de Santiago.

La ciudad fue fundada en el siglo de nuestra era, una placa la data el 10 de junio del año 68, aunque la arqueología está descubriendo restos de ocupación más antiguos.

Su origen, en la Hispania Citerior, está en un campamento de la Legio VI, que posteriormente fue ocupado por la Legio VII Gemina Felix Pia, a la cual se le considera la auténtica fundadora de la ciudad, y por eso lleva su nombre.

Quedan en la ciudad pocos restos romanos pero, al parecer, tenía un fuerte carácter militar, ya que su cometido era asegurar las calzadas por donde se transportaba el oro desde Las Médulas hasta Roma. El resto romano más claro de la ciudad es su plano, marcado por el contorno de la muralla, y la calle ancha, que coincide con el antiguo decumano.

En el siglo VI fue conquistada por el rey godo Leovigildo, y entró a formar parte de su reino.

En el año 712 fue conquistada por los musulmanes, pero el dominio musulmán dura muy poco, y pronto queda abandonada».

P.D.: If you have some suggestion I will thank you. --Pastranus 11:18, 1 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

### [recensere] Respuestas

Amigo, gracias por las preguntas. Trataré de responder en español :

in viam est? ←El caso acusativo aquí es imprudente ; mejor es est in via o in via est.

ad ostios? ←La forma es imposible porque el sustantivo ostium es neutro.

Junto a la desembocadura. Ad = junto a. Near to ←Sí, pero recuerde que el significado fundamental de ad es 'movimiento hacia'. Busca estas palabras útiles : iuxta y prope.

nominem? ←La forma es imposible porque el sustantivo nomen es neutro.

Lleva su nombre. «Su nombre» es complemento directo y va en acusativo ¿no? ←Sí, pero la forma nominem es imposible.

genuinam? ←Es incorrecto porque el sustantivo conditorem es masculino.

«Genuina» es complemento directo y va en acusativo ¿no? ←Sí, pero genuinam es femenino.

archaeoligia antiqui est? ←Mal deletreado—y imposible porque antiqui y archaeologia no se concuerdan.

occupata? Fue ocupada. Voz pasiva. occupata... est ←(1) La frase "Suus origo" es incorrecto porque el adjetivo Suus es masculino, y el nombre origo, aunque sea masculino en español, es femenino en latín. (2) La declaración "origo, . . . quae deinde occupata . . . est" es tontería porque no se puede ocupar un origen.

considertur? Es considerada. Voz pasiva. ←Sí, pero es mal deletreado (el infinitivo es considerare, y entonces el tema es considera-, no consider-) ; además, palabras más aptas son fertur y habetur.

in urbem permanent? En la ciudad quedan = Dentro de la ciudad permanecen. ←Sí, pero considera : están in urbe, pero van in urbem. ¿Entiendes la diferencia?

sub Romam? Es un error, mejor «ab Roman». ←No, no, no : esta palabra Roman es imposible. Los hombres están sub Roma o van sub Romam. Así como así, por "hasta Roma" en la oración "se transportaba el oro hasta Roma," no se usa alguna preposición, pero se dice simplemente Romam, y esta declaración completa es aurum Romam transportabant (o transportaverunt).

Creo que debes estudiar la diferencia entre el caso ablativo y el caso acusativo. Por nosotros anglófonos, estas preposiciones son fáciles porque nuestra palabra in usualmente pide al ablativo latín, y nuestra palabra into pide al acusativo, pero ambos sentidos en español necesitan la misma preposición (en). Igualmente on y onto; en español, ambos también piden a en (o otras palabras, como encima de y sobre). Espero que estas respuestas te ayuden. Sin embargo, hay en el texto otros errores, que no he mencionado (e.g., ab Romam). IacobusAmor 14:24, 1 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

#### [recensere] Correcciones

Estimado IacobusAmor

Gracias por las correcciones, y por ayudarme a hacer un buen texto. Algunos de los errores se deben a que hablo en español, por ejemplo genuinam lo puse en femenino porque en español concuerda con legio (de hecho concuerda con legio genuina fundadora).

  OK, pero no te entiendo, porque la palabra español fundador es masculino, y no hay esta palabra, fundadora, en latín. IacobusAmor 19:33, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
    En español fundador/fundadora es un adjetivo y puede ir en masculino o femenino, que significa el que funda o la que funda, y luego está el verbo fundar. Claro en latín conditor, conditoris es sustantivo y de ahí mi error. --Pastranus 11:59, 13 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

No sé si habré resuelto bien todos los errores. En archaeoligia... antiqui est he puesto archaeologia... antiquis est. No sé si está bien.

No comparto la segunda objeción de occupata (La declaración "origo, . . . quae deinde occupata . . . est" es tontería porque no se puede ocupar un origen). La frase dice: Sua origo, ..., in castris Legioni VI Victix est, quae deinde occupata ab Legione VII Gemina Felice Pia est. Son dos frases: el origen está en un castro, y el cual fue ocupado.

  Sí, pero en la frase quae . . . occupata . . . est, la palabra quae es femenina, y no hay antecedente feminino con exceptión de origo. Entonces, la sentencia dice "origo . . . occupata est"—que es imposible. Si quieres decir que ocuparon el fuerte, tienes que decir quae . . . occupata sunt—y ahora ¡quae es neutro! IacobusAmor 19:33, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

Ab Roman. Creía que había que poner la preposición cuando se decía desde... hasta..., ex... ab... Desde Las Médulas hasta Roma.

  "Hasta Roma" = Romam. Tal vez la palabra Roman sea un "typo" (error tipográfico). IacobusAmor 19:33, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

La diferencia de in e into en inglés aclara más las cosas que las explicaciones en español que he encontrado para el uso de in en latín.

Muchas gracias. Procuraré escribir poco texto cada vez para que no sea molestia corregirme.

  De nada, amigo. ¡Buena suerte! IacobusAmor 19:33, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

P.D.: "clerus" et "cortes" I find this works in http://catholic.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/words.exe --Pastranus 09:39, 7 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Scores

Scin tu, Iacobe, modum rectum "musical score" appellandi?--Ioshus (disp) 17:59, 3 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

  The idea of a musical score (which temporally aligns all polyphonic parts in a single system) has been common for only the past few hundred years, so the concept is new, but the term could be old: is something wrong with notatio (scilicet musicalis)? Alternatively, German Partitur and Italian partitura offer an idea: partitura, -ae, f. Would that work? IacobusAmor 18:11, 3 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
    Interesting... http://lysy2.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/words.exe?partitura Notatio seems safer to me, but maybe substantivized, notata?--18:14, 3 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Franci

Thanks for following me up, I only had a specific task in mind... to assess the usefulness of {{in progressu}}, and didn't even read the rest of the article. As I said, I appreciate it.--Ioshus (disp) 03:53, 7 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

  You're welcome. Checking multiple articles for one inconsistency is a perfectly respectable practice. Who wouldn't do it sometimes? I didn't read all of Franci either, but the ease with which I found grammatical errors (not the one triggered by your emendation) led me to believe that others probably lurk in passages I didn't read, so the Latinitas might be rated at -1 or -2 or so. IacobusAmor 13:44, 7 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Praemium

Gratulationes, Iacobe! Propositus est praemio Stella Constantiae. Vide Vicipaedia:Praemia Vicipaedianis --Xaverius 18:58, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] cap(p)ella

Ad notam: In dictionario Langenscheidt invenio "cap(p)ella", "capellanus", "capellus". In Smith-Hall "capella" (chapel). --Alex1011 19:52, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

  Meum dictionarium dicit capella solum esse (Anglice) 'she-goat', 'a statue so-called' (by Cicero), and 'a star on the left shoulder of the constellation Auriga'. All seem to be a diminutive : caper + (u)la. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary derives English 'chapel' from Modern Latin cappella [sic] and then derives that from Medieval Latin cappa 'cloak'. So it would seem that we have a genuine minimal-pair distinction here between capella 'she-goat' and cappella 'chapel'. Of course my corrections could be wrong, and vicipaediaists should bring any other pertinent evidence to bear on the question. IacobusAmor 20:24, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
    Gratias ago. --Alex1011 20:30, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

      1. Words has capella, capellae N (1st) F [FEXDE] Medieval lesser chapel; choir; [a capella => unaccompanied (song); ~ magister => choirmaster]; she-goat; meteor type; star in constellation Auriga (rising in rainy season); dirty fellow, old goat; man with a goat-like beard; body odor;
      2. Words has cappella, cappellae N (1st) F [FEXDE] Medieval lesser chapel; choir; [a capella => unaccompanied (song); ~ magister => choirmaster];
      3. {{PONS-SS}} has capella (A): 1) goat 2) constellation
      4. {{PONS-SS}} has capella (B): 1) chapel 2) clergy
      5. {{PONS-SS}} has capellanus (capella): chaplain
      6. {{PONS-SS}} does not have "cappella"
      7. de:a cappella (pp!) says: 1) "In historischen Schriften des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts wird a capella in der Regel nur mit einem p geschrieben." 2) "A capella [...] Johann Gottfried Walther: Musikalisches Lexikon 1732, Seite 4." 3) "A capella, alla capella [...] (F. A. Brockhaus: Allgemeine Deutsche Real-Encyklopädie für die gebildeten Stände. 1851 Leipzig. 1. Band, Seite 85)"
      --Rolandus 21:00, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
        OLD autem dicit:
        1. capella ~ae, f. [caper + la]]
           1. she goat
           2. star in the constellation Auriga
        As it only has words from classical writing, neither cappa nor cappella is in there.
        Traupman gives the same two definitions for capella. He does not have cappella and he says sacellum for "chapel". My hunch is with Iacobus here. Cappella was definitely derived from cappa. That we see it as capella sometimes is erroneous.--Ioshus (disp) 21:12, 11 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

What's with Germans? Since PONS is German, and Walther was German, and German takes the Latin with one P into its compound Kapellmeister, one begins to wonder if we haven't once again hit upon a divide between Germans (a la several contributors with their postposed est, and of course the pope, with his encyclical Deus Caritas Est) and the rest of us, or (throwing in the Finns) between Central & East Europeans and the rest of us. Maybe it's something about the pedagogy. ¶ In any event, the Italian & English eurodance, house, and techno band that flourished in the early 1990s was indisputably known as Cappella. IacobusAmor 03:25, 12 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

  The German wikip article is "A cappella" as Rolandus mentioned, but explaining that it is often written in later centuries with only one P. On the other side US "Smith-Hall" perhaps under Germanic influence in the 19th century, has only capella for chapel. By the way, why is chapel written with only one P? --Alex1011 06:58, 12 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
    According to Merriam-Webster, because it reflects Old French chapele. Or maybe it's because English is a Germanic language. ::winkwink:: ¶ Seriously though, if the Medieval Latin = cappa, why didn't the French become chappelle? Modern French appears to be chapelle, but a search at Google turns up numerous French personal names and placenames spelled chappelle. A puzzlement! IacobusAmor 09:54, 12 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
      It's because Old French was spelt more or less phonetically, and double consonants in Latin had become single consonants in Old French. So "chapele" was a sensible phonetic spelling. Later, in the 16th century especially, people began to reintroduce in spelling the extra consonants that had existed in Latin -- but this was a spelling-game and never consistent. Hence there are some names that have the double -p-. Andrew Dalby 12:03, 23 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] =D

Thanks for catching (one of) my mistakes. I swear, I know more Latin than it seems! Agriope 02:35, 15 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] hypallage

Iacobe amice, possis recordari locos classicos quibus exempla hypallagae inveniam? Si vitem, nolo Aeneidem aperire vel adhibere. Gratias!--Ioshus (disp) 01:38, 23 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

  Eheu! obliviscor! (And why has my Star of Steadfastness stopped rotating?!) IacobusAmor 03:11, 23 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
    Mi videtur etiam volvi...--Ioshus (disp) 04:52, 23 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Carabao

Gratias ago. Thanks for your insights and improvements. I'll study up on the verb-noun gender agreement.--Jondel 13:30, 4 Maii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Perthia Amboi

Gratias tibi ago, Iacobe, pro tuo auxilio in meis paginis, propitim recentissime paginae "Perthia Amboi". Salve! Rafaelgarcia 00:58, 10 Maii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Alicia in Terra Mirabili

On this page you asked: "Which reminds me has this work been Latinized?" Yes: 1964. Alicia in Terra Mirabili (Alice's Adventures in Wonderland) tr. Clive Harcourt Carruthers. [4] -- Secundus Zephyrus 04:29, 11 Maii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] De Cratete Mallota

Fabullus Iacobo s.p.d. In pagina a te creata de Cratete Mallota scripsisti: "Traditur excogitasse globum qui terram in pilae modum exhibuisset ("Geophysical Earth" 2005:18)." Non teneo quid vis cum parenthesi "Geophysical Earth" 2005:18. Ceterum id factum nobis tradidit Strabo in Geographia 2.5.10, ut nunc in pagina legi potest. An huius facti alii sint auctores, nescio. Vale, --Fabullus 12:26, 11 Maii 2007 (UTC)

  Gratias, Fabulle. "Geophysical Earth" 2005:18" est pagina in magazina Scientific American (auctoris nomen nescio). Vide bibliographiam. IacobusAmor 17:55, 13 Maii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Sorry...

for the edit conflict yesterday, next time I will wait much longer... --Amphitrite 18:48, 20 Maii 2007 (UTC)

  No big problem in this case, as I lost only about five minutes of work. In general, it may be best to wait an hour or two before editing a text that someone else has been working on. IacobusAmor 19:09, 20 Maii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Praemium

Gratus sum ob praemium quod me dedisti! Nunc debeo praemio honorare cum pluris paginis (pluris fortasse, sed cum bona latinitate)!--Xaverius 08:32, 22 Maii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Res Novae

Iacobus please see my question at Disputatio:Res novae#What does Res Novae mean#novae res ~ res novae?. Did your quote on Casesar's word order from Devine & Stephens pertain to "res nova" or "res novae"? Is "res nova" a typo?--Rafaelgarcia 01:04, 23 Maii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Trenchcoats

Ok you helped me on the translation of sunglasses (umbrae, which I think is a great translation), but how would you translate the word trench coat? As a guideline you can maybe use the Icelandic translation síðfrakki (or just long-coat)? Amimagnum, magnamiculum... --BiT 22:37, 3 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] why uv deleted delenda

Only because the template that says that this article is not even a stub does one extra thing. It still says the article is delenda (inter septem dies) and it also TELLS WHY, because the page is not even a stub. It's what you had, but better! Cheers.--Ioshus (disp) 01:16, 5 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

  Oh, that's even better. I'll have to remember it! IacobusAmor 03:38, 5 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
    Sorry if I caused confusion! We have {{delenda}} (where a reason for deletion needs to be given), but we also have related templates for “problem pages”. Some of these templates say that the page will be deleted after a while (7 days) if no one will remedy the problem beforehand. Unlike delenda, when using these templates, it is not necessary to explicitly specify a reason for deletion: {{latinitas|non latine}}, {{latinitas|pessima}}, {{non stipula}}, Disputatio Formulae:Not verifiable. In all but the most clear-cut cases (e. g. a page with characters that look like the result of a cat rubbing its back on the keyboard), I prefer these templates over plain {{delenda}} without any reason - using these templates can help prevent accidental deletion of legitimate content (e. g. content in the wrong language that should be moved to a different wikipedia). Greetings, --UV 21:47, 5 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] accusativus

Verene maius tibi placet figuras verborum accusativas videre rectas apud Accusativum? Iacobe, credo te saevum esse ;] ;] --Ioshus (disp) 03:46, 6 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] bishop

thank you for your correction (actually III decl. no locative). For the moment in the category I put only catholic bishop , I believe we should create a category ad hoc for lutheran and anglican bishops. Ciao--Massimo Macconi 17:00, 10 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] De Xota

Thanks for the correction on xota... I see I got all my -ire verbs wrong... About categoria:Musica Hispana what is sensu stricto the difference between hispanus and hispanicus? I thought that it would not make a difference, but if you have spotted it, it must not be the case. Maybe the category should be moved?--Xaverius 12:02, 15 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

  Just because I ask questions doesn't mean I know the answers! (I don't know which term is preferable, as both are certainly attested & available.) It struck me as odd that you'd call it a saltatio Hispanica and then put it in the category Musica Hispana. In reference works, inconsistencies—even small ones, like that—are usually bad, bad, bad. ¶ The article might mention the coplas & estribillos and instrumental interludes. ¶ Isn't xota also spelled jota? ¶ There might also be a category for Spanish dances: fandango, flamenco, seguidilla, etc. ¶ Which category do Basque genres go in? IacobusAmor 12:15, 15 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
    I know about inconsistencies too well, just look at my essays ;-)... About the coplas and estribillos, I thought that they would be difficult to translate, so I just stuck to the basics: singing and dancing and castanetes. About the spelling, in Spanish it is jota, but I used xota a) to stay closer to the etimology from valencian, b) to represent the /x/ sound and c) because this would then get confused with iota! Concerning the Spanish dances, I think that we should think of this when we have more articles...--Xaverius 13:03, 15 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] exsulare

Gratiam ago per verbum exsulare et emendationes. Thanks. Did you sort of back translate? eg. research at perseus , the word refugee then select the best among alternatives?--Jondel 13:08, 16 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] De vicifontibus

Iacobe, do you know how does Vicifons work? as any other normal wiki? I have a Latin chronicle of the Visigoths that I would like to put there, but I do not really know how. Is anyone here a magistrate in vicifons?--Xaverius 16:12, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

  Ta'ilo. (Beats me.) E a pe'a 'e fesili ia UV po'o Massimo po'o se isi tagata atamai? (How about asking UV or Massimo or some other clever person?) IacobusAmor 17:38, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
    Blah blah blah, blablah blah bla blah (very well, and so I shall do)--Xaverius 18:37, 18 Iunii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] instar plantae??

"Model plant" and "plante modèle" have a sense in genetic. it is an organism (here a plant) well studied and with a genome fast fully known. those organisms have a high syntheny (there genome is like the genome) from cultivated plants or used organisms. in genetic, we can't study all the organisms, so we used some organisms with a small genome (like Arabidopsis or Medicago) and we work on it. when we know all wa can know about it, we suppose there is a lot of gene in other organisms like those comming from model organisms and we can suppose about the genome of rice, pea, bean, soya, ... without making a lot of experimentation. Vide etiam article about "model organism" and "syntheny" in english. -- Thoma D. 06:52, 3 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Parvula Ariana

Salve! Grato animo emendationes tuas accipio. Unum tamen restituere volo, scil. Unum (Ἕν), quod eodem iure magna prima littera scribitur ac Pater. Ambo enim vocabula Divinitatem significant, aliud philosophicam, aliud Christianam. De virgulis taceo, nam animadverti editores textuum antiquorum plerumque regulis patrii sermonis uti. De gustibus &c. Adhuc, sodes, unum: "Adde quod usque a saeculo secundo erant qui fidei Christianae speciem verae philosophiae induere vellent", scripsi. Forma "vellent" usus sum, quod vim consecutivam sententiae relativae dare volui. Formam a me adhibitam in "volebant" mutasti. Sit ita, nam mutata, si tolerabilia sunt, reciprocare nolo. --Neander 00:39, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] dictator

that's what we were talking about. We got a problem because in Roma, a dictator wasn't what it is nowadays: Cesar was a dictator (that was a politic real function) but he wasn't a dictator like we imagine this man, nowadays. But the point is that in french and english and probably other language, we tell that Cesar was a dictator and that Staline was a dictator. Even if the idea is different, the word is the same. Why not in latin?? -- Thoma D. 12:55, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

  Indeed. The standard technical term in Latin was dictator. That's what Romans called those rulers, and we have to respect their terminology. We wouldn't call Gaius Caesar a tyrant (tyrannus) unless we wanted to assert a point of view. We shouldn't do so for Stalin either, should we? The title he held was (I guess) Secretarius Generalis Factionis Communisticae Comitiae Centralis Consociationis Sovieticae, and that's what we should call him, no?—unless we call him something like dictator de facto? IacobusAmor 13:41, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
    From the english wikipedia article on Tyrant:
      In ancient Greece, tyrants were influential opportunists that came to power by securing the support of different factions of a deme. The word "tyrant" carried no ethical censure; it simply referred to anyone who illegally seized executive power in a polis to engage in autocratic government.

And also from the same article concerning the modern meaning of the term:

      A tyrant is a single ruler holding vast, if not absolute power through a state or in an organization. The term carries connotations of a harsh and cruel ruler who places his/her own interests or the interests of a small oligarchy over the best interests of the general population which s/he governs or controls. This mode of rule is referred to as tyranny. Many individual rulers or government officials are accused of tyranny, with the label almost always a matter of controversy.

I think we should prefer the original Greek meaning to the second. Also I should point out that both points can be used without expressing a point of view as tyrannus just names a particular kind of political leader. That said, I don't think Tyrannus would apply to Caesar as he didn't sieze power illegally nor, as far as I am aware, did he rule in the interests of himself or a small oligarchy over the interests of the general population. But perhaps someone more knowledgeable of Caesar can comment on this. From what I know of Stalin, however, I would be inclined to say he was a Tyrannus, as he ruled in favor of the communists over the interests of the general population, he was an autocrat, and he used cruel measures to impose his view over the people.--Rafaelgarcia 14:06, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

  if i've well understand what IacobusAmor told, you suppose that we must have three points of view: (i) some people in ancient Roma were called dictator (as Ceasar), so, we call them dictator, (ii) somme people in ancient world were called tyrant (as in Syracuse), so, we call them tyrant, (iii) some people are called dictator or tyrant (as Staline, Hitler, Castro) but this is not their real political function: we don't care about their surname: we just have to write their real function. All right?? -- Thoma D. 14:17, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
    Right! Probe dicis, amice! IacobusAmor 14:25, 5 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Neutrum

Oh ... thanks! --Rolandus 12:58, 8 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Next stop

According to Graesse it's Compendium (I haven't checked further). If you care to do it, link it to Esia (praefectura Franciae). Andrew Dalby 20:52, 9 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

  Why don't I handle the race and you handle the stops? IacobusAmor 17:07, 10 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
    I can work with that. Andrew Dalby 17:12, 10 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
      Fair enough. Are you close enough to go outside one day and watch the racers pass by? IacobusAmor 18:06, 10 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
        I am getting (just) ahead with the place-names and I am adding them to the page Circuitus Franciae. I guess you could add your news text to that page too -- why waste it, after all? And, yes, they will pass quite close to us on the Cognac-Angoulême stage: we might well have an outing there that day! Andrew Dalby 13:10, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
          That would be cool! Btw, in the construction 'course from A to B', I've been using prepositions (cursus ab A ad B) to clarify the structure for beginners—but idiomatically, since these endpoints are all towns, we should probably be using the plain ablative for A and the plain accusative for B. For today's stage, that might necessitate shortening the starting-point to Villare (as putting an intrusive ad in the middle of the construction might confuse readers). Would that be OK? Maybe I'll go back and change the earlier entries. IacobusAmor 13:42, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
            Bare accusative certainly fits, and is better Latin (newbies have to learn sometime =]).--Ioscius (disp) 14:16, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
          Yes, I think you should shorten that very awkward place-name to Villare (3rd decl. neut.). Andrew Dalby 14:56, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
            Rightly or wrongly, I felt that to use a preposition neither for from nor for to made the sentences too difficult. I therefore reinserted "a" for from in each case. Sorry! If you disagree, by all means change them back. Andrew Dalby 17:24, 11 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
              Andrew, I ran our questions by a retired university professor of classics, and if I can find your email addy, I'll copy his answer to you. Meanwhile, I've fixed the nuntii in accordance with his advice. IacobusAmor 02:52, 13 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
            I think it should work if you click on "send an email to ..." (in Latin, naturally).
            In this context I think of the one surviving sentence from Trajan's memoirs. "Inde Berzobim, deinde Aizi processimus." They are foreign names so not everyone knows how to decline them, but Trajan gets away with it, because the first one is clearly an accusative and we can take it from the structure of the sentence that the other one is as well. But to put two foreign names together in the same clause, in different cases, especially if the cases are difficult to recognise, might be going too far. Andrew Dalby 08:50, 13 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
              OK, I'll try the email. Allen & Greenough's example (#427.2) is Delo Rhodum navigare 'to sail from Delos to Rhodes'. IacobusAmor 13:05, 13 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Ciclistas

Hola Iacobe, he estado haciendo algunas páginas de ciclistas (Petrus Delgado, Laurentius Jalabert, Eduardus Merckx y alguno más) y he estado usando vinco como transitivo para decir que han ganado el Tour o la Vuelta. ¿Eso está bien o hay otra forma de decirlo?--Xaverius 16:24, 13 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

  Está bien: vinco, vincere, vici, victum: hodie ego stationem vinco; heri properationem vici; cras circuitum totum vincam. IacobusAmor 16:38, 13 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Finnish places

The 'ä' and 'ö' sounds are quite different from 'a' and 'o' (See this). Have you read Neander's comment in the taberna? That sums up why we should probably use them. I wouldn't really say this is an issue about pronunciation, since the Germans use the 'ä' in Finnish names and that is quite a difference in sound from theirs, and we can often find IPA forms of these city names which I on the pages wherever possible. --Harrissimo 20:06, 18 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

  Then there are two ways of approaching the question. In the old days, Romans happening upon Finnish might have heard ä as a kind of e and written it E; they might have heard ö as some sort of a (or o) and written it A (or O). If this Vicipaedia were to be an old Roman encyclopedia, that's what we should naturally do. But these are the new days, and we're literate, and so we know better. If we're allowing J and W, why not ä and ö? The cat is out of the bag! Still, such diacritics look odd in Latin. I've been suppressing most of the Polynesian ones. IacobusAmor 21:30, 18 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
    I did ask Rolandus to take a look at it, because he usually has something about policy, but he hasn't replied yet. I do think though, that we shouldn't think of Latin as so much of a special case that we can't use foreign lettering, like other languages, which have to cope. I could definitely see your point of view if we ever covered Iceland though. Names like Seyðisfjörður and Þorlákshöfn are just annoying. Of course if we chose to use foreign lettering, that also means we would have to invent declension rules for non-latin names, which is a real snag. --Harrissimo 14:45, 19 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
      For Finnish, it's been done. I've seen a presentation of Finnish spelling & declension rules here in Vicipaedia, but where? IacobusAmor 15:06, 19 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
        In Jämsä, we can remove the vowel harmony making just Jämsa, more easy to decline. Iustinus said he'd look for us in Kalevala (if you didn't read that in the Taberna anyway). --Harrissimo 18:15, 26 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Loebs

In saying "The Loeb isn't writing an encyclopedia", I meant only to comment on the issue of whether or not to transliterate Greek. I agree with you 100% that current Loeb practice over spelling issues should weigh heavily with us -- it is a hugely important series.

And I don't think you're mad. Andrew Dalby 12:11, 1 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

  Thank goodness! Now let's see if you can still say that when I come back from the dentist's (in a few hours)! I was actually responding to noster Avitus, as I agree with you in all this. IacobusAmor 12:33, 1 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] sam-3

I think it should be smo-3 ... which we do not have either, see also en:Talk:Samoan language. --Rolandus 11:45, 4 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Categories

You can but an article into a category, by adding Categoria:xxx. However, this does not create the page Categoria:xxx itself. So click on the red link then and add the parent category Categoria:yyy for that category Categoria:xxx. Then save page Categoria:xxx. So you have created a category with a link to the parent category Categoria:yyy, which might exist or not. The link to Categoria:yyy is blue or red then. You can also add content to a category page like to an article. We seldomly do that. But if you do it, a category will be displayed this way:

1. the title
2. the (optional) text you have added
3. the list of articles (and categories) which have this category as a parent category
4. the parent categories to which this particular category has been linked

Just treat category pages like normal articles. They have the prefix "Categoria:" in the title and the child pages are atomatically displayed. This is where they are special. You can also add interwiki links. Was my explantion good enough? ;-) --Rolandus 13:44, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

  Not at this hour of the morning! I need more coffee! Wait! IacobusAmor 13:48, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
    Until then an answer to your question about having direct links: I think, this is not possible in this version of the software Vicipaedia:MediaWiki. This might be the reason why the English Wikipedia tries to do this: en:Category:Lists_of_female_movie_actors_by_name. It uses subcategories which have the starting letter in the name. For lists (= normal articles which we normally call "Index ...") there is the solution with the formula {{A-Z}} (see Index nominum). This works, because the headers of articles have "names" which can be adressed. Categories do not have "names" which can be referenced by a link. Maybe they will add this feature in the future, I do not know. --Rolandus 14:02, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
      Tell them to hurry! At the moment we have maybe 1000 names, and scrolling down to the bottom is a bother. But what happens when we have 100,000 names?! Scrolling to the bottom will be too daunting, and this category will be useless except for people whose name begins Aa and maybe for those whose name begins Ab !!! IacobusAmor 14:09, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
        I just wanted to give you this as an example where it is annoying too: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:GFDL - But now I see that they have an index on Commons. Hm ... maybe we have just to find out the trick or need an upgrade of our software. --Rolandus 14:25, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
          I should do the testing more carefully. It works: http://la.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Categoria:Biographia&from=S --Rolandus 14:28, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
            It goes on ... we already have the template which they are using: {{CategoryTOC}}. I have added it to page Categoria:Biographia and see what happens. :-) (The software has this feature built in, so it works although the headings cannot be addressed.) --Rolandus 14:32, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
              Woohoo! That's perfect, Rolande!—at least until we have so many names that we'll want to subdivide the index into Aa-, Ab-, Ac-, Ad-, and so on. Macte! IacobusAmor 15:08, 5 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] cannabis

Hey, Iacobe. If you feel the desire to make edits to this page, you might as well do it at Usor:Ioscius_Rocchius/Cannabis. Within a few days, Cannabis as it is will be but a memory. There's a lot to write.--Ioscius (disp) 04:37, 6 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] ecclesiae minister

tibi gratias ago--Massimo Macconi 14:46, 6 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Cappellae musicae pontificalis

dear Iacobus, what title should I give to this page. In any case I believe that also you can move the page to an other page name vide "movere". Ciao --Massimo Macconi 13:48, 10 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

    We have instructions about "moving", I have added a section: Vicipaedia:Movere#Needed_rights_for_moving_a_page. --Rolandus 06:34, 11 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
  Re: "what title should I give to this page"—Any title that doesn't have the misspelling MUSUCA in it! IacobusAmor 14:53, 10 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Senates and what not

I hope you don't mind, Iacobe: Avitus-like, I have copied your citations about Senates from my talk page to Disputatio:Senatus Britanniarum. Andrew Dalby 11:32, 14 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

  By all means, copy away! Put them where they'll be of greatest use! You'll notice that Ainsworth doesn't distinguish between Commons and Lords, but surely there was a standard way of doing so. Anybody deeply interested in the modern political vocabulary will find useful words & idioms in actual parliamentary documents, but of course not everybody has ready access to them. IacobusAmor 12:52, 14 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] De nomine

I didn't really know where I should write this, so here goes. I honestly think that "re-naming" everybody into Latin is HIGHLY superfluous and, even, stupid. Sure Latin 'has' an equivalent of the name "Edward" but that doesn't mean we change that some guy's name into "Edvardus" or what ever. There is an Icelandic version of the name Edward as well (Játvarður)- but nobody on the Icelandic Wikipedia would ever change the name "Edward Island" into Játvarður Island like you are doing here. And in most cases you are simply making up names. To people who's speak Latin natively that would sound weird; i.e. changing the spelling of a name to adapt it to the declension of said language. I don't know if this post has been coherent, but I hope you get my point. I just think it's stupid to call George Bush 'Georgius Bush'. Why not simply call him George? --BiT 11:53, 19 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

      Re: "nobody on the Icelandic Wikipedia would ever change the name "Edward Island" into Játvarður Island like you are doing here" (emphasis added)—I haven't done the renaming about which you complain. IacobusAmor 12:18, 19 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
      Re: "And in most cases you are simply making up names."(emphasis added)—No, I am not. IacobusAmor 12:18, 19 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
      You, BiT, posted your remarks in a place that the person you're addressing is unlikely to visit. That person seems to have changed Edwardus to Eduardus. This change would have been the right thing to do if the Edward in question, or at least those close to him or writing authoritatively about him, actually preferred Eduardus to Edwardus. (But where's the evidence?) Non-Latin names have been Latinized in writing for maybe 2500 years now, despite your sensibilities on the subject. IacobusAmor 12:18, 19 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
  Its often necessary in latin to decline a name because of the grammar. For example especially to form dative, genitive and ablative. For this reason there is a long tradition in latin lit. of translating names. In middle ages people would translate their own names. Thus we have Isaacus Newtonus, Leonhardus Eulerus, etc...--Rafaelgarcia 12:00, 19 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
    I think maybe this discussion belongs at Disputatio Vicipaediae:Translatio nominum propriorum, so I have copied it there. Andrew Dalby 12:10, 19 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Provincia + nomine proprio

Could you please help me? I have done a lot of pages of old Nations, e.g Res Publica Venetiae (Repubblica di Venezia) ecc. Is the present formulation e.g Ducatus Mediolani correct or wrong (perhaps Ducatus Mediolanum?Thank you and ciao--Massimo Macconi 12:43, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC) P.s to find the wrong pages you could put provincia in the box and then do quarere and not ire--Massimo Macconi 12:43, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

  According to Bradley's Arnold's rule, the right way to handle those appositives would result in Res Publica Venetia (or maybe better, with an adjective, Res Publica Veneta or Res Publica Venetica or Res Publica Venetiana?) and Ducatus Mediolanum (or maybe better Ducatus Mediolanensis?)—but surely Latin versions of these names have been in existence for many hundreds of years, so why not check the literature and see what you find? Attestations can show the way! IacobusAmor 13:39, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

Thank you--Massimo Macconi 13:58, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)--85.2.207.166 13:58, 22 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Ainsworth's

Would you recommend Ainsworth's latin dictionary - listed as c1850s - AINSWORTH's ENGLISH~LATIN Dictionary? You talk about it a lot and I guess my only dictionary (except for Words, of course), the Oxford Latin Minidictionary, doesn't always do the job... --Harrissimo 23:03, 24 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

  That depends on what you're using it for. Its Latin–English section is nowhere near as thorough as L&S and probably later dictionaries, so I can't recommend it for that. Its English–Latin section, however, has useful idioms, and it seems likely to have been designed for students who wanted help in writing their exercises in Latin prose composition (a task not irrelevant here in Vicipædia). For example, suppose you need to Latinize "It's an ill wind that blows nobody good"; you look under wind, and you find that the Latin is Etiam aconito inest remedium—a sentence in which (you'll observe) no Latin word for 'wind' occurs. While we're here, let's whisk through the wind-section. Under wind itself, you get of course the words ventus, flabrum, and (marked with a special character because it's a special use, for 'breath') anima. Then you get several idioms, including the one quoted above. Then a new paragraph: "The eight winds known to the ancients" (with a note saying that another wind, euroaquilo, in the Gospel of Luke, is best translated 'east-northeast'). Then many paragraphs of particular uses:
    A little wind made with a fan = ventulus
    To have the wind with one, or have a favorable [sic!] wind.
    To go down the wind [evidently a now-obsolete English idiom] = adversa pati, fortunam experiri adversam. [And several more related idioms.]
    A boisterous wind. [Then a set of other winds: contrary = reflatus, gentle = aura, ventus lenis, &c., &c.]
    A whistling wind = ventus stridulus.
    To have the wind of [a nautical term?] = vento praevertere.
    An easterly wind [then winds from several other directions, then:] That causes rain = pluvialis, imbrifer, &c., &c.
    Wind-bound = vento adverso detentus
    A wind-egg [?!] = ovum urinum.
    A wind-fall [i.e., the nonmetaphorical sense: "apple, pear, &c. beaten down by the wind"; then the metaphor:] = lucrum insperatum.
    One's wind or breath = halitus, spiritus, flatus, anhelitus; anima.
    To take wind or breath = respirare; anhelitum, vel animam, recipere.
    To take wind, or be known abroad = patefieri, retegi, evulgari, palam enuntiari.
    To be out of wind [i.e., breathless] = anhelitum ducere.
    To wind (scent or smell out) = odoror, olfacio.
    To wind, or blow, a horn = cornu inflare.
    Long-winded = animae praelargus. A long-winded piece of work = opus diutini, vel diurturni, laboris.
    Short-winded. . . . A short-winded person = anhelator.
    Windiness = venti inclusi abundantia.
    Windward = ventum versus.
    Windy = ventosus, ventis obnoxius.
    Windy or flashy expressions = ampullae (and specially marked, verba sesquipedalia).
  I've compressed the style and suppressed parts of some of these paragraphs. (And obviously I've left out references to the other wind, meaning verto, circumverto, contorqueo.) It might prove interesting to see how modern Latin–English dictionaries handle the concept of wind.
  Ainsworth's main faults from your viewpoint are probably two. (1) The lesser is that it treats I & J, and U & V, as the same letter, so jam, inch, job, Ionian, juvenile, ivy, vixen, ulcer, vocal, up, vulgar are in perfect alphabetical order. If you look for a word and don't find it, you have to remember that you may have been looking in the wrong part of the current alphabet. (2) The greater, especially for a nonnative speaker of English, is that because its diction is two centuries old, its English vocabulary isn't quite the same as ours; the language has changed: many once-ordinary senses of words have become rare or obsolete, and many new senses & words have come into existence. You may get a feel for this fault in the entries for wind above. In glosses, you'll sometimes see hath for has, but that's only a minor irritant. ¶ An example that just turned up: the commonest current sense of invest is 'to commit money in hopes of getting a return', but you won't find a Latin word for it in Ainsworth's; the senses of invest that you will find under invest are 'invest in an office = inaugurate' and 'invest = besiege'—neither of which you're likely to think of looking for under invest.
  At the end are thirty-two pages constituting an index nominum propriorum, drawn from history & literature. I'll copy the first in its entirely so you can compare it with other such lists: "ABDALONYMUS, i. m. A poor gardener, yet of princely descent, made king of Sidon by Alexander the Great." And another: "MACAREUS, eos et ei. m. The son of Æolus. Having had a child by his sister Canace, he fled from his father's indignation, who had ordered the child to be cast to the dogs, and sent his daughter a sword, with a command to use it as she deserved." IacobusAmor 01:07, 25 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
    Well, improving my composition is exactly what I want it for and I often try to translate little phrases like these without success. It also delights me to see the eight winds. I spent HALF AN HOUR looking on the internet yesterday for how to say southwestern in latin, eventually getting to Africus -a -um somewhere obscure.
    P.S. Wind egg (n.): an imperfect, unimpregnated, or addled egg. ;) --Harrissimo 01:48, 25 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
      Is a reprint available? My copy is coming apart, and every time I look up a word in it, fragments fall to the floor. IacobusAmor 18:55, 25 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
        The version that I might buy looks pretty rag-eared and the spine is "taped on" but £11 seems a pretty fair price. I think the latest reprint is the "Morrell Abridgement" from some time in the 19th century - I guess there isn't some mint condition colourful new reprint about. Maybe this one (at $35 - you are American, right?) could be good if it is deteriorating so badly. While we're at it, does Ainsworth have population density? We're having a discussion about it over at Disputatio:Caiania. --Harrissimo 23:36, 25 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
          No, it doesn't have "(population) density," which I'd guess is a twentieth-century concept, but it does have "populousness, population, populosity," for which the Latin is—ta-da!—populi frequentia. ¶ In general, I don't like abridgements and don't recommend them. IacobusAmor 00:14, 26 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Cyriaco

Notice a recent change to your article. Anon added the Italian name of Ragusa (which is of course the same as the Latin one) and failed to format the addition correctly. I thought this was getting silly and overweighting the sentence, so I took out all of it, even your original gloss "Dubrovnik", because, I thought, if one wants to know about Ragusa one can click on the link. But you may well prefer to put your original gloss back in -- it's up to you! Andrew Dalby 09:19, 28 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

  That's fine. Links make a great deal of duplication unnecessary. Good catch! IacobusAmor 11:47, 28 Augusti 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Andreas Howe

Hi... thanks for the improvements you made to 'my' article. That frase should means: "After three years, Andreas got two golden medals at the Yunior Championship of Grosseto"... but I think I make out a messe with the dipendent proposition... :) --Sogeking 12:10, 6 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

  You're welcome. "Post tres annos, Howe in certamine iuvenibus Grosseti duo numismata aurea lucratus est"? IacobusAmor 13:04, 6 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
    Well, for me it's good, but are you sure the word "numisma" is better than "phalera" for "medal"? --Sogeking 16:53, 6 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
      No, but phalerae appears to be used only in the plural with a singular sense (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3D%2335909), whereas numisma can specifically refer to a medal (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3D%2331149). There may yet be an apter word. IacobusAmor 19:53, 6 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
        Ok done! (Sorry if I didn't answer for a while, I've had some things to do on it.wiki :)) --Sogeking 19:22, 11 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] Bock vel Tragus

enlace autor imagen vide wiki germanica --Penarc 14:59, 12 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

## [recensere] de ente

That was my try to make "about being" (so he was learning in Holland about being a merchant. Should mercator be in the ablative there, or is the whole construction wrong? --Harrissimo 15:57, 18 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

  It's odd even in English. The more English possibilities you can juggle in your mind, the likelier that you'll come up with an apt Latin one. He was learning about being an X, He was learning how to be an X, He was learning how to become an X, He was learning so as to become an X, He was learning so that he might be an X, He was learning how to work/function/live as an X, He was learning the duties/methods/manners of X's, He was learning what X's do, He was learning the art of Xship. You get the idea. ¶ IIRC, esse has no classical present participle, and ens, entis was invented late. That doesn't make it wrong, but it might be cause for worry, or at least a raised eyebrow. IacobusAmor 16:52, 18 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
    iit ad Londinium ut acquireret scientiam ut fieri mercatore. He went to London so that he would acquire? knowledge in order to become a merchant. Would that work better? --Harrissimo 17:33, 18 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
      Don't forget your Accusative of Place to Which. Londinium ivit ut. . . . I've checked a dictionary, and there's an idiom for 'to follow the pursuits of trade': mercaturas facere. + 'Acquire' = adipiscor. IacobusAmor 17:47, 18 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
        Thanks for that. I was just about to make the changes, but I see you beat me there :) . Harrissimo.

### [recensere] Something similar

Quoque, adiuvit pauperes urbis aedificante elemosinas eis. Also he helped the poor of the city by building almshouses for them. Is there a way in which I can express "by building" which isn't part of the present participle? Harrissimo.

  Adiuvit = wrong form (a syllable left out). The thought might be easier if restructured: 'Also, he built almshouses to help the city's poor' (= ut-clause). Here, you can leave out 'for them.' Or, back to the original: 'Also, by building almshouses, he helped the poor of the city (urbanus, -a, -um?).' Perhaps an ablative of means with a participle (and more typically at the start of the sentence) would work: ptochotrophis aedificatis. (My dictionaries don't have elemosina, though I see where it's coming from.) Ask an expert! IacobusAmor 00:35, 23 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
  May I butt in and add that you don't begin a sentence with quoque. You put in, early in the sentence, whatever word you want to emphasize, and then you add quoque after it. Adiuvavit quoque pauperes ... or Pauperes quoque adiuvavit ... or (turning it round as Iacobus suggests) Aedificavit quoque ptochotrophos ... or Ptochotrophis quoque aedificatis .... Andrew Dalby 09:03, 23 Septembris 2007 (UTC)
    Aedificavit quoque ptochotrophos ut adiuverit? pauperes urbis. Acceptabilis? Harrissimo.

## [recensere] Emendatio paginae Iuliano Amato dicatae

non intellego quia in pagina Iulianus Amato iurisprudentiae studuit a tibi emendata est iurisprudentia studuit. Ex Fons nominis aut citationis: Luigi Castiglioni, Scevola Mariotti, Vocabolario della Lingua Latina, Latino - Italiano . Italiano - Latino, IV edizione a cura di Piergiorgio Parroni con CD Rom, Taurini anno 2007, studeo col dat.: ergo: non student agriculturae, non si dedicano all'agricoltura, gratia tibi ago propter explicationes--Massimo Macconi 18:41, 22 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

  Sic, dicunt L&S, recte cum dativo et genetivo, et raro cum accusativo. IacobusAmor 19:09, 22 Septembris 2007 (UTC)

Receptum de "http://la.wikipedia.org../../../i/a/c/Disputatio_Usoris%7EIacobusAmor_0ee5.html"

Categoria: Castiglioni-Mariotti

##### Views

- Pagina usoris
- Disputatio
- Emendatio recentissima

##### communitas

- Invitatio
- Taberna
- Adiutatum
- Donationes

##### Quaerere