Disputatio:Miss Marple

Mythistoria facinorosa

Neander, you changed the link from mythistoria facinorosa to Romancium criminale, but you forgot to change it in the other forty-one articles where it appears. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 01:32, 12 Iunii 2012 (UTC)

Do attestations of either term exist? One suspects that mythistoria facinorosa might be an example of Vicipaediaese, though Cassell's does have facinorosus 'wicked, criminal', with citations to vir and vita from Cicero and Livy; but criminalis, -e is lacking. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 01:32, 12 Iunii 2012 (UTC)

I changed the link because I found romancium criminale in Tuomo Pekkanen & Reijo Pitkäranta (2006) Lexicon hodiernae Latinitatis Finno-Latino-Finnicum (s.v. Rikosromaani). At least, it's an extra-Vicipaedian attestation. Maybe Donatello can find a better word in Vilborg's lexicon (s.v. Kriminalroman). Neander (disputatio) 10:45, 12 Iunii 2012 (UTC)

Partes agit

Here's another question. Is "partes agit" the ideal term when the subject is not an actor but a character who appears in a series of stories? If it isn't, what would be a better term? I can't think of many ancient parallels, but we have e.g. Odysseus and Menelaus who appear both in the Iliad and in the Odyssey. Would we say that Odysseus "partes agit" in the two epics?

And of course there are characters who appear in more than one play in a trilogy: that would be another ancient parallel. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:47, 12 Iunii 2012 (UTC)

Oh, you're right, Andrew. I canceled my lapsus cogitandi. That's the best I can do for now. Neander (disputatio) 10:56, 12 Iunii 2012 (UTC)