Disputatio:Sanctius (rex Aragonum)
Latest comment: abhinc 14 annos by Chris1981 in topic Sancius
fuit alter rex Aragoniae
recensereWhat do you mean with "alter"?--Chris1981 03:46, 28 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- He was the second king of Aragon - is "alter" not adequate here?--Xaverius 10:05, 28 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks. I didn't know it could mean "second".--Chris1981 21:17, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
Sancius
recensereWhat I'd like to know is why Sancius in
is being read as Sanctius. IacobusAmor 04:07, 28 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- Depending on the manuscript you read, the name "Sancho" is spelled Sanctius, Sancius, Sansius. --Xaverius 10:06, 28 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- PS: and even Santius
- Well, but it's confusing for an image of one thing (Sancius) to serve as an illustration of another (Sanctius), so one might suggest fixing the lemma or using a different image. IacobusAmor 13:27, 28 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- It's the same thing, but, yes, the name variation has to be dealt with somnehow. For the moment I've made the variation explicit in the caption, but I agree that it might be better dealt with in the lemma. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:48, 28 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- It seems to be pretty common in that time, that the spelling of non-latin names was non-uniform. I had to deal with a Bezelin/Bezilin/Berthold/Birchtilo once, who lived around the year 1000 in what is today southwest Germany. According to the en WP the name Sancho is a Castilian name of Basque origin (Santxo, Santzo, Santso, Antzo).[1] SANCHO Spanish form of Sanctius [2]--Chris1981 05:34, 29 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- Oh dear. Then it looks as if the i in the Latin spellings wasn't pronounced independently, as /i/, but was functioning to make the preceding consonant a sibilant. Accordingly, the "T" of San(c)tius wasn't really a /t/. In other words, the spelling San(c)tius will be making classicists pronounce three syllables, San(c)-ti-us, where the man's contemporaries would have pronounced two, San(c)-sus or Sanʃus—phonemic strings that Cicero might have spelled Sansus or Sanxus. The "T" thus being intrusive, as an artifact of medieval spelling, Cicero redivivus will mispronounce the word less noticeably if it's spelled Sancius than if it's spelled Sanctius. IacobusAmor 12:27, 29 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- Hoffmann has "Sanctius" as a standard form. Maybe we should keep it that way and make all these indications in the page Sanctius?--Xaverius 11:06, 31 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- Oh dear. Then it looks as if the i in the Latin spellings wasn't pronounced independently, as /i/, but was functioning to make the preceding consonant a sibilant. Accordingly, the "T" of San(c)tius wasn't really a /t/. In other words, the spelling San(c)tius will be making classicists pronounce three syllables, San(c)-ti-us, where the man's contemporaries would have pronounced two, San(c)-sus or Sanʃus—phonemic strings that Cicero might have spelled Sansus or Sanxus. The "T" thus being intrusive, as an artifact of medieval spelling, Cicero redivivus will mispronounce the word less noticeably if it's spelled Sancius than if it's spelled Sanctius. IacobusAmor 12:27, 29 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- It seems to be pretty common in that time, that the spelling of non-latin names was non-uniform. I had to deal with a Bezelin/Bezilin/Berthold/Birchtilo once, who lived around the year 1000 in what is today southwest Germany. According to the en WP the name Sancho is a Castilian name of Basque origin (Santxo, Santzo, Santso, Antzo).[1] SANCHO Spanish form of Sanctius [2]--Chris1981 05:34, 29 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- It's the same thing, but, yes, the name variation has to be dealt with somnehow. For the moment I've made the variation explicit in the caption, but I agree that it might be better dealt with in the lemma. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:48, 28 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- Well, but it's confusing for an image of one thing (Sancius) to serve as an illustration of another (Sanctius), so one might suggest fixing the lemma or using a different image. IacobusAmor 13:27, 28 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- Would we need to add all the variations in all the pages of kings named Sancho then? or may it be easier to have a page Sanctius which would explain it?--Xaverius 08:53, 29 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)
- I think a page Sanctius would be a good idea.--Chris1981 21:19, 27 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
- Would we need to add all the variations in all the pages of kings named Sancho then? or may it be easier to have a page Sanctius which would explain it?--Xaverius 08:53, 29 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)