Disputatio:The Number of the Beast
Latest comment: abhinc 14 annos by Omnipaedista in topic Grammar and lexicon
Grammar and lexicon recensere
I have used republicatio to gloss "re-issuing (of an LP)". I am a bit wary about properly rendering "their first work with Bruce as a singer"; I just let it be "cum Bruce cantore" (or should we use "cum Bruce qua cantore"?). As for Bruce, there is an old etymology acc. to which it comes from Brix, but, first, this is not widely accepted, and second there is no unambiguous way to inflect Brix. So, I have proposed an alternative form: Brus, which is, first, closer to the English pronunciation of the name, and second, closer to the more accepted etymon of the name: from de Bruis. --Omnipaedista 02:58, 22 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
- According to Cassell's, a publicatio is a confiscation, from the verb publico 'to appropriate to the public use, confiscate'; so a republicatio must be a reconfiscation (adding insult to injury?). IacobusAmor 03:05, 22 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
- When in doubt about a proper name, do what the Romans did, use it in its foreign form and don't try to inflect at all. Just use Bruce, de Bruce, ad Bruce, etc. I think both "cum Bruce cantore" and "cum Bruce qua cantore" are grammatically correct, but the normal idiom is to not use qua, unless you want to emphasize that he is not usually a singer but made an exception in this case. I think using "cum" is also unusual in this kind of expression, unless the author wishes to be emphatic. I would guess a simple ablative absolute is more than sufficient: Bruce cantante = with Bruce singing. As Iacobus pointed out, publicatio is a false cognate: for reissuing I would think to use re-editio or redivulgatio.--Rafaelgarcia 03:34, 22 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, that's right about the cum, as it seemed odd where a participle, esp. an ablative absolute, would do. ¶ As for republishing, Cassell's says, quite specifically, to "render [the verb republish] by phrase, such as (librum) denuo edere." It doesn't have reissue at all, but the sense of that verb is practically the same as republish, so Cassell's advice should still apply. IacobusAmor 03:49, 22 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
- When in doubt about a proper name, do what the Romans did, use it in its foreign form and don't try to inflect at all. Just use Bruce, de Bruce, ad Bruce, etc. I think both "cum Bruce cantore" and "cum Bruce qua cantore" are grammatically correct, but the normal idiom is to not use qua, unless you want to emphasize that he is not usually a singer but made an exception in this case. I think using "cum" is also unusual in this kind of expression, unless the author wishes to be emphatic. I would guess a simple ablative absolute is more than sufficient: Bruce cantante = with Bruce singing. As Iacobus pointed out, publicatio is a false cognate: for reissuing I would think to use re-editio or redivulgatio.--Rafaelgarcia 03:34, 22 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
- 'Bruce' is apparently 'Brussius'; at least, this seems to be the normal Latinization of the original Bruce's name (Robertus Brussius). —Mucius Tever 01:03, 23 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
- I stand corrected regarding publicatio; in fact, I knew about the "confiscation" sense (confer grc: δήμευσις), but I was under the false impression that it had that sense only in Classical but not Contemporary use of Latin. As for Brussius, I wasn't aware of this form, but apparently this latinization is well established in Vicipaedia (e.g.: see also David II). After taking into consideration all the above, I have just made the (hopefully) appropriate edits.
--Omnipaedista 08:22, 23 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
- I stand corrected regarding publicatio; in fact, I knew about the "confiscation" sense (confer grc: δήμευσις), but I was under the false impression that it had that sense only in Classical but not Contemporary use of Latin. As for Brussius, I wasn't aware of this form, but apparently this latinization is well established in Vicipaedia (e.g.: see also David II). After taking into consideration all the above, I have just made the (hopefully) appropriate edits.