Disputatio:Transplantatio organorum

I'm pretty sure the medical latin term for organ is organum. Does anyone want to actually look up terms instead of guessing at them from their knowledge of classical latin? I'm pretty sure we can find more than one biological latin or medical latin reference in google books or somewhere...!--24.183.186.151 10:03, 13 Februarii 2010 (UTC)

You are correct!--Jondel 09:34, 13 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Ait Cassell's: "[organ]s of the body, corporis partes or membra; the internal [organ]s, exta (-orum, plur.)"; praeterea, sola nominis organi significatio Anglica est "an implement or instrument . . . esp., a musical instrument." IacobusAmor 12:09, 13 Martii 2010 (UTC)

So. To be clear you indicated organum is defined as internal [organ]s and exta(entrails), ok? --Jondel 04:22, 15 Martii 2010 (UTC)

No, not OK at all. The Latin clearly indicates that Cassell's dictionary says the English word organ is best rendered by the Latin words "corporis partes or membra," and the English phrase "the internal [organ]s" is best rendered by the Latin word "exta (-orum, plur.)." IacobusAmor 04:37, 15 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Iacobus, you know well that latin is long established in medicine and Ancient Greek is incorporated into latin. I will cite sources with samples of usages in due time. We can agree that the Greek source, organon both meant a musical instrument and container-instrument for containing liquid, in living beings, the humus. Membrum leans towards extremities(limbs, hands, feet) or "parts of the whole". "Organum" and its cognates exists many languages and will create less confusion. --Jondel 04:22, 15 Martii 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps to those familiar only with evolved dialects of the language; but from the viewpoint of the received standard language, it may create more confusion. (According to the Perseus site, the only use of organum in a source so late even as the Vulgate refers to a musical instrument.) Issues of dialect & register are probably always going to be with Vicipaedia—until it splits into separate encyclopedias to serve its separate constituencies. IacobusAmor 04:37, 15 Martii 2010 (UTC)

To Cassell's, we can add White's dictionary, which gives as the Latin for 'organ (of the body)' only pars and membrum. The English word organ in reference to a part or member of the body isn't a different word, but seems to be the old word ('a musical instrument') with transferred senses: the OED lists the transferred senses under the heading 'an instrument generally'. IacobusAmor 04:49, 15 Martii 2010 (UTC)

I overlooked the fact that with my proposed move to "transplantatio organorum" I am intervening in this discussion as well. Sorry.

We have a balancing act to perform. No one, I think, not even a botanist or a Papist, seriously disputes that our grammatical target is classical. (Ciceronian if you like.) We want to write what Ciceronians can understand. Well, there are now many things named in Latin in modern technical fields unimagined by Cicero, from diocesan cities in America to microbiology and the mountains of Mars; but the majority of users of Latin in these fields focus on terminology, not text. They are all potential users of a general encyclopedia -- if only for its lemmata -- and we can catch the eye of all of them if we can accommodate their terminology when we write about their technical fields. It's still one language (more so than English, probably). That's what I had in mind when I wrote (I think I wrote it) the introductory sentence at Vicipaedia:Fontes nominum Latinorum. Do others agree or disagree with that introductory sentence? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:14, 5 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Fons?

I'm wondering if you can cite any source for the polysemous term translatio in this context. My sources (Pitkäranta; Vilborg) have transplantatio. Neander (disputatio) 12:50, 3 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Traupman has "transplant tr transferre, transponere; (med) inserere." Cassell's, compiled before organ transplation had become common, has "transplant, lit. and fig. transferre, traducere (of peoples)." So the figurative use of transferre (and necessarily of its derivatives, including translatio) must be OK—but since Traupman cites the specifically medical use of inserere, maybe that's the way to go. ¶ However, neither Cassell's nor Traupman has a Latin noun insertio ; and for the English noun 'insertion', both have interpositio. (Traupman has the same for 'graft', for which Cassell's has surculus.) For interpositio, Cassell's adds a warning: "usually to be rendered by verb." L&S call insertio postclassical, first found in Isidore in a horticultural context. ¶ So putting it all together, if we want to maintain the classical vocabulary, we might want to stick with inserere (and perhaps transferre) for the verb and interpositio for the noun. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:06, 3 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

How much do we really stick to maintaining the classical vocabulary, when speaking about modern, technical concepts? How many times some of us have fetched a mot juste from medieval or neolatin sources? These are of course rhetorical questions. In my opinion, the gist of classical idiom is the preservation of classical morphosyntax and syntactic idioms. No language can live without enriching its vocabulary. Pitkäranta and Vilborg have transplantatio. I don't see why they'd be inferior sources. Neander (disputatio) 14:10, 3 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

They're not inferior to Traupman, but they're not necessarily superior to him either. As for classicism, no time for discussion today—and the pertinent arguments have been around for centuries. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:50, 3 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Why do we have democratia? If we want to maintain the classical vocabulary, we might want to stick with civitas popularis, attested in Cic.Rep. 1.42. ¶ But never mind, I had in mind to enhance the status of the transplantation article, but Jondel already appears to have enhanced its status to his satisfaction. Neander (disputatio) 15:11, 3 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Transplantatio 'a cross-planting', when used for medical work in animals, is a metaphor, involving a transferred sense of a word that fundamentally refers to plants. Transpositio 'a cross-placing' has the advantage (if it be that!) of being the primary & straightforward sense of a word; similarly insertio 'a connecting, a combining'. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:49, 5 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Please feel free to enhance. In fact it would be good for 'you' to enhance as best'est', and fastest now than somebody who would do a botched up job in the future. The future/nature will take care of itself(?) -No it won't. You have to make sure things are fixed before they have a chance to get broken.--Jondel (disputatio) 15:24, 3 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

I recommend "transplantatio" because it corresponds with the official Latin terminology for illnesses, which includes the terms "Insuccessus et rejectio organorum et textuum transplantatorum", "Rejectio medullae ossium transplantatae", "Insuccessus et rejectio renis transplantati" etc. (heading T86, corresponding to English "Failure and rejection of transplanted organs and tissues", "Bone-marrow transplant rejection", "Kidney transplant failure and rejection" etc.) This already suggests that Pitkärantä wasn't just making things up and is closer to reality than Traupman, and it is possible to confirm that: the term "transplantatio" is found in 1930s Latin surgical terminology, as here, used as international technical term within English text. Similarly, "transplantatio reni" can be found on Google, used as official technical term in Polish text. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:28, 3 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Note that the same source, under T86.8 and T86.9, confirms "organum" for organ. That's handy to know. So I'm proposing moving this page to "Transplantatio organorum". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:39, 3 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Very good, indeed! Neander (disputatio) 05:47, 4 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

... also "Transplantatio cordis" in recent Finnish and Hungarian sources. It's not surprising that medical/surgical Latin terminology is actively in use among writers of national-but-less-international languages (examples above also from Polish and Slovenian sources). But I haven't yet found any on-line thesaurus or vocabulary for Latin surgical terms. In the same way, I'm still looking for a proper on-line thesaurus for Latin geological terms, although, there again, some current writers in various languages continue to use the Latin terms.

Whatever handy sources I find in this way, I link at Vicipaedia:Fontes nominum Latinorum. In this area, I feel, thanks to the Web and Wikimedia, we are maybe just in time (only just) to help bring scientific Latin terminology back into the form of a single ramified language instead of a series of separate jargons. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:59, 4 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Awesome finds Andrew! Btw, I would like to create a transplantationes category. To Neander, I would appreciate your expertise, for example in a quandary on how to translate, patients requiring transplants are far in excess of donors. Also transplantation is an advancement of modern times. To Iacobus, inserere is a useful latin word.--Jondel (disputatio) 13:27, 5 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

A literal gloss of the equivalent category in the English wikipedia might be "Categoria:Transplantatio organorum." That is, if the nonhorticultural sense of transplantatio (ad verbum 'a moving of a plant from one place to another') and the noninstrumental sense of organum (fortasse ad verbum 'a tool for work') were accepted. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:01, 5 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

Agreed!--Jondel (disputatio) 16:59, 6 Aprilis 2016 (UTC)

latinatis

Neander, thank you for your help on improving the articles, like amputatio. Could I ask what you think is incorrect or not understandable with Transplantatio ? Best regards.--Jondel (disputatio) 07:23, 3 Iulii 2016 (UTC)

Translation

Latin original:

Transplantatio organorum sive Translatio sive transplantatio[1] membri est chirurgia qua membrum corporis exsectum ex corpore in altero ponitur. Translatio est necessaria cum aeger viscus suus nimia deficit vel morbo laborat. Ars translationis membri fere est difficilis, reiectione systemae immunitatis causa. Transplantatio est una res provectarum magnarum in hodierna medicina. Infeliciter egastas organium est re vera nimio plurior donantibus. Viscera et texta quae transferri possunt, comprehendunt: Iecur

English:

Transplants or transplants of organs or transfer of the member(organ) is a surgery in which part of the body is cut off from the body placed in another. The translation is necessary when the patient organ is extremely faulty or suffer from sickness. An transplantation of an organ is almost always difficult, because of the rejection of the immunity system. Transplantation is one of the greatest advancements in modern medicine. Unfortunately the demand/need for(of) organs is far greater than donations. Organs which can be transferred include: Liver.

Thanks, Jondel. I needed this because I wanted to make sure that I've understood everything. Based on your texts, I edited the article, augmenting it a bit. If you have something to ask, please, feel free. Neander (disputatio) 20:08, 4 Iulii 2016 (UTC)

Neander, I am overwhelmed and grateful for your help. However I am obligated to say that there was a long debate that 'organum' can not be used in the English sense of internal animal organ. I think this satisfactory so far and will be standing by to see how this progresses.--Jondel (disputatio) 15:24, 5 Iulii 2016 (UTC)

There has indeed been a lot of discussion about this, some of it visible above. I'd say, in writing about modern medicine/surgery, it would be quixotic to avoid the word ... but I'm not at all sure whether consensus has been reached :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:36, 5 Iulii 2016 (UTC)

I overlooked the long discussion at the top. My instincts strongly supports organum.--Jondel (disputatio) 15:41, 5 Iulii 2016 (UTC)