Disputatio Usoris:Andrew Dalby/Tabularium 2

Latest comment: abhinc 2 annos by Andrew Dalby in topic Chops

Rolandus Burrage Dixon Recensere

I thought he might catch your eye! However, the bit about his work on the peace commission came straight from en:, which you may want to correct. It says: "He was [a] . . . member of the American Commission to Negotiate Peace (1916-18) in Paris." IacobusAmor 20:30, 29 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I might, but I get a bit tired of correcting en:wiki. Some similar pages will say "Versailles" instead of Paris, which is even more of a howler. It's not just wikipedia: the standard (US) biography of Ho Chi Minh describes him delivering copies of his Vietnamese "Claims" along the corridors at Versailles; there would have been no one there, and he wasn't the fellow to waste a railway ticket ...
You can see from already-linked pages on the Inquisitio (1917-1918), the Commissio ... and the Deliberatio ... where people actually were at what date. I have not heard that Dixon went to Paris in 1919: I take it the date in the article is therefore correct and he was one of the many who worked in the Inquisition up to 1918 but didn't make the transatlantic trip. However, this would want to be confirmed. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:49, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The New World Encyclopedia (http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Roland_B._Dixon), which I hadn't checked before and seems to have a better article on him than Wikipedia, says: "In 1918, he became a member of the House Commission, which collected reports on the political conditions in Central Asia. Dixon spent several years with the commission, negotiating peace in Asia." Nothing about Paris! Maybe this passage has useful clues for you. I'll fix our text when I find time, but meanwhile anybody is free to have a go at it. IacobusAmor 11:32, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It sounds very dubious, because "Colonel" House fell from favour in April 1919 (and Wilson, whose protégé he had been, was mentally inactive after September 1920 and out of power in March 1921). Therefore, if I understand correctly, I don't at present believe in this "House Commission" (except as the Commissio Americana ad Pacem Componendam (1919) whose history we know) and I certainly don't believe any such thing would have continued for several years after 1918. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:43, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The mystery deepens! Note that Dixon doesn't appear among the men in the photo of your article. ¶ Do we have an insertable sign that questions an assertion of fact? I've been assuming that "dubsig" should be used only for dubious Latinizations (or generally the forms of words), but maybe it has broader uses? ¶ In America, official commissions, committees, etc. are often popularly called by the name of their chair, so "the Smith Commission" could be a way of referring to the President's Commission on the Blablabla Incident, and "the House Commission" could be a perfectly ordinary phrase for the group in question. IacobusAmor 12:31, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, sure -- the dubious assertion in the "New World Encyclopedia" was that the commission continued for several years after 1918.
All such errors are typical of tertiary sources, i.e. encyclopedias, which is why one never relies on them! In this case I think the doubt is manageable. The House group, under one or other name, existed 1917-1919 (it cannot have existed in 1916 because the US hadn't got involved in the war at that time; it ceased to exist by 1920 when the last treaty was signed). Everyone says Dixon was in the House group at a certain period; Wikipedia says he was in it 1916-1918; he isn't in the 1919 photo, I hadn't heard his name as a Paris participant in 1919, and that all fits. Conclusion: he was probably in it 1917-1918, and on this tiny issue en:wiki scores about 50/100, "New World Encyclopedia" scores about 30/100. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:19, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here's the real story (or something much closer to the real story than the wikipedias have), in his obituary in the American Anthropologist (written by Tozzer & Kroeber): "In 1918 Dixon became a member of the House Commission, called the “Inquiry,” and collected reports on the political conditions in Central Asia. In December of the next year he sailed for France with the American Commission to Negotiate Peace and remained in Paris until May." So he served on the commission from 1918 at least to 1920, and was in Paris from about December 1919 to May 1920. Unless of course even people who knew him and had access to (some of) his private & official papers erred! IacobusAmor 13:56, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, that's good evidence: his absence from the photo means nothing, of course. Maybe it was his day off. But your "1920" is wrong, based on a misunderstanding by the obituarist or the copy-editor: the words "of the next year" ought not to be there. In fact they all sailed to Paris in December 1918, and they (nearly all) remained in Paris until May 1919. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:11, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Or maybe "of the next year" is right and 1918 is wrong (and should be 1917). IacobusAmor 14:48, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Very neat. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:47, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
According to the twelfth edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, the Conference of the Powers assembled in Paris for its first plenary session on 18 January 1919, and its Supreme Council met for the last time on 21 January 1920, but "Even then the work of the peace settlement was incomplete." The article goes on & on & on, in excruciating detail. IacobusAmor 14:04, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that agrees with my timetable. Very few if any of the "Commission" remained after May 1919; but he may have been among the few, if he was dealing with Asia. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:11, 30 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Iosephus Song Sui-Wang Recensere

Vale, carissime Andreas, in historia episcopi Jordan te vidi. Gratias ago! Etiam in haec nova re ire potes?

Rex Momo 18:57, 31 Martii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

subcategories for scotland Recensere

Salve Andrew, i was just beginning to create subcategories for scottish scientists - (Categoria:Zoologi Scotiae), like the english wiki does, i discovered that you removed Categoria:Geologi Scotiae, was this because of bad latin? Hendricus 10:03, 7 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

IPA, Sardou, etc. Recensere

Ciao I give you answer in my discussion page. Thank you and Happy Easter--Massimo Macconi 12:39, 10 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Andrew! Recensere

My pages are always very short, but I prefer to write little than to write a lot with a lot of misstakes--Massimo Macconi 14:36, 10 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Diarium, radiophonia et televisio sunt ... Recensere

Salve Andrew, Neander told me you might be the right person for questions about modern words in Latin. I'm looking for a translation of "(mass) media" (simple:mass media) and "media studies" (simple:media studies). Right now, radiophonia and televisio are parts of the Categoria:Technologia, while diarium is part of the categories "Opera" and "Litterae". Greetings from Berolinum --Kolja21 18:31, 13 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kolja, I am going to copy your question to the Vicipaedia:Taberna because I am sure that others, also, will have opinions on this! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:36, 13 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks! Sounds great. --Kolja21 23:01, 13 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Diodotus Recensere

Thank you! Indeed, I still have some bugs in my work; mistakes that I have made more than once. But everyone on here has been extremely supportive and constructive, and I will continue to sharpen my skills with all of your help! How do you feel about my Latin in general? Are there any notable overall corrections to be made in my style? CeleritasSoni 19:25, 16 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oranius Ioannes Tempesta Recensere

Salut, mon chér ami. Merci pour Nik NOvecento. J'ai laissée cette autre page en custorire ça fait long temp, mais pas de personne l'ont corrigée. Est ce que peut tu regarder se ça va?

Merci et a bientôt

Rex Momo 17:22, 28 Aprilis 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quaestio de categoriis Recensere

Andrew, just wondering why you're changing the category of "International organizations" (Organizationes inter civitates) to "Organizations of states" (Societates civitatum). Plenty of international organizations (e.g., the Red Cross) aren't run by the governments of states. Did my "inter civitates" for "international" throw you off? Is there another & better option? ¶ Otherwise, I'm fine with changing (the modern monstrosity) organizatio to (the classical) societas. IacobusAmor 12:55, 3 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We have two categories: Categoria:Societates internationales and Categoria:Societates civitatum. I think they cover it, don't they? But, if not, suggest a third. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:58, 3 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I didn't know that. I was avoiding the adjective internationalis because to Cicero (if Cassell's is to be belived) it would have implied something having to do with barbaric & uncivilized tribes (nationes). IacobusAmor 13:03, 3 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, that's us today, I guess :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:04, 3 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Macedonia Recensere

Thanks for helping to clear up the mess! For the sake both of clarity and of diplomacy, favouring none of the Macedonias above the others, I thought it best that Macedonia should become a disambiguation page, as it now is. --Fabullus 11:55, 5 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The best choice, I'm sure. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:56, 5 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Recensere

Your welcome is very kind, and I appreciate the helpful information. I hope that I can contribute to Vicipaedia without making too many errors!--Pebbles 17:02, 7 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

slovene wiki Recensere

Hey Andrew. I noticed you created Vicipaedia Slovenica. I was just curious why you chose to make this particular page. Do you have some sort of Slovenian affiliation? You can see from my babel template (I will happily translate for you if you wish) that I have an affiliation. Just curious, no big question. Cheers. --Ioscius (disp) 01:37, 11 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Algorithmus - algoritmus - algorismus Recensere

Hi Andrew, I see you redirected Algorismus to Algorithmus (the method) instead of Algoritmus (the man). However, I was just contemplating moving Algoritmus (the man) to Algorismus, which seems to be the oldest attested Latin name of the man. But perhaps you can think of a better way to distinguish between the two. These are the facts as I know them:

  • The man (al-Khwarizmi) is called in Latin Algorismus, Algoritmus and many other variants. Algorithmus (with th) does not seem to be among them.
  • The method is called in Latin algorismus, algoritmus but also in more recent publications algorithmus.

It seemed to me that we might use the unambiguous and modern-sounding algorithmus for en:algorithm, a concept that is still very much in use, and the oldest attested form, Algorismus, for the historical figure. What say you? --Fabullus 11:37, 17 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm sure you are right, Fabulle. I will delete Algorismus for the present, and you can place al-Khwarizmi where you think best! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:42, 17 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mrs. Greenwood Recensere

Scisne Margaretam Greenwoodem-Whalenem? Magistra mei est. Irishguy4m 23:49, 21 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bisbona Recensere

Multas gratias tibi ago! De pagina "Bisbona"...bene speremus!:) --MarcusXC 17:33, 29 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Salve! Come si usano i template in Vicipaedia? --MarcusXC 19:23, 2 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gratias! --MarcusXC 14:09, 5 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Veniam peto, bene non intellegi Recensere

Ave, Andrew! Veniam tibi peto. Non intellegi notae "UV" significationem et errorem esse putabam quia imaginem semper minorem inveniebam: ehu, nondum Vicipaediae Latinae peritissimus sum. Me excuso et tibi ago gratias de communicatione in pagina disputationis mea. Ave atque vale.--Alexander Gelsumis 19:40, 30 Maii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Credo optimam esse, ago gratias propter patientiam tuam. Si dubia aut impedimenta habebo in pagina creanda aut in imagine addenda, non haesitans auxilium a te petam. Vale.--Alexander Gelsumis 16:33, 1 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Edson Damian Recensere

Vale, carissime Andreas, et tibi gratias ago causa istae paginae. Can you watch again, a little, please? I put another new and a picture. Can you watch if all is good. Tibi semper gratias ago

Rex Momo 09:48, 1 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How to say "Novel" in Latin Recensere

Hi Andrew, I'm writing a Vici page about Gabriele D'Annunzio, one of my favourite writers. But how can I say "novel"? I have some ideas, like "Liber longior" or "Implicatior liber" but I hope you can help me. Thank you.--Alexander Gelsumis 17:08, 1 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For "novel" we usually say "mythistoria", Alexandre. Good! I look forward to reading the page! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:12, 1 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Patres Albi Recensere

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habeas? Can you watch a little this page, if I have written something wrong in my not good Latin?

Tibi semper gratias ago

Rex Momo 09:19, 5 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"Régime de Vichy" Recensere

De adjectivo censui. De nomine tamen adhuc incertus sum : "respublica", ut dixi, patenter non decet et "Francia" absurdior est, sed dubito an "regimen" facile intellegatur. Quid tibi videtur ? ThbdGrrd 19:52, 15 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chalcolithicum Recensere

Vale Andrea, paginam Aetas Aenea movisti ad Chalcolithicum. In pagina tamen Aetas Lapidea distinguitur inter Aetas Cuprea (chalcolithicum) et Aetas Aenea. --Fabullus 04:23, 17 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gratias ago, mi Fabulle. Corrigi errorem (cui ego contribueram!). Habui duas paginas, Aetas Aenea (eam nuper movi) et Aenea aetas. Nunc, fortasse, bene est. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:48, 17 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translation Request Recensere

Ad Vicipaedia:Tabernam movi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:28, 19 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category for translators? Recensere

Does Vicipaedia have a category for translators from Latin? I see that Haroldus Norse translated poems by Catullus (at least numbers 15, 16, 21, 33, 55, 81, 100) into English verse. Also Italian (or, rather, Romanesco)? He translated some poems by Belli too. IacobusAmor 12:40, 19 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, we have Categoria:Interpretes Latino-Anglici! At present we've developed these language-pair categories only for Latin, but it could in the future be done for other language pairs too. Meanwhile, to take account of Norse's translations from Italian, you can also put him at Categoria:Interpretes textuum Italianorum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:33, 19 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Done, and done. Thanks! IacobusAmor 13:36, 19 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Petens Ammonitum Recensere

Hey Andrew, I have a quick question. I just began working on Harrius Potter et Camera Secretorum, and got immediately stuck (of course) haha. In the first sentence it reads, "in aedibus Gestationis Lugustrorum", which is supposed to translate "In the house of Privet Drive"....I get "gestatio" as bearing/wearing (Noun), which makes no sense. Is this a common neo-latinization for Drive/Way/Road? Or can you at least put some sense into it for me? It would be greatly appreciated! (P.S. Casu primo posui hoc in disputatione de "Andrea Dalby"! Ha!) CeleritasSoni 00:47, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In what is perhaps an even stranger developement...why do I keep switching languages? haha too late for this =) CeleritasSoni 06:02, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Why me, CeleritasSoni? What do I know about Harry Potter?!? No, I can't make any sense of that. Since some of the Harry Potter books exist in Latin, the best way is to work from the names used in the printed translations. Don't know if that helps in this case ... Good luck! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:00, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Checked a dictionary; per L&S, gestatio can mean 'drive' in the sense of going about in a vehicle and in the sense of the place one does so. —Mucius Tever 15:43, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, yes, I see! Thanks, Myces. It's true, then: a "drive" (as a street name) is so called, historically, as a place in which one would drive a carriage. However, I can't help thinking that not many will understand the word "gestatio" if used as a street name. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:55, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, it is the name of the place. I don't know if there would be any words better suited to actually translate 'Drive' as opposed to other types of street. —Mucius Tever 21:58, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd assume it's Via. If this is the first Potter book, I actually own a copy, but I've searched & searched and haven't found it! If it turns up, I'll let you know. IacobusAmor 19:54, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Haven't found which? 'in aedibus Gestationis Ligustrorum' is on page 1, first sentence. —Mucius Tever 21:58, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, I see: it's the other way round! Well, maybe it's a misleading translation, as there's no significant conceptual difference among a drive and a street and a way: you can drive on any of them, and you can have an address on any of them, and each of them can be straight or curvy, wide or narrow. Whether a real-estate developer or a surveyor calls a path a drive or a street or a way may depend merely on whim. Both a street and a drive may be a narrow, winding road, and both may be as broad & straight as broad & straight can be. IacobusAmor 22:37, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I dunno, it might be misleading in the way that the surname 'Baker' is misleading when its bearers aren't pistores. In many places labels like "drive", "boulevard", "way", etc. are just part of the name of the street and don't necessarily describe its properties. The same town might even use them to have a Privet Drive, a Privet Lane, and a Privet Avenue all at once, so they can't usually be ignored or remapped. —Mucius Tever 23:27, 21 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For example, on the left you see a drive, and on the right a street. IacobusAmor 00:09, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gestatio for drive in the sense of a street for driving appears to be decidedly non-classical. As far as I know this neologism was invented by Peter Needham. The closest classical meaning is "a promenade, a place where one is carried to take the air". In general, it means "a bearing, a carrying, a being carried about". I would have just translated it as a "via" or if I really felt compelled to be more specific I would have just used "via autocinetica". However, as a Proper Name, rather than a mere substantive, I really can't dispute it.--Rafaelgarcia 00:33, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, those are just L&S's glosses, and they are working with a slightly different language than we are. (They give "bear, carry" and "be carried" as their major glosses for 'veho', too; a modern dictionary—Traupman's—s.v. gestatio has "ride (on horseback, in litter, in vehicle); drive (place); walk (place)".) I googled one translation of the first example L&S cite and 'gestatio' is translated by all of 'a ring, for taking the air on horſeback". —Mucius Tever 13:50, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For the record: Cassell's doesn't have gestatio ; and for the verb gesto (a frequentative of gero), it gives the basic sense as 'to carry, bear about' and a second sense as 'to ride about'. IacobusAmor 14:05, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To put it in context, just remember what Gestatio means in english and romance languages: gestation!--Rafaelgarcia 11:53, 24 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am afraid this is only one of Peter Needham's to my view misguided decisions. These include 'birotula automataria' for Hagrid's gigantic motorbike, 'Hermione' declined according to the third instead of first declension, and unattested 'Nicolas (indecl.) Flamel(us)' for attested 'Nicolaus Flamellus', to mention just a few that I happen to remember. --Fabullus 05:13, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The 'Hermione' gets me too, ever since I found out it was a Greek name. I'm sure I've mentioned my biggest peeve, where the basiliscus in the second book is everywhere a basilicus. —Mucius Tever 13:50, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The misspelling basilicus could emanate from the press (typesetter, copyeditor, proofreader), rather than the translator, and a diminutive form for a gigantic motorbike might have ironic value. Hermione, though, if it has an attested history in the first declension, probably shouldn't wantonly jump to the third! IacobusAmor 14:05, 22 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Recensere

Thanks for catching the error on exstinctus before it led to something.--Rafaelgarcia 11:54, 24 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

SOS !!! Recensere

Vale Andreas carissime, quomodo te habeas? Necessito adiutum tuum, si potes: je cherche, urgentement, le discours de Obama à L'Université de Notre Dame.... en Français.

Je l'ai trouvé seullement en Anglais, mais j'aurai besoin aussi en Français. Est ce que tu peut m'aider le trouver?

Tibi sempre gratias ago causa adiutorum tuorum

Rex Momo 12:00, 26 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Movere titulum: a "Pugna navalis apud Trafalgar (1815)" ad "Pugna avalis apud Trafalgar (1805)" Recensere

Ave, Andrew!

Errorem feci in hac pagina scribenda: nam scripsi "1815" pro "1805" sed nescio titulum redirigere. Potesne me adiuvare? Gratias ago.--Alexander Gelsumis 16:00, 27 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Emendationem a te factam vidi et eam magni facio. Ave atque vale,--Alexander Gelsumis 16:07, 27 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Recensere

Thanks, Andrew, for fixing the title of Electricitas so speedily. (I'll go to Wikipedia now and add a link there, so as to help our score on the ratings for the 1000 pages.) Now we have another problem: the article's nexus for Electrum wrongly redirects to Electron—which amber most certainly is not! If electrum really can mean electron, we need a disambiguation page, since Vicipaedia should surely allow for the possibility of having an article on amber! IacobusAmor 14:39, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You maybe remember, Iacobe, that you can deal with this yourself. Type "electrum" in the search box. When you get to "Electron", click on the little word "electrum" under the title. Now click on edit. Create your discretiva page. Eurekas! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:57, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We do have a discretiva page, see : Electron (discretiva), where amber is called succinum--Rafaelgarcia 15:05, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, right. Then I guess the redirect at Electrum could be edited to point to Electron (discretiva). Is that best? Succinum is surely the right Latin word for "amber". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:28, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ack. Now you're confusing me. The earliest source for succinum in Ainsworth's & Cassell's is Pliny, but electrum goes back to Vergil & Ovid; so, apparently being earlier, shouldn't electrum take precedence (even if it does come from Greek)? The form of succinum preferred in Cassell's is sūcĭnum, and that seems reasonable, if (as Cassell's says) the word derives from sucus. IacobusAmor 18:03, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You're right Iacobus. I think the original page authors like Pliny were motivated by the fact that the word Electrum is used for so many contradictory things: in latin just about any material that is amber colored is called electrum: gold/silver alloys as well as amber.
Under electrum Lewis and Short give :"ēlectrum, i, n., = ἤλεκτρον.I Amber (pure Lat. succinum), Plin. 37, 2, 11, § 31; Ov. M. 15, 316. — Plur., Verg. E. 8, 54. — " but under succinum they redirect to sucinum where they state :"sūcĭnum (succ-), i, n. sucus, I amber, usu. called electrum, Plin. 37, 2, 11, § 30; Mart. 3, 65, 5; 5, 37, 11; Juv. 6, 573 al."
So in summary, the proper name seems to be held to be sucinum or succinum with the more popular common name being the ambiguous electrum.--Rafaelgarcia 18:24, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll copy this to Disputatio:Succinum: let's continue there. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:39, 29 Iunii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Fauna Recensere

Iustinus Andreae diu absense spd,

Habeo, Andrea, domini André de flora librum, sed non de fauna. Scisne num exstiterit apud antiquos piscis (non serpens) nomine "aspis"?

Valere te iubet Iustinus 05:52, 1 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gratias tibi ago! Sed Pennatula rubra ...? Num sea pen? Si ita est, crux mea nondum resolvitur. Malum! --Iustinus 22:29, 4 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paginas meas a te visas esse Recensere

Hi Andrew,

I am really honoured that you found 'my' pages interesting enough to look them over one by one the day before yesterday, and that you found their latinity palatable enough to be rated L1! To be honest I have my doubts about the latinity of Terra Media (which I hope now to have improved), and Premislia (which still needs a careful check). You have also removed the "stipula"-template from many of my pages. Could you explain to me when a 'stipula' becomes a 'normal page'? Some of my pages are still extremely short, and could easily be expanded by someone more knowledgeable than myself. I feel especially honoured by your inclusion of some of 'my' pages in the list at Usor:Andrew Dalby/Paginae (aliorum) notabiles! By the way, Atropates is now included twice, and Media is a disambiguation page. Thanks and best wishes, --Fabullus 11:06, 2 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deletion? Recensere

Hi, do you know where I can place a request for deletion of my user page (Usor:Chaemera)? I've been searching for the appropriate page, but I can't find it. Much obliged. «Chaemera»™ 18:36, 4 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I found out you're a admin too, can you please be so kind as to delete my userpage for me? Thanks in advance. «Chaemera»™ 21:43, 7 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Circumequitatus Recensere

Verbum Circumequito -are constat hic. Putasne circumequitatus validum esse? (de chilense Rodeo loquor).

Ita, "circumequito" vidi. Non impossibile est quemdam, in lingua Latina hodierna, verbo "circumequitatus" usum esse. Si id speramus, possumus in pagina Chilia reinstituere ... Id nunc feci! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:20, 11 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rodeo, secundum MWCD, est "a public performance [ergo, ludus?] featuring bronco riding, calf roping, steer wrestling, and Brahma bull riding." Only one of those (four) activities features horses, and the activities of roping & wrestling don't seem to feature riding. A problematic term! IacobusAmor 17:25, 11 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Rodeo Chilensis non est sicut Rodeo Americae Septentrionalis. Vide: es:Rodeo chileno aut en:Chilean rodeo. Rodeo Chilensis does feature riding and in circles Cato censor 18:58, 11 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You seem to be arguing that Vicipaedia should use a single word for 'rodeo', and that circumequitatus should be it; but then how does that fit the sense of 'rodeo' as quoted from a North American dictionary above? If one word is wanted, it should be capable of conveying both senses. Ludi animalium tractatorum 'games of the handling of animals' could accommodate both senses (and more!), but it's a bit long and nonspecific. IacobusAmor 14:02, 16 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lingua Vandalica Slavica Recensere

Dear Andrew, could you please review this article I created? Thank you very much. El Mexicano 18:47, 12 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Media Recensere

Gratias iterum iterumque! Ergo tu consentias Media imprimis esse regio Asiae, deinde tantum aliae Mediae. --Fabullus 11:44, 15 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Formula:LHH Recensere

Hi Andrew. Thanks for the better wording. I adapted it from articles that link to LHH. Actually, there are many more: Specialis:Quaerere nexus externos/www.hls-dhs-dss.ch. Would you be willing to help me to replace the links by the template? --Leyo 13:13, 16 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

societas hominum Recensere

I think that's right, Andrew. I was going to add that myself, but I forgot the mot juste and wrote societates humanae which of course came up read, so I abandoned ship. Thanks for doing it correctly. =] --Ioscius (disp) 13:36, 17 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

De institutione Cynica Recensere

Alexander Andreae s.p.d.

Andrea, scribere paginam de institutione Cynica Antisthenis Diogenisque vellem sed nonnulla dubia de verbo hanc interpretante habeo. Non obscure rem agam: licetne institutionem Cynicorum verbo "Cynismo" interpretari sic ut intellegere possim et lato nostroque sensu?

Cura ut valeas. Alexander Gelsumis 12:22, 18 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Salve, Alexander! Verbum "Cynismus" (= philosophia seu traditio Cynicorum) reperio semel apud scriptorem Latinum tardiorem (Cassiodorum) et quater apud scriptoribus Graecis classicis seu post-classicis; hoc verbum igitur credo satis notum esse et nobis utile. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:59, 18 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gratias ago tibi. Vale! Alexander Gelsumis 14:11, 18 Iulii 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi! Need your help... Recensere

Hi! I'm from Polish Wiktionary. We are translating names of our main templates into various languages (our top 50) in order to help users who don’t speak Polish understand our articles. I wonder if you would be helpful and translate for us just a few linguistic terms into Latin. How about that?

  • [1] pronunciation - pronuntiatus
  • [2] definitions (plural) - definitiones
  • [3] inflection - flexio
  • examples (plural) - exempla
  • [4] syntax - syntaxis
  • [5] collocations (plural) - collocationes
  • [6] synonyms (plural) - synonyma
  • [7] antonyms (plural) - antonyma
  • related terms (plural) - cognata / verba cognata
  • [8] idioms (plural) - idiomata
  • [9] etymology - etymologia
  • notes (plural) - notae
  • [10] translations (plural) - versiones
  • derived terms (plural) - derivata / verba derivata
  • [11] transliteration - translitteratio
  • [12] transcription - transscriptio
  • sources (plural) – fontes

PS. Please note that some of them must be in plural. We’d be very grateful Best regards! --PiotrekSzwecja 16:37, 1 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It sure helps. Thank you! Here you can see them all. --PiotrekSzwecja 18:14, 1 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Diana pagina mensis Augusti. Recensere

Salve ! Plurimas gratias tibi ago, Andrew. Magno honori arbitror esse mihi, quod aliquantulum contribui paginae "Diana", ut quae digna titulo paginae mensis iudicata est. Tua cura meliorata magis placet quam antea. Marcus Terentius Bibliophilus 13:09, 3 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

De imagine Catonis Censoris Recensere

Ave optime, Andrea.

Cum quidem adhuc imperitus sim, intellegere non possum amotionis imaginis a pagina "Marcus Porcius Cato Maior" causam: in plurimis libris meis atque in paginis interretialibus inveni hanc imaginem (vide hic), remotam die 17 Iulii, esse hermam - Saeculo II a.C.n. factam - Catonis Maioris ipsius nec illam eius pronepotis Uticensis appellati, cuius statuae multae et imagines pictae nobis sunt. E Disputatione hunc nodum quaestionis esse intellexi, sed spero te me correcturum si errem. Auxilium tuum magni facio.

Vale, Andrea, et salve. Alexander Gelsumis 14:36, 7 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Salve optime, Alexandre. Imaginem olim in pagina habuimus, sicut et in Vicipaedia Anglica; et removimus (sicut et e Vicipaedia Anglica remota est) quia re vera nemo scit an imago Catonis sit necne. Legere potes disputationem hic: en:Talk:Cato the Elder#Portrait. Imago est pulcherrima, sed anonyma. Si credis imaginem Catonis esse, necesse erit citare fontem fidelem (in his non includo Communia!) huius rei ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:48, 7 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gratias plurimas, Andrea, tibi ago. Haec pagina utillima mihi fuit. Spero hoc dubium non nimis tibi molestum fuisse. Salve. Alexander Gelsumis 15:19, 7 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Franciscus Brusonus Recensere

Gratias tibi ago per refectiones tuas in Franciscus Brusonus.

--Achillus 11:12, 8 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Frusino Recensere

Cur omnes meas recensiones paginae Frusinonis delevis? solum mea recensio ultima ("Frusinas") corrigenda erat. --Luca P 19:04, 20 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Omnes errant: "delevis" -> "delevisti" ... --Luca P 17:55, 21 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translation of a short story Recensere

Hi Andrew!

I would like to request something from you. Yes, translation. I hope, it's not a bad thing for you. Some years ago I wrote a (really) short story about a lonely man (actually symbolized the Saami nation). I translated into some languages and I thought, it would be great to have it more, like also in Latina :) I made this page, the English translation is somewhere there. You can put the Latina translation there. Thank you again! Sorry for my disturb... :( - hu:User:Eino81

Villas Culturas Recensere

Gallice: Couture sur Loir (41) ----Clive Sweeting

Alpincica et languedocana Recensere

Salue Andrew, "Alpincica" et "Languedocana" non sunt inuentiones meae. Erant in formula "linguae romanicae". Lingua occitanica diuisa est: - lingua occitanica borealis: aruernica, lemosina, "vivaro-alpina" - alpincica ? vivarensis-alpina ? - lingua occitanica medianis siue australis: "languedocien", prouincialis - lingua occitanica atlantica: gasconica siue aquitanica Translatio vetus "languedoc" est "lingua occitana" (1319). Languedocana = lingua linguae occitanae? --Jfblanc 07:55, 26 Augusti 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gorgontiola Recensere

Vale carissime, quomodo te habeas? The right name of this city, where is also born the cheese Gorgonzola, is Concordiola, from Dea Concordia.

Can you take off the orrible Gorgontiola and tell som Bot to change? Perhaps is the same that created the page Codonio that I've asked to you to change in Cotoneum.

Thanks a lot!!!

Rex Momo 10:59, 10 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rex Momo Recensere

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habeas? Novam paginam scripsi et tibi adiutum peto, de ista pagina ad scribendas novas res. Non bene Latine scribo, sed in pagina Italica et Francica ire potes.

Tibi gratias ago

Rex Momo 16:50, 18 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nescio, I think it's better to leave Rex Momo like Rex as name and Momo as surname, that in Wiki.LA aren't translated. Rex Momo 19:14, 18 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Then I misunderstood. I did not know that "Rei" existed as a name. I thought "Rei" was his title and "Momo" was his name, derived from the ancient god "Momus". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:22, 18 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

salve! Recensere

hello my friend,I 'll try!Greco22 16:38, 23 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Recensere

Thank you for welcoming me; I am not able to write in a decent latin yet, so I cannot contribute here: next year I will be more free, and I will start a serious study of latin. I think that, as an italian, it's my duty. See you in future! Mparu 18:53, 23 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Adfixum/Affixum Recensere

Hello, if "affixum" is synonymous with "adfixum" as you say, then the definition of affixum needs to be changed as it does not comprise interfixes or infixes. See for example [13], [14], [15]. Greets, Solejheyen 17:39, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
P.S. Mea Latina mediocris est. Solejheyen 17:41, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I understand now that some people treat the two words as distinct. It would be good if we can cite a reliable source ... maybe a linguistics textbook. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:44, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I just found a better source, look here [16]. An adfix is not exactly the same as an affix indeed, though they have much in common. Solejheyen 17:46, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The awkwardness here, Solejheyen (in case you don't know), is that adfixum & affixum are merely different ways of spelling the same Latin word: the former is the etymologically correct (fussier, if you will) way, and the latter is the way that reflects the pronunciation. It's approximately the same difference as that between realize (the etymologically correct spelling) and realise (the evolved spelling, based on French). Just as there's no ordinary difference in lexical meaning between realize & realise, there's no ordinary difference in lexical meaning between adfixum & affixum. IacobusAmor 17:52, 27 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Interwikis Recensere

Please update interwikis in Formula:Abecedarium Graecum, using w:en:Template:Greek Alphabet because local interwikis are not current. 19:16, 29 Septembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ordo patriarchalis Sanctae Crucis Hierolosymae Recensere

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habeas? Haec nova pagina feci. Tibi gratias ago si custodire mea pagina potes.

A bientôt

Rex Momo 06:49, 9 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Andrew, how are you? Please, can you find 5 minutes to wacht this new page? Sorry, but my Latin isn't so excellente as your, and it's a pleasure that the page can be corrected form you! Have a nice Sunday a thanks a lot Rex Momo 10:45, 11 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think you're getting plenty of help from others, Rex. Hope that's OK! I'm a bit busy this evening ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:23, 11 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mutatio nominis Recensere

Salve! Usoris nomen suum mutare volo: possibile estne? --MarcusXC 17:50, 9 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nescio, Marce. Id Usor:Adam Episcopus efficere potest. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:30, 9 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gratias ago Recensere

Tibi gratias ago. Here we are lucky today it a sunny day, I will go in Italy in Milan to theather. I hope I can go on in the future with la.wikipedia, but at the same time I'm sorry we find only (from my point of view) few new friends for our project --Helveticus montanus 09:34, 10 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Commune Italianum Recensere

Haec de Formula:Commune Italianum removi quia minime me intersunt. Vide Disputatio Formulae:Commune Italianum :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:51, 14 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Philippus Maakaroun Recensere

Vale, carissime Andreas, quomodo te habes? Tibi parvum adiutum peto, si haec pagina corrigere potes, quia mea Lingua Latina non multum bona esse!!!

Tibi gratias ago

Rex Momo 17:03, 17 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

De cibis matritensibus Recensere

Salve Andrew! as you can see, I'm beginning a new series of articles on food from Madrid (Gastronomia Matritensis). I thought you would be interested! There are some dishes which may have had Roman equivalents and may have had a more adequate name, but I guess that I'll write you as I write them. Vale--Xaverius 14:00, 25 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mouthwatering! As for me, I'm working on breakfast this afternoon. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:53, 25 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pars secunda (de cibis Vasconum) Recensere

Hi again, Andrew! I was wondering, how do you say "curd"? my dictionary has simply caseus, but that would be confusing, and coagululum doesn't sound right to me. What do you think?--Xaverius 15:39, 29 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Secundum Cassell's: lac concretum. IacobusAmor 16:09, 29 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree. "Coagulum" is the rennet, not the resulting curd. "Caseus" is what it was sometimes called (just as you can call grape juice "vinum" the moment it begins to ferment), but that word is no help if you want to make the distinction between curds and cheese. "Lac gelatum" was also used, but it is technically wrong of course, so "lac concretum" is the best solution. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:27, 29 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pars tertia (de tomaculis et farciminibus) Recensere

Just bringing your attention to this, Andrew. As I wrote this on the same day as the discussion on "Cohortes" started, my comment must have passed unoticed --Xaverius 15:17, 10 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This time my doubt is a bit more complicated. Whereas in Iberian languages (Spanish, Portuguese, Basque and Catalan) and as far as I can tell in Italian too, we make a disntinction between cured and raw sausage (es:salchicha vs. es:embutido) I was wondering if in Latin such a distinction would exist. Whether if it exists or not, I came across several terms and I cannot decide which would be more accurate for either term: tomaculum, farcimen and lucanica. What do you reckon?--Xaverius 12:25, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Plus I now just thought about en:cold cut/es:fiambre, which would be the general category for all of these, wouldn't it?--Xaverius 12:28, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm really sorry, Xaveri, I overlooked this so-interesting topic. I have been pretty busy the last few days.
An authority on sausage is a paper by Frank Frost, 'Sausage and meat preservation in antiquity' in \Greek, Roman and Byzantine studies\ vol. 40 (1999) pp. 241-252. I have a copy before me as I write. Maybe Francus Frost deserves a Vicipaedia entry. Anyway, Frost believes (and gives evidence for the belief) that a botulus is the general word for a sausage, while a lucanicum (or lucanica) is a cured sausage. He doesn't discuss tomaculum. Unfortunately for us, Frank gives much more space to Greek terms than Roman.
Now I'm looking at my own collections of words. According to Aulus Gellius, farcimen was the upper-class word for what the lower classes called botulus; while according to Petronius, botulus and tomaculum were somehow worth distinguishing, and both might be served to eat. Apicius treats "short, chopped/sliced Lucanica" as ingredient in a cooked dish. In Petronius again there is a c(h)orda, served in slices. There is also a medieval Latin word salsicia that is the parent of modern "saucisse" etc.
The distinction you mention, incidentally, corresponds to French saucisse (fresh sausage) and saucisson (cured sausage). My inclination is to treat botulus as a sausage in general, botellus as a fresh sausage, tomaculum as a cured sausage, and lucanicum and chorda as specific types of cured sausage. But I'm not certain. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:43, 11 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Andrew - no worries about the delay. Then I guess that we would want a categoria:botuli which will include pages on fresh (Categoria:botella) and cured (Categoria:tomacula) sausages. Farcimen would then redirect to botellum, the general page on fresh sausages. Special sausages, like black pudding could be botellum sanguineum or something similar, although translating names of modern-day sausages may get complicated: weisswurst can be clearly botellum album, but chorizo may be chorizo (tomaculum) (although according to the DRAE, it derives from saslicium.--Xaverius 14:21, 11 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Libbie Henrietta hyman Recensere

Salve Andrew, how do you think a womansname should be translated? en:Libbie Henrietta Hyman, Hendricus 15:31, 26 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Salve Andrew, the past days i´v been correcting quit some articles, added some bio´s and a museum and even somen categories, there haven´t been any corrections after that. does that mean i´m starting to learn it? Hendricus 19:45, 26 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

template botanistae Recensere

Salve Andrew, the abbrevations are only to be used with botanical specimens, i'v added that in the formulae, i also added a little leaf, maybe you like it? Hendricus 18:41, 28 Octobris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cohortes = Parlamentum? Recensere

Dear Andrew, Could you look into this link which appears utterly bizarre to me but usor: has created and created again without explanation. It seems vandalism to me.--Rafaelgarcia 22:24, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cassell's and White's dictionaries don't make any such connection. IacobusAmor 22:30, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is not a vandalism, it is just the old Castilian name for parilament, "las Cortes" which existed in Navarre too and etymologically come from cohors. It is usually used always in the plural (las Cortes). I cannot think of a medieval document now which would call them cohortes in Latin, but I'll have a look --Xaverius 23:04, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It would seem then that Castillian cortes is a sibling of French & English court, as all three words reflect Latin cohors. But a court is not a parliament, and redirecting a form of Latin cohors to a word for a parliament but not at the same time redirecting it to a word for a court may therefore be inappropriate. IacobusAmor 23:28, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In the context of Spain at least, "cortes" are the parliament. However, this should not necessarily apply to Latin (even if in medieval Latin this was used to refer to Castillian, Navarrese and aragonese cortes).--Xaverius 23:30, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see. However, even with this figurative sense, in latin this could only be understood as a proper name at best. Corhortes Hispaniae = The Corhorts/Retinue of Spain, which obviously is not a synonym by any stretch for the term cohortes nor is it literally translating the spanish term Cortes either. Nevertheless the names Cohortes Hispaniae etc can be profitably incorporated in a disambiguation page on cohors. A latin source for such names should be given though, or the spanish/Navarre name should be preserved with a suggested latin translation in parentheses. THe issue now is how to communicate with the anonymous user...Do you think you can Xavieri?--Rafaelgarcia 23:59, 2 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll try again to communitace with him, but I do not know if it will work. I think it is the same user (with different IP) who created most of Canariae Insulae and Castella et Legio (in which, by the way, cohortes also appear). We never managed to contact him. And lastly, I haven't found a source for cohortes other than the RAE dictionary.--Xaverius 09:30, 3 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
[conflict of edits -- I see I'm partly repeating but will say it anyway! --] I'm glad Xaverius chipped in here because I didn't know this. But from what we now know, I'm prepared to bet the word does occur in the medieval Latin of Spain with this special sense. I don't have a citation to hand, however.
The immediate reason for a redirect, I guess, is that the writer on Navarra has used the word cohortes in this special Spanish sense. It's also used in that way on at least one other page of ours. That seems a fair reason to permit the redirect, at least for the present, until we have something better on cohors and/or cohortes. This writer, whoever it is, is a reliable Latinist who has made many, many useful contributions. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:04, 3 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

categories Recensere

Salve Andrew, i´ve placed some categories at Gulielmus Aitcheson Haswell, can you take a look for me? thanks, Hendricus 17:54, 6 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cypros an Lawsonia inermis? Recensere

Dear Andrew, I would appreciate it if you could have a look at the latest edits to Cypros (arbustum) and Lawsonia inermis, and my comments thereto at Disputatio:Lawsonia inermis. --Fabullus 09:30, 10 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Liber de wikipedia Recensere

Care Andree,

Facilius francogallice quam latine loqui est... sed, si vis, possum etiam anglice loqui.

J'ai déjà eu l'occasion à plusieurs reprises de lire vos articles de la wikipédia latine. Or, venant de recevoir une proposition de compte rendu de la part du Bulletin des bibliothèques de France (BBF), j'ai eu l'heureuse surprise de découvrir qu'il était dû à votre plume. Je dois le recevoir d'ici quelques jours et suis sûr de n'avoir que du bien à en dire.

Bien cordialement,

Remi Mathis 13:10, 12 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ah! Don't make such dangerous predictions, Remi! But it's nice to hear from you, and I'm pleased to know that you'll be writing something. In return, I'm sure that whatever you have to say will be full of interest. Good wishes -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:14, 12 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Non-fiction Recensere

Dear Andrew, How are you? Could you please help me? How would you translate in the page National Book Award no fiction section. Thank you--Helveticus montanus 10:22, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Greetings! It's not easy, is it? In classical times practically all books were non-fiction, so the distinction hardly needed to be made. You might say "Libri rerum", because "res" are matters of the real world. Iacobus and Rafael might have other suggestions.
For sections lower down that page you might consider "Libri iuveniles" and "Libri pueriles". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:39, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your very useful suggestions--Helveticus montanus 10:44, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

De revolutionibus Recensere

Adding this to category Germaniae scripta is erroneus. Majority of Polish books of this time were written in latin and printed in Germany. So Poloniae scripta Germaniae edita. Mathiasrex 15:19, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is no error. See Disputatio:De revolutionibus orbium coelestium. If the book was written in Poland, please say this in the text, adding a footnote if the claim is controversial. Having done this, you can add the category "Poloniae scripta". Do not remove "Germaniae scripta". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:47, 22 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

De Miecislao Recensere

Salve, Andrew. How can I undo the redirecto on Miecislaus I (dux Poloniae) ad Miecislaus I (rex Poloniae) without simply emptying the page as you told me not to do?--Xaverius 12:53, 29 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is the way to delete an awkward redirect and then make a move. Part 1. Try to go to the redirect Miecislaus I (rex Poloniae). You will be landed at Miecislaus I (dux Poloniae). Now click on the little words "Miecislaus I (rex Poloniae)" underneath the page title. You will be taken back to the redirect. Now click on "delete", and confirm that you wish to delete.
Part 2. Go to the page Miecislaus I (dux Poloniae). Click on "move". Type in "Miecislaus I (rex Poloniae)". (You wish a redirect to be created, so don't remove the tick. It is bad practice to remove redirects.) Confirm. The page will be moved. Eureka! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:01, 29 Novembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

damnatio memoriae Recensere

Hey Andrew, thanks for going back over my grammar in damnatio memoriae. I've been studying Slovene 5-6 hours a day this semester and my how my Latin (and everything else) is struggling as a result. That difficulty multiplied by attempting a total rewrite of an article at 0730 and I'm bound to miss a few hominums and delevits. I've missed being around here, but I think I'm finally at a point where my Slovene is good enough that I can scale back to 2-3 hours a day and find some more time to help out around here. Cheers =] --Ioscius (disp) 12:10, 4 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry, forgot to reply. I didn't realise they were your words I was trying to improve, Iosci! And, yes, you have been missed. But maybe the Slovene Wikipedia has been getting the benefit? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:12, 9 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aelam/Elam Recensere

Fortasse melius est paginas Aelam et Lingua Aelamitica movere ad Elam et Lingua Elamitica (nunc paginas redirectionis). Illud 'ae' vice 'e' videtur esse res tantum typographica e tempore classico tardivo cum inter ambo nihil interfuit. Nunc tamen, ut et Ciceronis tempore, 'ae' [ai] dicimus, non [e]. Etymologice 'e' melius esse videtur quam 'ae'. Praeterea, Elam quoque in fontibus Latinis (sicut Nova Vulgata) attestatur. --Fabullus 13:17, 8 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Laete consentio, Fabulle! Ego enim mutationes facio in pagina de lingua si tu eandem rem facis in pagina de regione. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:19, 8 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paginam Elam non possum delere qui magistratus non sim. --Fabullus 13:29, 8 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Da veniam: movi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:17, 8 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Praemium Runcimanianus Recensere

Going on with my pages dedicated to litterary awards it has been a nice surprise to find your name for the Runciman award. I see that in the page "Andrew Dalby" the prize is named Praemium Runcimanianum, should we modify the page's name? Ciao --Helveticus montanus 20:40, 9 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, I think you were right: "Praemium Runciman" agrees better with our rules. Yes, I was interested to see you created that page! Best wishes -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:20, 9 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Professores melius quam Professor Recensere

Recte me monuisti, mi Dalby, de usu Vicipaediae latinae, tam de litteris quadratis quam de categoriis, sequarque libenter hanc regulam mihi pro tua affabilitate indicatam. Hac occasione oblata, velim etiam te interrogare cur categoria nominetur Belgia non Belgica sive Belgium. Belgia enim nomen est nymphae quae repraesentabat Belgicam. Multo elegantius est, ut puto, loqui de regno Belgicae, sive de Belgica sive de Belgio. Rarissime Belgia invenitur apud nonnullos poetas neo-latinos. Aliquid aliud: categoria Professores sive Alumni Universitatum Lovaniensium mihi non videtur congruere cum veritate historica. Fuerunt enim Lovanii tres Universitates studiorum quae inter se nullum connexum historicum habent. Ita melius est categoriam pro unaquaque earum universitatum creare ut feci, ne ingens confusio fiat inter has tres scholas universitarias. Nescio quid tu de his rebus reputes, sed licet tibi de hac re tuam propriam opinionem sequi. Vale perquam optime.--Bruxellensis 17:01, 12 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Credo, care Bruxellensis, te recte dividisse categorias de eruditis Lovaniensibus: utilius erit categorias universitatum singularum habere. Possumus igitur novis categoriis semper uti, veteribus delere.
De nomine civitatis Belgiensis (et categoriae respectivae) licet apud Disputatio:Belgia ... disputare! Salve optime -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:44, 13 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your radio interview Recensere

Dear Andrew, a new nice surprise I heard you yesterday hearing a podcast of a BBC radio broadcast (All things donsidered if I rember right)! Ciao--Helveticus montanus 10:15, 20 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just heard you this morning!--Xaverius 10:47, 20 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hope some of it made sense. I can't remember what I said! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:34, 20 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Catharina Owen Eldred Recensere

Recte animadvertisti, mi Dalby, errorem quem calamus nimis rapide motus effecit et ad rectiorem formam illam Catharinam, pro tua eximia navitate, reduxisti. Quam optimus custos esse videris Vicipaediae! Quam sagax et perspicax scrutator! Te duce, omnia menda suum vindicem invenient! Gratias plurimas.--Bruxellensis 17:04, 21 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

dessert Recensere

Hey Andrew, I was reading some of the quotes on Cannabis, trying to figure out how I will organize that page better, when I came upon the translation of the Galenus which suggests that cooked cannabis seeds are used in a typical tragemata, which article I was thinking to start. I ask if that's the best translation of "dessert" or should it be a redirect to something better? (oh and I'm halfway through my Christmas present, your new book on Wikipedia). Best! --Ioscius (disp) 19:52, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What an excellent Christmas present idea! (Hope you're enjoying it.) The word tragemata was indeed borrowed into Latin -- used by Pliny and others -- and for good reason: at least, I can't think of a native Latin word meaning exactly what it means, things to chew alongside wine after dinner. It even survived into Romance languages (French dragée "spicy sweet e.g. sugared almond"). Yes, I think tragemata should probably be the word, though how closely it corresponds to dessert depends on your view of dessert ...
Ah, but now I realise that there is also the Latin word Bellaria, discussed e.g. by Aulus Gellius 13.11.7. He implies that the meaning is the same; in which case the substitution of tragemata may have been a matter of fashion, and we should perhaps choose the more-Latin "bellaria" after all. It already exists as an article, I notice, though covering "sweets" rather than "desserts". Gellius would disapprove of that interpretation of "bellaria", but he wasn't always right .... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:30, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am indeed enjoying it.
So perhaps we should keep the bellaria article covering confectionery in general and start tragemata specifically for dessert. If bellaria can have more than one interpretation and tragemata only one perhaps that's the way to go. My view of dessert certainly includes things to eat with wine after a meal. I'd even forego the meal in its favor. Thanks! --Ioscius (disp) 21:15, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, that makes good sense. And assuming we may include cheese in our dessert, I might make the same choice as you. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:38, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In my humble opinion cheese should be with every meal and as a snack in between.--Ioscius (disp) 22:22, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

a few more cibus questions Recensere

Hi Andrew, me again. It would help a lot if you could take a look at the whole Cannabis#Cibus section. I am linking things there but the majority of things are redlinks. Things I can't seem to suss out for myself:

  • Ephippus:
    • Brachus
    • Brygmus
    • Mnûs*??
    • Pyramides
    • Conchae (seafood?)
    • Iovis cerebrum??
  • Platina
    • Baricocoli Senensium

If you could help that would be great. Thanks! --Ioscius (disp) 21:08, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I suspect you should replace Brachus, Brygmus, Mnûs with [...]. No one understands these words, and there is no point in making the eager readers of the cannabis article puzzle fruitlessly over them. Pyramus I could do an article on, taking it from p. 70 of my A to Z. Conchae seems in the wrong place in the menu: maybe there's another mistake. There are sources on Iovis cerebrum: Athenaeus 514e, 642f; Zenobius 3.41; Hesychius s.v. Dios enkephalos. The phrase is claimed to mean "a morsel fit for a king", but I really don't understand why, and if it does have that vague meaning I don't see why Ephippus should put it in his list with all those other very specific things. Not very helpful, I'm afraid.
Baricocoli I can help with! See this link. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:38, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok see what I have done with brachus, brygmus, and mnus, but it lacks a source (that the meanings of these words are not well understood). Could always cite our resident food expert ;].
What shall we do with conchae, then? I agree it looks weird on that menu, but so it is written?
Same problem with Διὸς ἐγκέφαλος. Weird as it seems, so it is written. Should we add a reference to that too?
--Ioscius (disp) 22:18, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, on conchae, the meaning for what it's worth is most likely "mussel", Mytilus edulis. Seems best to link to that.
On Διὸς ἐγκέφαλος, the interpretation is given by Henricus Liddell, Robertus Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon. 9a ed. (Oxonii, 1925-1940) s.v. ἐγκέφαλος "III. prov. of rare and costly food, morsel for a king". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:41, 27 Decembris 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

a/ab Recensere

About your change to 50412 Ewen, I thought a was to be used before consonants, ab before vowels and h, and abs before t (if at all)? -- Robert.Baruch 14:42, 8 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, quite right (though abs can be forgotten). Similarly e before consonants, ex before vowels. Note that initial h is ignored (i.e. count as a vowel). I was afraid the script might not reliably make this distinction. If it can, do it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:01, 8 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lobia massonica Recensere

Verbum lobia, significat ut scribit Bacci id quod nos vocamus "a lodge" sive "une loge". Verbum massonicus etiam existit (videas Bartal etc...), videas infra omnes notulas meas. Etiam existit, secta massonica (quo utuntur hostes latomismi).

Si dici potest Secta massonica etiam dici potest Logia massonica, sive logia massonum, sive Logia francomurariorum. Lingua latina non est ut opinor rigida et congelata, semper adiectivus addi verbo potest. Ita anglice dici potest: a lodge aut a lodge of freemassons idem latine dummodo verba extiterint!

  • Francomurarius invenitur in Bacci
  • massonus in Ducangio
  • masso -onis in Blaise.
  • massonum secta in Blaise.
  • secta massonica in Codice Juris Canonici.
  • latomismus in Bartal

tamen verbum lobia, quo utitur Egger mihi videtur aptius. Hoc verbum, secundum peritos, venit et verbo francico laubja e quo cadunt verba theotisca Laube et anglica loft. In latinitate mediae aetatis invenitur (saec. IX) verbum laubia quod significat porticum. Sed secundum P. Guiraud hoc verbum venit e graeco logeum sive logium. Legito: Alain Rey, Dictionnaire historique de la langue française, II, Paris, 2000, p. 2046-2047, sub verbo "loge". Carolus Egger, Latinitas, 1983, p. 190, dat nomen: lobia.

  • Antonius Bacci, Lexicon vocabulorum quae difficilius Latine redduntur, Romae, 1963, p. 337: "francomurarius".: "
  • Vide: Albert Blaise, Lexicon Latinitatis medii aevi praesertim ad res ecclesiasticas investigandas pertinens, Turnhout, Brepols, 1975, p. 571, : masso- onis.
  • Antonius Bartal, Glossarium mediae et infimae Latinitatis Hungaricae, Leipzig-Lipsiae: latomismus

Vale. --Bruxellensis 16:15, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bene, et gratias ago. Oportet potius haec in pagina ipsa a principio aperte explicare. Si collocatio "lobia massonica" est neologismus, oportet id dicere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:19, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Etiam animadvertendum est in omnibus symbolis est iunctura lobia +massonica: Cur non latine?
  • de:Freimaurerloge
  • en:Masonic Lodge
  • es:Logia Masónica
  • et:Loož (vabamüürlus)
  • la:Lobia massonica
  • nl:Loge (vrijmetselarij)
  • pl:Loża wolnomularska
  • pt:Loja Maçônica

--Bruxellensis 17:05, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Quis potest tali quaestioni responsum dare? Sed et has res potes ab initio in notula indicare, sic:
1. Lobia massonica: fortasse neologismus? Cfr. Anglice Masonic lodge, Hispanice Logia Masónica. De verbis "lobia" et "massonicus -a -um" vide notulas alias.
Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:15, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lobby Recensere

Quod attinet ad lobby, mihi magis placet verbum quo utuntur Germani: Lobbyismus, etenim nemo scit quid sit lobium tempore medaevali, forsitan "porticus". Lobby cum duo b, non mihi videtur ex verbo lobium originem suam trahere. Inspiciendum est in dictionario etymologico scientifico. Valeas pancratice.--Bruxellensis 16:24, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tale dictionarium iam in pagina citavi hodie; tu citationem delevisti! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:32, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Tunc da mihi excusationem quia inconsulto feci mutando textum.--Bruxellensis 17:02, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Do! Et vale optime Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:15, 14 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Puy-de-Dôme Recensere


I'm not often on the Vicipædia, is it normal that Puy-de-Dôme is a redirection to Puy-de-Dôme (praefectura Franciae) ? Cdlt, Vigneron * discut. 15:14, 19 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Vigneron! The answer is that it's OK, it's not a bad thing, although it would be even better if we knew a Latin name for Puy-de-Dôme and then we could move the page to that Latin name. If you wanted to start a page for another concept with the same name (e.g. the mountain?) this is possible, the redirect can be edited to turn it into a full article. Does that answer your question? Greetings -- Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:55, 19 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thats ok for me. I searched for the latin name but I can't found it.
FYI : there is no concept with the same name (the mountain is Puy de Dôme). In french the hyphen are used for disambiguation (Puy-de-Dôme vs. Puy de Dôme, Mont Saint-Michel vs. Mont-Saint-Michel or Saint Michel vs. Saint-Michel).
Cdlt, Vigneron * discut. 15:41, 20 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Conventiculum Recensere

Hi Andrew. I proposed a meeting of vicipaediani some time ago, and now it seems that it may actually take place. If it were to take place, and you were able to come (I knot it is too far away still, but it just occured to me), we would be delighted if you could give us a lecture on Vicipaedia! after all, you are the only one with a book written on the topic, and we heard you in the BBC. There is plenty of time, so you can give it a thought if you wish. Cheers, --Xaverius 00:30, 27 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will certainly do my very best to come: Rome seems a good idea to me. And, yes, I am always happy to talk ... so I agree to say something ... but I hope others will also! Unluckily it appears Rafael can't come at that time. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:36, 27 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We can open in the discussion a setcion for "proposed topics" - maybe someone will also speak! It's a pity Rafael cannot come, but this means we'll have to organise another meeting in the States.--Xaverius 15:31, 27 Ianuarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translation Recensere

Hi, Can you translate my userpage here in the Latina Wikipedia? Thanks. --MisterWiki 16:27, 11 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This guy has a permanent block at en:, Andrew, you know this guy? --Ioscius 17:52, 11 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No offence, MisterWiki, but I'm a bit busy! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:04, 11 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem, but I don't know why everybody judge me because of that block. --MisterWiki 06:11, 18 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Forgive me -- that wasn't my reason. I really am a bit busy just now! Ask on the Vicipaedia:Taberna. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:33, 18 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

geoponica Recensere

Andrea, des mihi quaeso fontem illum in Geoponica ubi de introitu veris tractat? Gratias! --Ioscius 19:58, 12 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Geoponica 1.1 (chapter title: "On the subdivisions of the year, the solstices and equinoxes").
Incidentally, did you notice any of the following signs, mentioned in chapter 1.4? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:28, 12 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Holly-oaks [Quercus coccifera and Q. ilex] and oaks [Q. robur] fruiting heavily mean that the winter will be a long one. Nanny-goats and ewes, mating and wanting to mate repeatedly, foretell a rather long winter. If cattle dig at the soil, and stretch out their heads towards the north, they predict a hard winter."
No, but I saw the kurenti scaring away the winter. Can't be long now. --Ioscius 00:07, 15 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Usor ignotus Recensere

Salve Andrew. An usor ignotus is creating formulae in French, which I cannot understand, and I cannot communicate with him. I've asked Bruxellensis for help, but I thought you may also want to have a look at what he is doing.--Xaverius 13:48, 17 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, thanks Javi, I've blocked him for the present. He seems to be making unwanted duplicates of our Formula:Ling. Whether he has a connection with Usor:WikiDreamer I'm not sure. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:03, 17 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
What about {{U}} and {{M}}? I've asked Bruxellensis to translate a note to him into French, but as he is probably a Pole, we may need another usor who is actually Polish (like Matthiasrex).--Xaverius 14:06, 17 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think we can afford to wait for some explanation of those. The ones we have deleted clearly duplicate our Formula:Ling. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:09, 17 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

you around now, andrew? Recensere

Just sent you a mail. Comments appreciated =] --Ioscius 13:54, 20 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments sent :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:25, 20 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Salve Recensere

Iustinus Andreae spd, svbeev. Ab aliis notis in disputatione tua adscriptis video te parum nuper vacare, ne igitur multum te importunem. Attemen volo te rogare num epistolam meam acceperis. Vale quam optime. --Iustinus 05:54, 21 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Da veniam, mi Iustine. Accepi hodieque respondebo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:11, 21 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dummodo acceperis & repondere aliquando velis, contentus sum :) --Iustinus 17:49, 21 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Responso accepto gratias tibi ago! --Iustinus 03:05, 22 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nomen 'systema stellare' Recensere

(a Disputatio:Taygeta (systema stellare))

Systema stellare videtur alterum systema solare designare. Fortasse, systema stellarum (Anglice 'system of stars') melior est? Pantocrator 22:59, 23 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gratias ago ob nuntium! in paginam disputationis respondi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:02, 24 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Occasional editor Recensere

Hello, I am never going to do very much here as my studying of Latin only went as far as 1965 (4 years at school and one term at University), since when it has been hardly used. I have just done a Peter Fox article for the English WP having found that Latin articles already existed for several university librarians I knew something about. The Latin user name was of course just chosen as a variant on a pseudonym used by a 19th century author.--Felix Folio Secundus 09:19, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deleted image Recensere

You wrote in http://la.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disputatio:Abecedarium_Graecum as follows:

For the letter J (for which Jot is the German name) I have preferred an image giving both uppercase and lowercase forms. The various incarnations of Eta are dealt with at that page, but the image you supply will be more use when we have the Spiritus asper page. Watch this space.

that you prefer Yot in both uppercase and lowercase. This file that meets your preferences was deleted from Commons, because it was falsely classified as fiction, see http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Yot_uc_lc.svg&action=edit You can request its undeletion at image deleter's talk: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Anonymous_Dissident , which is preferable, because you are more trusted in Wikipedia than anonymous users. 19:29, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You're mistaken, I think: the file I chose is still there. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:35, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is not mistake. Deleted File:Yot_uc_lc.svg is nearly identical to image cited by you except serifful/serifless alternation, while having matching naming scheme, and has stylization strictly matching with:


I know about existence of this file from Internet Archive:


In http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Yot_uc_lc.svg&action=edit you must scroll up to see deletion log. 19:43, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm very sorry, but I can't help you. I chose not to use that file; I did not think it was helpful. Therefore its deletion from Commons is not a problem for me. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:17, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your revert introduced errors, because bad glyphs are pointing to bad letters. Reexamine your bad edit, please:


Note that San wikilink is falsely marked with Qoppa variant. I thought that you are reliable, but I now doubt that. 20:34, 26 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Consider your aims carefully. If your real aim is to waste the time of administrators and confuse readers of Wikipedia in many languages, yes, you have done some of that, but it hasn't made you happy.
If your real aim is to publish the truth as you see it, you're failing to do that. Even if some of your changes stay a short time, they are all reverted eventually.
Yet other people succeed in spreading information by way of Wikipedia. How is that they succeed, while you fail and make yourself unhappy? If this question interests you, I could suggest one or two ways in which you would succeed better.
But you have to be prepared to learn. I came to Wikipedia not only to teach but also to learn. If you believe you have learned everything already, and insist only on teaching others, Wikipedia is not the best place for you to do it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:45, 27 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Insigna Recensere

I was correcting a few of Nuada's city pages from insigna to insigne when I found there are over 120 more - too many for me to correct.

Is there any chance that insigna is a valid spelling? Pantocrator 14:46, 27 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, you were right. The plural "insignia" would be quite OK too, but "insigna" means nothing. One might ask a bot to help ... UV runs one of those ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:50, 27 Februarii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

VolkovBot Recensere

Please unblock the bot. The problem was in pywikibot framework where 'disambig' template was included into the list of disambig templates, and this confusion has caused bot's misbehaviour. I've corrected my local copy but the issue needs to be addressed globally for all iw bots. --Volkov 15:04, 4 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for unblocking. As for the template, if I got you right, current 'disambig' template does the same thing as en:Template:Otheruses. It may be wise to rename Latin template to avoid any further confusion. --Volkov 16:55, 4 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Middle voice Recensere

In many of your edits, most recently here, you have changed active to passive forms where the meaning is middle. This is good Latin, indeed. Latin preserves the PIE use of passive forms of otherwise transitive verbs with middle meaning, where English uses the active (this is the shortest way to summarize it). However, both Latin and English use the present 'active' participle also with middle meaning (also a PIE inheritance).

I mention this because it seems to be omitted in all Latin grammars I know of, but nonetheless is an important feature of the language. People are likely to get it wrong; perhaps we should add it to one of our guides? I was thinking of writing something myself. Pantocrator 13:47, 14 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry I didn't reply yesterday. Yes, I have always felt that a Latin passive (middle in sense) often corresponds to an English active intransitive: perhaps I'm unconsciously conscious (sic) of this because I studied Greek as well, and Greek retains a partly-separate middle voice. I hadn't thought about the use of the active participle with middle sense. By all means write something! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:00, 15 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I found a grammar that explains this as I have (the use of passives as middle in s. 125-126, and the double use of the pres. part. in s. 139), but it's strange that I had to look at so many before I found one that did. Pantocrator 00:03, 25 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I too have long believed many languages have a middle voice and just don't know it. If there isn't a functional difference of voice between "I open the door.", "The door is opened by me.", and "The door opens", then I don't know anything.
Not sure what you're reading, though, Pantocrator, for PIE lacked a passive voice (as is most widely postulated)?
--Ioscius 19:17, 15 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PIE is usually described as having a 'mediopassive'. Perhaps at some time it was only used as a middle, though, with no passives expressible in the language, but it is relatively easy to pass from the middle to the passive in such s system. Pantocrator 00:03, 25 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Persian Empire(s) Recensere

Salve Andrea, in pagina diputationis mea tibi respondi. --Fabullus 11:42, 22 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Honoratus/Honorius Recensere

I see you fixed the inconsistency by moving Honorius de Balzac to Honoratus. Should I then change the name on my list?

There are Saints of both names, but I know of no vernacular form today from 'Honorius'. This page and this show Italian Onorato, which confirms Honoratus (French apparently does not have a separate form from Honorius). Pantocrator 00:03, 25 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are Popes called Honorius (Onorio in Italian). There is also an Italian painter en:Onorio Marinari. So Honorius does certainly exist as a forename. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:35, 28 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, then, there is in Italy. I guess the forms must be taken separately, and we just have to assume that French 'Honore' comes from Honoratus for the reasons given. Pantocrator 01:04, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have no opinion as to which name is more appropriate here, but for an example of Honoré = Honorius, see fr:Honoré d'Autun --Iustinus

Interpretes textuum Hispanicorum, etc. Recensere

Good evening, Andrew. Excuse me that I write in English. I am looking at the Categoria:Interpretes textuum Hispanicorum. Is it meant to be the Latin equivalent of en:Category:Translators to Spanish? If "yes", please let me know, and I will inter-wiki this category and all the other similar ones. Best regards, --Fadesga 00:19, 28 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for checking, Fadesga. A good thing you did. In fact our category is equivalent to en:Category:Translators from Spanish (from, not to), and all these categories of ours belong under en:Category:Translators by source language. It will be good if you do the interwiki links! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:28, 28 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Andrew. Thank you so much for your kind remark. So, I have already inter-wikied all the possible "translator from..." pages I came across. Now, I wish two things: 1) that you create the Latin versions of "Category:Translators by source language" and "Category:Translators by destination language" (because the Categoria:Interpretes is actually "Category:Translators" and nothing else); 2) that you create a couple of subcategories, for instance, "Category:Translators into English" and "Category:Translators into Latin"; with these two new subcategories, I can help create further subcategories for other languages. I like this task!! Best regards from Montevideo, --Fadesga 23:35, 28 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

gratias Recensere

Andrea, gratias tibi auxilio tuo de pagina me scripta "Josepho Matt" ago. Sapiens et doctus magistratus es, et semper verba tua auscultabo. --Andrew K. 03:13, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

De libro tuo de Wikipedia Recensere

Ave Andreas,

Ecce versus quos scripsi de libro tuo sunt. Quos qui invenies.

Remi Mathis 07:38, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ok...i'm sorry :'( Recensere

ok...the next article I ask help to the tavern, I am also taking a course of autodidactic Latin I hope that to my next Article to be improved. I Wish you an Excellent Holy Week--Lodewijk Vadacchino 12:09, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Evidently Iacobus was willing to help, so there's no problem. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:13, 29 Martii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sumpa Recensere

I rather think it's excessive of you to try to get it deleted. There's no grammatical errors in there; only the title is dubious, and it's only still there because there's no agreement on the best name.

I'm not sure why you deleted Origo either; as I created it, I'm pretty sure it was in Latin! Pantocrator 21:00, 3 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Origo didn't read like Latin to me! But by all means have it back if you're going to work on it. Let me know. If we restore it I suggest you mark it {{Tiro}}.
It wasn't doing any harm, and I may well work on it. Bad English is still English, and bad Latin is still Latin. Yes, of course you should bring it back (outside of mainspace if you insist).
"Sumpa" is sitting on the borderline: there are errors in every sentence plus the title is neither a Latin word nor a foreign word. Are you still working on it? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:08, 3 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not at this moment, but I always keep track of my articles. Pantocrator 22:01, 3 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chronovisor Recensere

Mutasti, mi optume Dalby, "chronovistrum" in "chronovisor", quod, pro certo habeo tibi ius est, sed magis mihi videtur hic ius linguae latinae servandum esse quam ius privatum uniuscuiusque. "Chronovisor", ut mihi videtur, homo est qui vidit temporalia. Nonne tunc si auribus tuis verisimiliter delicatis displiceat chronovistrum, placere possit chronovisorium? Sed expecto sententiam senatus vicipediani. Vale semper perquam bene.--Bruxellensis 12:25, 5 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Et tu vale optime, Bruxellensis! Consensum disputationis ad paginam ipsam non video; scio autem nos regulam habere "Noli fingere". Igitur verbum Anglicum "chronovisor" misi quia citationem huius verbi faciliter repperi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:48, 5 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Bene secundum aureas regulas vicipedianas egisti, nunc est expectandum ut aliquis scribat de hac re.--Bruxellensis 13:09, 5 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tartessus Recensere

Salve, Andrew. How is your paper on Solomon and Tarsis/Tartessus going? or is it actually finished? --Xaverius 15:00, 7 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Taxinomia linguarum Recensere

Hi Andrew, is there, as far as you know, any generally accepted taxinomical nomenclature for languages? For instance, if Indoeuropean languages are a family, what then are the Indo-Iranian languages (a subfamily?), and what the Iranian (a genus)? --Fabullus 12:48, 8 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, I did look into this, a while back, when writing the Dictionary of Languages. My conclusion was that though some linguists, working on some families, have tried to introduce a fixed system -- with different names for each taxonomic level, and with different suffixes for the names of the groupings -- just like Linnaeus -- the great majority don't accept any such system. And personally I agree with the great majority! because (a) with gene research it is increasingly dubious to what extent such a system works in biology (b) even if did work for biology, languages aren't like that: they change for all sorts of reasons, at all sorts of speeds, and their relationships are much more complex than simple genetic descent.
So, when I was writing the brief Vicipaedia pages on Indian languages, I used "familia" for the highest-level group (everyone uses that word), and simply borrowed handy everyday words such as grex and series (one might add ramus etc.) for smaller units without seriously trying to be systematic.
Are you going to write more about Iranian languages? What a good thing! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:05, 8 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(Mithridate nostro exhortante, Latine pergam): Non in animo habebam plura de linguis Iranicis scribere. Novistine me antea nihil fere de his linguis novisse, sed quae scripsi plerumque alibi in interreti invenisse! Transmittendo tamen multa didici! Vale, --Fabullus 10:24, 16 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Textilia vs. textiles Recensere

Andreae Fabullus s.p.d. Valde gaudeo nunc paginam Latinam de bombycino scriptam esse. Scribesne etiam de serico? Ceterum credo Categoriam:Textiles cum Categoria:Textilia iam diutius exstanti coniungendam esse. 'Textilia' tamen melius quam 'textiles' scribendum esse puto. Vide “textilis” apud Charlton T. Lewis et Carolum Short (1879). A Latin Dictionary. Oxoniae: Oxford University Press. --Fabullus 15:22, 14 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recte mones. Contribui. Gratias, mi Fabulle. Fortasse tu vis de serico scribere? Si nolis, ego paginam incipere possum. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:51, 14 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Quid de Amorgino scis? Id nomen in pagina Anglica video, sed fontes a me lectis potius de productione insulae Cos loquuntur. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:06, 14 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
De serico tu paginam age scribe, nam ego ne differre quidem sericum a bombycino noveram! De Amorgino item nihil novi, sed Coa novi a commentatoribus Lucretianis qui putant Lucretius IV 1130 Cia aut Chia (manuscripta inter se discrepant) pro Cois scripsisse. --Fabullus 10:39, 16 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Admin stuff Recensere

I see you deleted a nuch of redundant pages today; why didn't you get around to those actually marked for deletion by me? One at least is not only a housekeeping deletion. Pantocrator 19:59, 24 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nothing personal! I just happened to be working through a different list. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:09, 24 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just posted another topic on the taberna; I wish I didn't but I know no one important responds to me elsewhere; but still if I just do it myself I get reverted and yelled at.

On English wikipedia, there are admins that spend much of their time responding to user requests and housekeeping stuff. Here, on the other hand, you are the only one here at all reguarly, and you spend all your time here writing articles - which is not a bad thing, but it's not what admins are for. Pantocrator 19:59, 24 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

True, there are not so many of us, and we all have our own interests and lives. Our main aim -- all of us, I'd say, whether admins or not -- is to make Vicipaedia bigger and better. At this stage, with a small number of regular users, that's best done (I think) by improving pages and writing more. Long discussions can be too much of a distraction -- and that means you may find that nobody wants to take on too many discussions at once. I guess you just have to take us as we are! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:09, 24 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I'm sysop on Papowo Biskupie Wiki. I organize action writing article Nowy Dwór Królewski on all languages version Wikipedia. Please writing article.

Link on Enclish Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nowy_Dwór_Królewski

Answer on this page: http://pl.papowo.wikia.com/wiki/Dyskusja_użytkownika:Kinrepok

Orationes Recensere

Congratulations, Andrew, on turning (most of) the orationes into preces. Macte! IacobusAmor 21:13, 5 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done them all now. But they are weak pages, most of them: they need a few more facts and many fewer lines of quoted text! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:02, 6 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translation Recensere

Hi there Andrew! Would you be so kind to help me translate en:RES_–_The_School_for_Renewable_Energy_Science into your language? Please. If you think that article is too long, here is a short version: "RES - The School for Renewable Energy Science is a international graduate school located in Iceland. The school is a higher education institution offering a one-year M.Sc. in various renewable energy technologies, continuing education. All instructions and correspondence are in English. Acclaimed international faculty ensures very high standard and quality." Thanks a lot and best regards. :) --D

Accurate Recensere

I'm well and you? I thank you for your -as always - precious suggestion. Could you please check also my new pages about the Football World Cup, for instance 1970. I will use it actually as a model. Thank you and ciao--Helveticus montanus 11:58, 9 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Interwiki Recensere

Please in protected Formula:Abecedarium Graecum change interwiki from bad

pl:Szablon:Alfabet grecki (horizontal)

to good

pl:Szablon:Alfabet Grecki (vertical)

because in this point two different interwiki sets are crosslinked. 21:11, 10 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Factum'st. --Ioscius 21:14, 10 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Formula:Abecedarium Graecum Recensere

Could you change interwiki as described in discussion. Malarz pl 21:27, 11 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Polish page to which you want an interwiki link does not exist. Also the Aragonese needed correction. Otherwise, I've made the changes you requested. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:37, 11 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
thanks. PL template have temprary title while I'm clening interwiki. The old pl:Szablon:Alfabet grecki was removed, bat some (three) protected templates have interwiki to them. When those interwikis will be corrected I will move template to this (corrrect) name. Malarz pl 20:17, 13 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That seems to have happened now, and I have corrected the interwiki to pl:Szablon:Alfabet grecki. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:58, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah, I see. No problem. I'll make that change as soon as you wish. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:31, 13 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I found, that ja interwiki should be ja:テンプレート:ギリシア文字, not ja:Template:現代ギリシャ文字. Malarz pl 19:11, 17 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, done. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:47, 17 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Casus belli Recensere

Hello, I understand why it was removed. You told me I can recover the data there, could you please restore it temporarily so that I can copy it somewhere else? Thank you, --Darwinius 14:04, 14 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, of course. Sorry to be inhospitable. I'll restore it briefly. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:06, 14 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's back there now. Please let me know when you have made your copy. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:09, 14 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've copied it now, thank you very much. It's me who have to excuse for using this wiki for unrelated business. :) Thanks again, --Darwinius 14:59, 14 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aloysius-Isaac Lemaistre de Sacy Recensere

Tibi gratias ago causa adiuti in hac pagina. Etiam in hac pagina me adiutare potes?

Thanks a lot, my Latin isn't so good as your !!!

Rex Momo 09:45, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Crosslinked interwikis Recensere

Please: in Sho interwikis:

change ku:Şo (japanese measure) to ku:Sho (Greek letter)

in Koppa interwikis:

change ku:Qoppa (indian city) to ku:Kopa (Greek letter)

because otherwise interwiki sets are crosslinked and bots are stumbled. 15:49, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OK, done. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:55, 19 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

De lingua prisca hispanica Recensere

Hi Andrew. I was wondering if for medieval Spanish it would be better to use lingua Castellana prisca or lingua Hispanica prisca. The thing is that this language (ipse sermone Roman paladino), was only present in Castille, and not in all of Spain, so Castellana may be more adequate. What would you think? --Xaverius 18:24, 21 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think you are probably right to prefer Castellana. My old textbook (Entwistle, The Spanish Language) carefully uses "Castilian" for the medieval period to about 1500 and then switches to "Spanish". And Nebrija, for example, calls it Castellana. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:31, 21 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Over here in the Americas, castellano is the Spanish language in general, including the language spoken today. IacobusAmor 10:56, 22 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The problem with Nebrija is that he is the hinge between both modern and medieval Spanish. I use always castellano anyway. I'll use Castellana prisca then in this case.--Xaverius 21:08, 21 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Non est obliviscendum quin vera lingua hispanica prisca sit lingua "vasconica" olim tempore Romanorum in tota Hispania locuta nunc solum in montibus Pyrenaeis!--Bruxellensis 09:28, 22 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And just a tiny thing, could you have a look at my versio latina of the Coplas por la muerte de su padre?--Xaverius 10:49, 22 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: Revert Recensere

Maybe, but the edit was made by a cross-wiki vandal. --Diego Grez 17:20, 27 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's better to check facts. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:39, 27 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categoria:Vetus Testamentum Recensere

sorry, I do not even remeber to have deleted the category, it was a misstake. --Helveticus montanus 06:24, 30 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]
here we are more lucky. The spring was cold and wet but the last 15 days have been sunny, ciao--Helveticus montanus 05:11, 31 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Satrapiae Imperii Achaemenidarum Recensere

In pagina disputationis mea respondi. --Fabullus 09:51, 31 Maii 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Et iterum ... --Fabullus 08:56, 6 Iunii 2010 (UTC)Reply