Quantum redactiones paginae "Disputatio:Ebullitio" differant
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Linea 7:
:::::Rectissime dixisti. In English, the present active participle and the verbal noun happen to have the same ending - ''-ing'' - but their meanings are completely unrelated. ''Boiling point'' is ''point of boiling'', not ''point that boils''. In Latin ergo not ''punctum fervens'', but ''punctum fervendi'' or ''punctum ebullitionis''. --[[Usor:Gabriel Svoboda|Gabriel Svoboda]] 15:47, 21 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
::::::Except that we have ''punctum '''fervoris''''', not ''punctum '''fervens'''''. The former is a correct translation of 'point of boiling'. The English verbal noun (gerund) is equivalent to both of Xavierus's forms; for the reasons already stated here and the Taberna thread I preferred the former. [[Usor:Pantocrator|Pantocrator]] 23:00, 21 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
:::::::PC you're wrong that ''punctum fervoris'' is a correct translation. Look at the definition of fervor L&S: it means 'a boiling heat' not 'boiling' or 'being boiling hot': heat is not the same as boiling. The verb fervere does mean to 'steam/smoke' and contains the meaning "to boil" as a secondary sense so at least punctum fervendi would be ok. Punctum fervescendi would be even closer since fervescere means "to become boiling hot, to begin to boil". But neither of these captures the idea of boiling/bubbling as opposed to evaporating as punctum ebullitionis.
:::::::On the other hand, no one mentions what term the chemists used: the would be the right terminus technicus no?--[[Specialis:Conlationes/24.107.235.195|24.107.235.195]] 01:05, 22 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
:::::Vel '''''gradus''' fervendi'' &c.? (''Centi'''grade''','' nomen Anglicum, in mente habuimus.) [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] 16:37, 21 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)
| |||