Quantum redactiones paginae "Disputatio:Fons Argenteus (Terra Mariae)" differant

::::::::::So are you saying, Myces, that we should translate "Silver Spring" but we shouldn't translate "Silverspring" and that this was the intention of the rule? That is certainly a clear rule, and easy to explain to non-linguists, which is a Very Good Thing. Questions may well arise from linguists, as we see, because the definition of "word" is not so universal and transferable as we English speakers think! I recall the famous Whorf observation, "Chinese has no word for ''word''". But, yes, it's possible to stick at the rule and interpret it language-by-language.

::::::::::We should change the example "New Jersey", though. It's confusing because the "Jersey" element has been translated, but the translation is not permitted by this rule. (I suspect that Nova Caesarea is fine for Vicipaedia because others have used the same translation before us, but there's currently no citation on the page to demonstrate that.)

::::::::::Turris Eiffel really is a different case from Silver Spring. If we are sure that ''Fons Argenteus'' is the way to go, we should insert a parallel example in the rule: maybe "Fons Argenteus". <font face="Gill Sans">[[Usor:Andrew Dalby|Andrew]]<font color="green">[[Disputatio Usoris:Andrew Dalby| Dalby]]</font></font> 09:05, 4 Maii 2011 (UTC)

::::::So some people are arguing that we may have ancient attestations of a Latin word for ''silver,'' and we may have ancient attestations of a Latin word for ''spring,'' but since we don't have an ancient attestation of a Latin phrase for ''silver spring,'' we must refrain from forming the obvious compound? That seems gratuitously restrictive. Besides, in the present case, we ''do'' have an ancient attestation of a Latin phrase for ''silver spring.'' It's in [http://books.google.com/books?id=rmoTAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA118&lpg=PA118&dq=fons+argenteus&source=bl&ots=IZPlWGjxve&sig=WqZeUBfRkySukyYWbQqr6-4hozE&hl=en&ei=fWm_TeiVGtOBtgfP4ry-BQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=fons%20argenteus&f=false Ovid]: "'''Fons''' erat illimis, nitidus '''argenteus''' undis." And if that's unpersuasive, marginalia anno 1815 paraphrase it, point-blank, as "Erat illimis '''fons argenteus''' nitidis undis." So there! [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] 02:44, 3 Maii 2011 (UTC)