Quantum redactiones paginae "Disputatio:Deimus" differant
Content deleted Content added
Linea 10:
:::Oh, OK. Not so simple. But if the classical pattern holds, we shouldn't have Dimos, should we? The -os is quite non-standard. <font face="Gill Sans">[[Usor:Andrew Dalby|Andrew]]<font color="green">[[Disputatio Usoris:Andrew Dalby| Dalby]]</font></font> 19:01, 16 Maii 2007 (UTC)
::::I believe that when a Britton says "quite" it's not as strong as when an American says it. I would say that when latinizing greek second declension masculines either ''-os'' or ''-us'' are acceptable, and in many cases they are even freely interchangeable. I opted for Dimos rather that Dimus simply because I worried taht the proper contraction of the ''ei'' to ''i'' might make it hard for modern minds to recognize the name, so I wanted to keep the rest unchanged. But I am not married to that. --[[Usor:Iustinus|Iustinus]] 20:00, 16 Maii 2007 (UTC)
:::You're right, I meant "relatively non-standard"! I still have a feeling we're being, shall I say, quixotic here. We have two well-attested forms, the pure Greek ''Deimos'' (which, in this case, is commonly used internationally) and the mildly-Latinised Greek ''Deimus'' which A. Hall originally chose. We have a third possibility, a standard Latinization of the Greek, ''Dimus'', which would be our default if no Latinization is attested. Why reject all three of these and choose a fourth, also (I think) unattested, ''Dimos''? <font face="Gill Sans">[[Usor:Andrew Dalby|Andrew]]<font color="green">[[Disputatio Usoris:Andrew Dalby| Dalby]]</font></font> 08:30, 17 Maii 2007 (UTC)
| |||