Quantum redactiones paginae "Usor:IacobusAmor/Disputata anni 2013" differant

 

Hi, Iacobus! I thank you very much for answering my doubt in the Taberna, but could you help me again? How could I say "by/around/near the campfire"? [[Usor:Casquilho|Casquilho]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Casquilho|disputatio]]) 11:58, 6 Februarii 2013 (UTC)

:Is something wrong with the simplicity of ''prope ignem'' ? [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 13:47, 6 Februarii 2013 (UTC)

:::''Ad ignem considere'', I like it. Thanks! [[Usor:Casquilho|Casquilho]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Casquilho|disputatio]]) 18:06, 6 Februarii 2013 (UTC)

 

Salve Iacobus, ut vales? 1)Quod tibi videtur de Lucius Skywalker? Melius sit Lucas Skywalker?(Vel aliqua more nomine Graece). Etiam possumus facere sit instar origine Luke Skywalker . 2) De Categoria Lingua Hawaiiana, amabo te movere quam melius tibi sit.(Aut relinquas ut iam sit.) 3) Velim citer vel serius creare res de larva(sicut Anglice insect youngling) sicut re latine "[[Vermiculus]]" et 4) [[Simia]]. 5) verbum "tragice" debet sit in dictionario tuo Cassells quae in Whitaker inveniri potest. Quod tibi videtur? Gratias.[[Usor:Jondel|Jondel]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Jondel|disputatio]]) 04:41, 21 Februarii 2013 (UTC)

 

:As discussed in our Swiss montagnard's page, let's wait a day or two, and if the bots haven't noticed these articles, a concerned human might attempt the fix. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 12:19, 12 Martii 2013 (UTC)

::::Scary! [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 12:08, 25 Martii 2013 (UTC)

 

:A curiosity is that none of my Latin dictionaries has a form of ''Hades,'' the Greek god of the underworld and hence the name of his domain. So I've been using [[infernus]] where necessary. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 15:40, 6 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

::Lots of new redlinks and red categories for you! ;) [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 15:54, 6 Aprilis 2013 (UTC)

 

 

Ave, IacoboAmore! I found the word ''cellum'' in the page about the cello and I've doubts about its existence. Maybe you've translated it from the English form, but I play it and I think ''cello'' is only used in English (for example not in Italian), so I wouldn't write it on the Latin page. Thanks for the attention, [[Usor:Franciesse|'''<span style="color:green">Fran</span><span style="color:white">ci</span><span style="color:red">esse</span>''']] 13:20, 2 Maii 2013 (UTC).

:Not enough work has been done to collect the Latin names & nicknames of musical instruments. ''Cello'' is the usual name of the instrument in many languages, as exemplified by wikipedia articles in Basque, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian, Hungarian, Icelandic, Ilokano, Indonesian, Latvian, Lëtzebuergesch, Norwegian, Malay, Runa Simi, Swedish, Tagalog, Vietnamese, Welsh, and perhaps others written in non-Roman scripts. For the moment, a footnote records that no attested Latin form has been found. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 14:00, 2 Maii 2013 (UTC)

::Thank you for your research, for the moment I'd cancel the name as you did, surely you know more than me about the relationships between English and Latin! Excuse me for my intrusion, but I'm going to work a little on that page, so I started from the title :-) Thanks again! [[Usor:Franciesse|'''<span style="color:green">Fran</span><span style="color:white">ci</span><span style="color:red">esse</span>''']] 14:57, 2 Maii 2013 (UTC)

 

... for your corrections of the new I've put about pope Tawadros and pope Francis! [[Usor:Rex Momo|Rex Momo]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Rex Momo|disputatio]]) 15:39, 12 Maii 2013 (UTC)

 

Emendationibus tuis gratias tibi ago.[[Usor:Jondel|Jondel]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Jondel|disputatio]]) 18:29, 12 Maii 2013 (UTC)

 

is [http://www.latin-dictionary.org/mediterraneus mediterraneus] (inland| remote from the coast ) ? [[Usor:Jondel|Jondel]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Jondel|disputatio]]) 14:40, 18 Maii 2013 (UTC)

:Yes, and ''mediterranea'' (n.pl.) serves as 'inland country', but we don't yet have such an article to link to, do we? If we do, please feel free to change the link! [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 14:44, 18 Maii 2013 (UTC)

::::Perhaps, I would be writing it. [[Usor:Jondel|Jondel]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Jondel|disputatio]]) 15:56, 18 Maii 2013 (UTC)

 

Salve, IacobeAmor! I was just curious about some emendations you made on the Philadelphia Flyers page. I'm not questioning them, but I'd like to know if there are some peculiar reasons for them because I made similar pages of all the NHL teams and am wondering if I should make changes to them too. [[Usor:Φιλέτυμος|Φιλέτυμος]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Φιλέτυμος|disputatio]]) 12:54, 22 Maii 2013 (UTC)

:I took the defintion from the English wiki, which for professional sports based in Canada and the United States should be taken to be authoritative. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 13:36, 22 Maii 2013 (UTC)

:::Thank you very much, your explanations did clarify many things! Yea, that ''foedus'' is undoubtedly a better choice than ''series'' - I just had to come up with some term, because I didn't have that many good dictionaries at hand. And yes, it would be welcome if other vicipaedians gave their opinion of the term ''conference'', but until that I'll go with the ''conloquium''. [[Usor:Φιλέτυμος|Φιλέτυμος]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Φιλέτυμος|disputatio]]) 14:06, 22 Maii 2013 (UTC)

 

 

Gratias emendationes tuas (--quamquam disputatio sit--). Erravi me paenitet. Tamen respondi. Quomodo satis dicere 'tunnel'? Crypta? Felicitationes.[[Usor:Jondel|Jondel]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Jondel|disputatio]]) 14:57, 27 Maii 2013 (UTC)

 

Salve Iacobe! "30 516 incolarum habet." Could you explain this one to me? I thought accusative was right and was using "incolas habet" as a template on other Belgian commune pages, so let me know if they should all be changed and I can do that. [[Usor:Lesgles|Lesgles]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Lesgles|disputatio]]) 21:57, 13 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

:Accusative ''is'' right: the ''numerals'' are in the accusative: ''triginta milia quingentos sedecim.'' The singular of 1000, ''mille,'' is usually described as an indeclinable adjective; the plural, ''milia,'' as a neuter noun. So: one thousand inhabitants, but two thousands of inhabitants. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 23:32, 13 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

::::Allen & Greenough #134 and Gildersleeve #293 imply that the canonical (or at least the preferred) form is the genitive with ''milia,'' though other forms occur. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 09:57, 15 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

:::::The practice identified in the old grammar quoted by Lesgles would be quite typical across languages, a sort of linguistic universal, that, in cases of doubt, the nearest handy element gets to choose the rule; so, if "milia" is nearest, it wants the genitive and gets it; if "trecenti -os -is" is nearest, it wants straight case-agreement and gets it.

::::::Actually, it looks like Gildersleeve does give the same pattern, at least in [http://archive.org/stream/gildersleeveslat00gilduoft#page/186/mode/2up this edition]: "tria milia quingenti equites, tria milia equitum et quingenti, equites tria milia et quingenti, equitum tria milia quingenti". Of course then he gives a quote from Livy with the genitive, but that may be because Livy liked using even ''mille'' with the genitive, as he notes below. I think Andrew's reasoning reflects why I was confused—that's a long time to hang on to the genitive when there are a lot of adjectives that come between. In a way, Gildersleeve's second option looks the best logically, but that would be clunky with large numbers ("30 milia incolarum et 516 habet"). [[Usor:Lesgles|Lesgles]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Lesgles|disputatio]]) 16:38, 15 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

:::::::Gildersleeve says, point-blank: "in the Pl. it is a declinable substantive, and must have the Genitive." That's the rule. He then goes on to accommodate a variant, as noted above. To be the most useful to the widest audience, the style of reference works typically uses canonical forms and avoids curious exceptions, no matter how "logical" they might look, or how similar they might seem to patterns in writer's linguistic substrates. That's why the suffix for the third-person plural indicative perfect is given in Vicipaedia as ''-erunt'' instead of ''-ere,'' why ''media urbs'' is preferable to ''centrum urbis,'' and why ''Lutetia urbs clarissima'' is preferable to ''urbs clarissima Lutetia'' (and ''Nirvana grex musicus'' is preferable to ''grex musicus Nirvana,'' and so on). [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 12:54, 16 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

:::::::::It's curious that I read Gildersleeve's prescription in exactly the opposite way. To copy the whole paragraph: "Mille, a thousand, is in the Sing. an indeclinable adj. and is less frequently used with the Genitive: mllle mllites, rather than mllle militum, a thousand soldiers ; in the PI. it is a declinable substantive, and must have the Genitive: duo milia militum, two thousand(s of) soldiers = two regiments of soldiers. '''If a smaller number comes between, the substantive usually follows the smaller number.'''" I read the "must" as applying uniquely when no other numbers follow; the following sentence is a weaker prescription ("usually") to ignore milia and follow the smaller numbers. Then the four examples given ''are'' the canonical usages, while the quote from Livy, <s>with</s>while the genitive is the curious exception (hence the "but"). [[Usor:Lesgles|Lesgles]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Lesgles|disputatio]]) 20:42, 16 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

::::::::::E. C. Woodcock, in ''A New Latin Syntax'' (1959, #77), states the rule this way: "the plural ''milia'' is a noun and always requires a genitive after it." In addition to the pattern cited by Andrew above, the seeming exceptions may relate to the fact that nouns may freely stand in apposition to each other; hence there's nothing wrong with ''pedites tria milia caesi sunt'' 'footsoldiers, three thousand (of them), were slain' = 'three thousand footsoldiers were slain'. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 13:13, 17 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

:::::::::::(If Woodcock were here, I'd like to ask him whether that ''after'' means "immediately after" or or not; it seems that the recent grammarians unfortunately don't explicitly consider this case...) But you're point about apposition makes sense. I think the takeaway is that different writers interpreted the relation between the noun quantified, the noun ''milia'', and the adjective numerals in different ways, and there are ample authoritative examples to follow for both usages. [[Usor:Lesgles|Lesgles]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Lesgles|disputatio]]) 17:04, 17 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

 

Salve Iacobe! Gratias ago pro emendationibus tuis, commentatio multo melior videtur. Vale, [[Usor:Lesgles|Lesgles]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Lesgles|disputatio]]) 19:36, 19 Iunii 2013 (UTC)

 

 

 

 

 

Dear IacobusAmor, Thank you very much for your input on [[Disputatio:Taxon_monotypum]]. You can read my response on the aformentioned page. With kind regards, [[Usor:Wimpus|Wimpus]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Wimpus|disputatio]]) 10:43, 3 Octobris 2013 (UTC)

 

Hi, Iacobus. I may not be a kind programmer, but I noticed the problem at [[Coemeterium Montis Alburni]] and I have diagnosed and cured it on that page. Unluckily the footnote system on en:wiki is not ideal for people like you who want to translate a large part of a page, but not all of it, to another wikipedia. This is not something that a programmer can solve for you: you have to do it yourself as part of your translation work. So I'll tell you exactly what to do. If you see, where the footnotes should appear, the text

 

|refs=

 

 

I noticed also your urgent pleas about transferring templates from en:wiki. Will you allow me to try to explain why there is often no response even from those Wikipedians who are good at making templates? There were always two reasons, and there is now a third:

# It takes a long time to do this work, and often there is no evidence that you (or others) would ever want the template on more than a couple of pages. In economic terms, that time would be badly spent: Vicipaedia will benefit much more from other work than from this.

# Templates on en:wiki are continually being altered. There is no warning that such alterations are happening, and ''copying those changes'' to other wikipedias is really complicated and frustrating. Therefore, copying a template now, and expecting to rely on en:wiki for the data, will entail an unknowable amount of later work to keep the template active.

# The third reason is new. Wikidata is gathering the information that goes into many of these templates. It is already possible to design templates here that use the information at Wikidata, and these templates are not dependent on the unpredictability of en:wiki. So, this different kind of template will be better and will reward the time spent on it.

 

:Quaestio curiosa. Hoc etiam ab eo dependet, quibus de formularum generibus loquamur. Hoc maxime ad id, quod ad ''infocapsas'' , seu ''infoboxes'' spectat, animadverti, quod valde ob penuriam talium formularum irritabar - ad hodiernum diem. Nonnullis abhinc annis, ubi me ad Vicipaediam Latinam adiunxi, illo tempore mos fuit laicorum paginas creantium non formulas (sicut et meus) addere, sed ipsam codicem tabulae, ut in paginis [[Savaria]]e et [[Regnum Hungariae|Regni Hungariae]] aliisque paginis olim faciebam. Et ego gaudeam, si formulas et Latine redditas faciamus. Paulisper autem irritor ob velocissimas (superfluasque, ut opinor) Vicipaediae Anglicae mutationes.

:Alioquin gaudeo, quod forma recentissima nostrae Vicipaediae tam bene, ad hodiernorum Vicipaediarum effigiem aptata est renovata.--[[Usor:Martinus Poeta Juvenis|Martinus Vester]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Martinus Poeta Juvenis|disputatio]]) 09:18, 4 Novembris 2013 (UTC)

 

 

 

 

Salve Iacobe! I was thinking of making a stub on [[latitudo alarum]] but then I saw at [[Disputatio Vicipaediae:Pagina mensis]] that you might already have a draft ready. If so, let me know! It's currently the top non-asteroid-related [[Vicipaedia:Dump/Paginae desideratae|pagina desiderata]]. [[Usor:Lesgles|Lesgles]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Lesgles|disputatio]]) 17:20, 15 Decembris 2013 (UTC)

:Yes, I was thinking of doing that long ago, but my interests have moved on, so by all means feel free to proceed! It'll definitely be a useful addition. Whether that should be its lemma, though, remains an open question. Signifying 'breadth of the wings', it's a perfectly plausible term, but just about all bodyparts (and some of their measurements) in all fields of biology have nomina biologiae propria (often Latin, or so obviously formed out of Latinate patterns that their Latinization is obvious), so ''[[latitudo alarum]]'' might not be the last word on the subject, so to speak. (It's not even certain a priori that the best word for what we call a wing in reference to insects is really ''ala,'' but it may be, since instances of it turn up in Latin contexts found on the internet.) For a wealth of details, see [[:en:Insect wing]], and of course you'll have seen [[:en:Wingspan]]. [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor|disputatio]]) 17:52, 15 Decembris 2013 (UTC)