Quantum redactiones paginae "Disputatio:Interrete" differant

:: Well, the argument is, simply, that if you check any philological edition of ancient Roman authors, published in authoritative collections such as Scriptorum classicorum bibliotheca Oxoniensis or Bibliotheca Teubneriana, you'll find only ''conectere''. We scarcely have any better informants than philological editions of classical authors. [[Usor:Neander|Neander]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Neander|disputatio]]) 21:01, 6 Maii 2020 (UTC)

::: Indeed, when you had raised the point I had done a quick research and, with some surprise, I had found too that philological editions tend to prefer ''conectere'', ''conubium'', etc (with some exceptions though). However, given that unless you find it in an inscription, writing ''conectere'' instead of ''connectere'' is nothing more than an editorial choice, I wonder what reason could motivate editors to prefer ''conectere''. From what I know of Latin phonology and orthography I would think of it as nothing more than a misspelling. But I think that this can be a very good question for any linguist who happens to read this discussion. --[[Usor:Grufo|Grufo]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Grufo|disputatio]]) 00:07, 7 Maii 2020 (UTC)

:::::Cum Giorno2 consentio.

:::::Addo: rationes, quibus editores philologici hanc vel aliam orthographiam praeferunt, licet apud philologos postulare (sicut Grufo proponit), sed non hic! Hic encyclopaediam conscribimus, fontibus fidei dignis rite adhibitis. Mea mente, haec disputatio ad finem iam venit. [[Usor:Andrew Dalby|Andrew Dalby]] ([[Disputatio Usoris:Andrew Dalby|disputatio]]) 08:35, 7 Maii 2020 (UTC)