Talk:Plus ultra

message: it's not non plus ultra, it's nec.
:Actually it's n—at least in today's common usage, which appears in mainstream dictionaries, and not infrequently in literate writing. The Merriam-Webster etymology calls it New Latin and gives no indication that the "ne" is a corruption of "nec". If the original phrase mentioned in this article does in fact use "nec", it really needs to be cited. AdRock (talk) 16:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Nec'' Plus Ultra 

message: I heard a story that "Nec Plus Ultra" was the motto of the kings of Spain up until the time of Ferdinand and Isabella (based, of course, on the Pillars of Hercules), and that the motto was changed, dropping the "Nec", after the discovery of the new world by Columbus, because it was found that there was "something beyond" after all.  Unfortunately I have no substantiation for this story. But it makes sense. 208.58.71.231 (talk) 23:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of Motto 

message: "Nec plus ultra" makes sense in Latin since "nec plus" = nothing more, "ultra" = beyond, but merely "plus ultra" is really a bit rare, I think. "Plus ultra" does not mean "more beyond", it would be simply "ulterior" (the positive comparative, "plus ultra" is as rare as "magis ultra"). I think so.83.32.114.227 (talk) 20:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct Latin? 

message: I was redirected here over "nec plus ultra" (being used to seeing "non plus ultra" and "ne plus ultra"), and am highly surprised over the contents of the page. I have never
heard of the Spanish motto before; and, certainly, the "non plus ultra"
version and its variations are far more wide-spread and well-know than "plus ultra" (in English,
at least). Further, as the article notes, they pre-date even the country of
Spain, let alone its motto.
I would strongly encourage a re-naming, -write, -priorisation of the article
to focus on "non/ne/nec plus ultra" with the Spanish motto as the side-topic.
Alternatively, obviously, a break-up into two inter-linked articles.
94.220.255.64 (talk) 19:03, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming and focus of article 

message: I find it ironic that the only thing actually referenced on this particular wiki keeps being reverted.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.114.34.219 (talk) 00:18, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mar-a-Lago tiles 

message: The sentence it is not Latin, see Wiktionary
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ultra#Latin
"Ultra" is either a preposition or an adverb. As preposition, it is not an adjective, so it cannot be put in comparativr degree (in fact, a true adjective is derived from it precisely because of this). You cannot say "plus ultra", you say "ulterior". It makes no sense the former. As an adverb, you cannot make a degree either. It's the same. The original sentence was French, not Latin, and was (mis)interpreted as Latin. Where are the Latinists?83.165.21.196 (talk) 15:35, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: There is nothing wrong with the latinity of "plus ultra": "plus" does not modify "ultra" as you imply (thereby wrongly putting it in the comparative degree). Instead, "plus" should be understood substantively, so the phrase means "more (things) beyond". Alatius (talk) 22:11, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  It is not Latin