lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Amor

message: i love you
(ita Latine "amo")
cur verbae primae, quamquam nomen non sunt, semper capital in prima portant? non decourm est hic rem!
thread_title: Usor ignotus scripsit:

message: What's that about Hitler? and where are the sources? The weirdness begins at the beginning: "Amor (-is, m.) affectus est animi, quo ad desiderium hominis alterius homo commovetur." Compare that with how :en:Love begins: "Love is any of a number of emotions and experiences related to a sense of strong affection." The Latin is narrow, and derives love from lust; the English is wide, and reads more like a psychologically informed statement. Our whole article is suspect, but we don't have a code for that, except "delenda," do we? or does "ScDub" suffice? IacobusAmor 03:45, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Delenda is a bit too severe but, no doubt, the article has to rewritten from the beginning. I think ScDB works for now...The english sentence you cite isn't perfect either because it's circular. For how is strong affection in this context different from love?--71.87.208.246 04:18, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :Maybe "love" is too slippery a concept to have universal meaning, and its definition depends on the philosophical or psychological theories of reality that form the cultural matrix in which it's embedded. It would help if our author would supply sources for the statements about Hitler, Stalin, and so on. In fact, the article cites no fontes whatsoever. IacobusAmor 13:31, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I think we ought to invent a formula or two about "pagina fontium egens" saying perhaps "haec pagina fontes omnino caret. Ambo te, has adde." or "haec pagina vel paginae sectio fontibus caret. Fontes adde ut lectores possunt sententias hic datas comperiri"--Rafaelgarcia 14:05, 12 Novembris 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: :::I think a lot of this is derived from writings on moral theology - Summa Thologica by Noldin & Schmitt perhaps? 82.36.94.228 15:45, 18 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: This is a strange article

message: The word "amicitas" appears a couple of times in the article. While it's a late vulgar form from which the French, Spanish, Catalan and Portuguese derived, it's not in classical texts AFAIK (it doesn't appear in Lewis&Short). I'm changing the forms. If 'amicitas' is correct please explain your sources. Loqu 06:18, 30 Octobris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Amicitas
Disputatio:Populatio

message: Quamvis recte, tamen populatio = cives verbum inusitatum est, quod solum apud Sedul., carm. 4 scriptum videmus. Quod inde vitandum sit. W. B. 13. Kal. Febr. 2006 20.30 UTC

message: Nonne populatio aliquid perdentem significat? Populatio in duobus dictionariis non numerum civium significat, sed perditionem. Habemus formulam quid dicit populationem esse numerum civium. Mutemus ut formula dicat "numerus civium" et "numerosissima" nec "populatio" nec "populissima". Sinister Petrus 20:53, 29 Maii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ita, quam dixi in disputationis pagina tua, multitudo fortasse est verbum optimum.--Ioshus Rocchio 21:24, 29 Maii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Nonne tandem Caesar dicit "multitudo" cum dicere numerum hominum voluit? An false memini? Sinister Petrus 02:55, 30 Maii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Dude, that's what I just said.--Ioshus Rocchio 06:09, 30 Maii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :::But dude, I was just confirming. I don't know how to say "duh on me" latine. Sinister Petrus 14:23, 30 Maii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Duh, mihi? =], sorry for being short, as the time stamp indicates, it was quite late.--Ioshus Rocchio 15:40, 30 Maii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nonne significat...

message: nunc in lexico perseus aspicio verbum popularitas:
I. (Acc. to popularis, II. A.) A being of the same country, fellow-citizenship: popularitatis causa, Plaut. Poen. 5, 2, 81 .--
II. (Acc. to popularis, II. B.) Popularity, but only subjectively, an effort to please the people, a courting of popular favor, popular bearing (post-Aug.): ne quid popularitatis praetermitteret, Suet. Tit. 8 ; id. Calig. 15; id. Ner. 53: quanto rarior apud Tiberium popularitas, tanto, etc., Tac. A. 3, 69 : gratus popularitate, Stat. S. 2, 7, 69 .--
III. Transf., the population, inhabitants (late Lat.), Tert. Anim. 30; id. adv. Marc. 1, 1
Nonne bonum esset sic paginam appellare quae de re hac loquatur?
replies: text: "the population" ~ "the people, the inhabitants" non est idem ac "population"; iam habemus paginam aptam nomine "numerus incolarum".--Rafaelgarcia 19:03, 2 Maii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  alterum nomen seligendum est.
Disputatio:Brimborium

message: I'll try to make a rough translation:
In German the word Brimborium is nowadays used for accessory circumstances, superfluous things, useless efforts, brouhaha (I found fuss, however, brouhaha sounds more like Brimborium; Brimborium does not mean anything to a German speaker but it sounds what it means). Brimborium comes from the French word "brimborion" (German Lappalie, English bagatelle ... or even more English: trifle) which goes back to the Middle-French (?) word „breborion“, „briborion“ (magic formula, ...). The origin of this word is assumed in the church-latin (?) vocabulary: Breviarium (short index, excerpt), the collection of catholic hourly prayers.
Origin and history of usage:
In the 16th century a Brimborium was a prayer, which was characterized by murmur and fast, inarticulated talking. Often it was a long prayer in Latin language. The Brimborium was interrupted of passages which were spoken a bit louder and more distinct to signal the other people (priests, monks, ...) the actual position in the text.
And so on ...
--Roland2 22:05, 20 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation from the German WP
Disputatio:Frictella

message: Platina goes on a pretty good tirade about the attitude that new Latin words shouldn't be coined, but it's not terribly relevant to this article. Still, I wanted to share it, so I'm posting it here:
replies: text: De Ofellis Quas Vel Frictellas Licet Appellare'

text: Frictellam a fricto dici nulla ratio obstat; friguntur enim haec esicia, unde et a frigendo sumpsere nomen. Male nobiscum actum esset si quod ex consuetudine in frequentem usum translatum est ad latinitatem traduci non posset, cum id et quadret et analogiam sapiat. Iniqui profecto in nosmet ipsos sumus, si id mala consuetudine ac pertinacia potius facere prohiberemur ad quod natura et lege impellimur; quis enim non propagari suum genus velit? Quis item quod abundantissimum cupiat restringi, et ad extremam maciem deduci gaudeat? Pedagogorum et invidorum haec est consuetudo, ut id quantum vis laudabile in alio improbent, quod ipsi attingere nequivere.

text: Habuit unaquaeque aetas quod latinitati adderet. Licuit, ut ait Horatius, semperque licebit signatum praesente nota deducere nomen. Scio ego plersoque oblatraturos in me quod ego nova nomina hoc meo scripto introduxerim; verum his ego, ut Herculem quondam latranti Cerebro fecisse aiunt, offas praepingues obiiciam quibus ut rabidi et femelici canes inhaerentes a me tantisper ad edacitatem caninos morsus convertent.
(He then follows with a score of recipes for fritters). --Iustinus 17:41, 24 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Platina
Disputatio:Systema numericum binarium

message: I'm not sure you can use dexter that way. The longer turn of phrase is more correct, but perhaps too clunky. Perhaps a compromise could be reached with digitus maxime a dextro or something like that. Traditinal grammars frown on using prepositional phrases as adjectives, but the Romans did not always observe that rule. I usually feel free to break it. Even if one can use dexter that way, the superlative would presumably be dexterrimus. --Iustinus 18:20, 24 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I find examples of both stems, dextrius is certainly the comparative, but I find dextrissimus and dexterrimus.  I don't mind a compromise, but the longer turn of phrase is, as you said, too clunky, certainly a version can be reached that is grammarically accurate, and aesthetically more pleasingly. Maxime a dextro is fine, but I still think dextrissimus/dexterrimus works, too.--Ioshus Rocchio 18:57, 24 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)

text: Apud Sallustium et Varronem invenies formam dextimus vel dextumus, quae mea sententia inde potius adhibenda sit. W. B. 9 Kal Febr. 2006 21.36 UTC
replies: text: :On those lines, dextrissumus ought to work, too.  Seriously, the language was spoken for a bunch of hundred years.  Compare American English today with the language in which the constitution was written.  200 years, a fraction of the time Latin was spoken, can certainly wreak extensive havoc on a language.  Many forms are "correct," especially in such ancient constructions as compartives.--Ioshus Rocchio 19:05, 25 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rightmost
Disputatio:Philippus II (rex Hispaniae)

message: Non est "Calori", sed Caroli.
Natus est in Vallisoletum

message: Meyers Großes Konversations-Lexikon, tomus 15. Lipsiae 1908, p. 780-781, (hic in interreti)
thread_title: Fons recensionis mense Maio 2021
Disputatio:I

message: What does diagraphum Italia mean?  Seems to me...one letter cant be a digraph.--Ioshus Rocchio 16:54, 26 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if it was supposed to mean "abbreviation"? --Iustinus 17:05, 26 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Digraphum duae literae sunt, digraphum provinciae Italiae possibile esset quod omnes provinciae Italianae duas litteras compendiarias habent. --Alex1011 09:00, 17 Decembris 2006 (UTC)

message: Sponsionem faciam iota esse nomen litterae istae, quo accipit de graeca littera ι: Dominus dicit in Evangelium Secundum Mattheum (Vulgatae) iota unum aut unus apex non praeteribit a lege (Mt. V, 18)
replies: text: Ne sponsionem feceris! Hoc in loco ( ἰῶτα ἓν ἢ μία κεραία / iota unum aut unus apex ) iota non videtur i litteram significare sed quamvis litteram exilem. Grammatici Romani semper de i littera loquuntur; videas quaeso Quintilianum (Inst. 1.4.11; 1.7.16), Diomedem (Gramm. 1.303.9 & 16), cett. --Neander 01:22, 8 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :Sed verba Domini de littera hebraea yod loquebantur! Possibiliter ergo Sanctus Mattheus litteram convertit, Sanctus Geronimus autem non!
replies: text: :: Non dubito quin de Hieronymo recte iudices (nempe si dicis eum ἰῶτα sine interpretatione Latinis litteris reddidisse). Constat Matthaeo Hebraicam / Aramaicam linguam fuisse sermonem patrium. Itaque, ut dicis, veri simillimum est eum yod, nomen י litterae, Graece convertisse. At equidem insuper dixerim eum hoc facto etiam Hebraicam huius litterae connotationem, id est 'litterula minimula', in Graecam linguam introduxisse. Non video aliam causam, cur Dominus ad י signum rettulerit, nisi quod littera minima linguae Hebraicae est. --Neander 22:14, 8 Iulii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonne ''Iota'' nomen est ei?
Disputatio:Cosmos (potio)

message: this should eventually be added to the article, I think, once I figure out where it should go:
*1076, Adami Bremensis Gesta Hammaburgensis Ecclesiae Pontificum 4.18: "Sembi vel Pruzzi ... carnes iumentorum pro cibo sumunt, quorum lacte vel cruore utuntur in potu, ita ut inebriari dicantur."
replies: text: I think I'll make a loci section, just for the heck of it. --Iustinus 16:45, 2 Februarii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: A further quote
Disputatio:Abecedarium

message: This thing needs a major rewrite.  The Latin alphabet isn't even printed, for instance, just spelled out.  And I don't think it's helpful to say "Aleph, id bos est," because, for one it no longer looks like the cow it once represented, and two, its a letter not a bos.  It should be explained that the letters were derived from animal (and other things) names, not just thrown out there "id est".  It would be helpful also to describe the origins of the alphabet, and how the letters evolved from Phoenecian.  Several more alphabets should be added, and from the closely related ones, a table might be useful showing the characters in the same line of sight, rather than aligned left all down the page.  I intend to do all this, I'm not just expecting someone else to make this changes.  Just wanted to put something on discussion page, because I intend to seriously restructure this article, and wanted to let any previous authors have a word in edgewise.--Ioshus Rocchio 20:42, 31 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I'll remove the 'id est's, and add the letter sounds. Dbmag9 18:15, 25 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)

text: Et quoque quisquis hoc scripsit nesciebat praepositionem "e, ex" casui servire ablativo, non nominativo. Articulum nominibus litterarum caret Latinarum; prosit scire quomodo litterae Latine dicatur.--Carolus 15:50, 26 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

message: ...non est verbum... Recte Europae- us, a, um.--Ioshus (disp) 15:28, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In certain rural American dialects of English there's Europeen ;) --Iustinus 16:38, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Europaenus... 

message: Re:
replies: text: "Hodie fere omnes linguae quas Europaei sciunt scribuntur cum alphabeto ex Poenico ducto."
Would this better be an ablative of means (with no cum)?

text: "Hodie fere omnes linguae quas Europaei sciunt alphabeto ex Poenico ducto scribuntur."
Also (since some Europeans who know languages know, e.g., African & Asian languages)?

text: "Hodie fere omnes linguae Europaeae alphabeto e Poenico ducto scribuntur."
Also (since linguists have been busy at work these last several hundred years)?

text: "Hodie fere omnes linguae mundi alphabeto e Poenico ducto scribuntur."
Jes' wonderin'. IacobusAmor 16:10, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Good points, I definitely agree.--Ioshus (disp) 16:49, 9 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "scribuntur cum alphabeto"

message: Duo verba habet lingua Latina quibus appellet seriem litterarum, alterum abecedarium alterum alphabetum. Potius quam aliud verbum a linguá Latiná aberruncandum aliud vero indistincté semper adhibendum, videntur ambo utilia quibus distinguantur, sicut in omnibus aliis fit præterea linguis, sensus concretus a sensu abstracto atque linguistico. Hac de causá mox quæ ad alphabetum pertinent in paginam alphabeti transferam, nunc innecessario inanem, quæque pertinent ad abecedaria in hacine relinquam. Avitus 13:25, 3 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Probe dicis, amice. Fortasse verbum alphabetum est postclassicale ("Late Latin"); abecedarium, mediaevale. Age sane! IacobusAmor 13:56, 3 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: De abecedariis alphabetisque
Disputatio:Perl

message: You're almost certainly right; I couldn't remember whether vocative followed the nominative or something else.  (See why I stipula-sort instead of writing articles? :P) --Alynna Kasmira 00:44, 1 Februarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ... see why I am categorizing ... ;-) As I remember vocative (as the name implies) is used e. g. when you could say "Hello, oh, world!". Typical circumstances are: 1) Words like "salve" when adressed directly to a person, the "!" and this possible "oh". At least this is my theory ... --Roland2 07:37, 1 Februarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Yes, unequivocally munde is the right form. I'm going to remove the dubsig.--Ioshus Rocchio 13:13, 15 Maii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Salve munde (rather than 'mundus')
Disputatio:Declinatio Prima

message: Credo dici " genus naturale" vice " genus naturalis"
"dei masculini sunt" vice " dei masculina sunt "

message: Now the order is:
 Nominativus 	
 Vocativus 	
 Accusativus 	
 Genitivus 	
 Dativus 	
 Ablativus 	
 Locativus
Shouldn't the cases be ordered by their alternative names?
 Nominativus    1st case
 Vocativus      5th case
 Accusativus    4th case
 Genitivus      2nd case
 Dativus        3rd case
 Ablativus      6th case
 Locativus      ???
Or are these alternative names not common?
--Roland2 18:24, 30 Aprilis 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoah...  Nah...they should be 
 Nominativus 	
 Genitivus 	
 Dativus 	
 Accusativus
 Ablativus
 Vocativus 	 	
 Locativus

text: That is standard order for textbooks and is the order for the modern inflected languages I know. Russian, Greek, Romanian (though they only have nom, gen, acc), my german textbooks list it that way.  Wheelock's lists it that way, Cambridge, Ecce Romani, Genny's, etc...--Ioshus Rocchio 02:24, 1 Maii 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, no I do not think they should be listed by the number names.--Ioshus Rocchio 02:26, 1 Maii 2006 (UTC)

text: Your suggestion is nearly the ordering I have in mind. I found these references ;-)

text: (See http://www.google.at/search?q=ablativ+vokativ&hl=de&lr=&cr=countryAT&start=0&sa=N)

text: * http://www.sbg.ac.at/phl/Kurs%20A%2004-05/Formenlehre%203.htm

text: * http://www.univie.ac.at/latein/lerg/frames.htm##2=http://www.univie.ac.at/latein/gr/gb.htm

text: * http://members.telering.at/anreiter/deklination_kons.doc

text: * http://culturitalia.uibk.ac.at/hispanoteca/Lexikon%20der%20Linguistik/c/CASUS%20OBLIQUUS.htm

text: * http://members.telering.at/anreiter/deklination_aundo.doc

text: * http://www.bglerch.asn-ktn.ac.at/latein/latein_hilfe3.htm

text: Some of these are academic ressources, however, I must confess that I have not listed the ressources which support other orderings ;-) I was searching in Google for Austrian pages and it seems that the order I have in mind is just used when the focus is on Latin. If someone is talking more general, other orderings are used, e. g. http://culturitalia.uibk.ac.at/hispanoteca/Lexikon%20der%20Linguistik/k/KASUS%20%20%20Caso.htm ("... rekonstruierten K. des Ideur.: Nominativ, Genitiv, Dativ, Akkusativ, Ablativ, Lokativ, Instrumental, Vokativ."). Another point: Most of my ressources are  either at the high school level or are Latin courses at the university which are mandatory for some studies like medicine. These are not the ressources which advanced linguists would use, I think. --Roland2 07:07, 1 Maii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :See http://la.wiktionary.org/wiki/Victionarium:Taberna#Order_of_nom._-_gen._-_dat._-_acc. --Roland2 12:33, 9 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Order of the cases
Disputatio:Gulielmus Shakesperius

message: Habemus poetam!

message: What's the "Imago:Johann Heinrich Füssli 025.jpg" doing as an illustration in this article? What does it show? Where's the caption? IacobusAmor 12:31, 10 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unexplained image 

message: Does anybody know where I could get a translation of Shakespeare's plays in Latin? --87.162.2.137 20:17, 21 Novembris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe you should ask this in the Vicipaedia:Taberna. --Rolandus 21:24, 21 Novembris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shakespeare in Latin
Disputatio:Monteiro Lobato

message: "vita defunctus" isn't there a better way to say dead in latin? Or am I miss translating this? Alexanderr 19:39, 2 Februarii 2006 (UTC)

message: Hi, this image is a suspected copyright violation and may soon be deleted from the Commons:. If your Wikipedia allows fair use, please consider uploading the image locally. Thank you. commons:User:pfctdayelise 12:43, 22 Februarii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Image:Brazilian author Monteiro Lobato.jpg]]
Disputatio:Religio Aegyptia

message: Why not religio Aegyptorum? --Roland2 20:45, 2 Februarii 2006 (UTC)
I don't really know to much about this, but before I added religio it said something along the lines of "Egypt has many gods..." Alexanderr 20:46, 2 Februarii 2006 (UTC)
Quem linguam raram loquuntur, amice?
replies: text: Rogasne cur linga rara loquamur? An aliud? Non intelligo. --Iustinus 04:54, 27 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

message: Re: "Populus cum sacerdotibus hos deos in templis magnis adorabat."—I always thought only certain priests were allowed to worship in certain parts of the temples. The sentence makes it seem as if the priests were ancillary to the populace. IacobusAmor 03:37, 4 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. We could fix it by removing the in. Of course there's so little actual text that it might make more sense to just totally rewrite it. --Iustinus 09:37, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Who could enter the inner chambers?

message: Having trouble getting a suitable cite on this one. But here are the unsuitable ones for now:
*Myth of the Sun's Eye (an Egyptian story which is preserved in both Greek and Demotic versions!). Greek version (JEA 55 and other places), lines 57—59:
replies: text: ... ὄμοσόν μοι κατὰ τοῦ

text: [ὀνόματο]ς τοῦ σου ἀδελφοῦ Ἀρε-

text: [σνούφιος·]

text: Iura mihi per [nome]n tui fratris Are[snuphis]
replies: text: :(As a bonus, here's the Demotic version, 4.12:

text: :ỉ.ḏd pɜ rn n Šw pɜy=t sn-n-mnš-nfr.

text: :Dic nomen Sosis tui fratris-vestis-boni.)
*An inscription from Philae, in AFP 3 (I'll add in the accents later):

text: Ὑ̣περ Βασιλε̣[ως] Π̣τολε[μαιου Θεου Εὐεργετου κ]αὶ Βασιλισσ̣[ης Κλεοπατρας] τ̣ῆ̣ς̣ Ἀ̣δ̣ε̣[φη]ς̣ τω̣̣ν̣ Π̣̣τ̣̣[ολ]εμαιου και̣̣

text: Κλε̣̣ο̣πα̣τ̣ρα̣ς̣ [Αρεν]σ̣ν̣ο̣υ̣[φει]

text: Pro Reg[e] Ptole[maeo Deo Evergetae e]t Regin[a Cleopatra] Adel[pha] (filiis) Pt[ol]emaei et Cleopatrae, [Aren]snu[phi].
That's right, I've foud one papyrus with Are-, and one inscription with the upper quarter of the -snu-. So far, no sign of the -phis. I'm beginning to wonder if this name is ever attested in full. If not it might explain why every scholar seems to spell the name differently ;) --Iustinus 09:37, 12 Februarii 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Arensnuphis
Disputatio:Extremadura (Hispania)

message: Nand possu crederi quo lan mian regiun nand venia acuí, tad lan'altraa regiuna. Onda solitio quo siat deuo-la si quest textu vat seri publicastu. Ei speru diei asd. Si quest serviut dieu aiund, speru quo fanda-xa del cassium. Moltan grazian.
*  Correctam formam Extremadura "Extrematura" esse reor: extrematura ab extremum, cum suffixo -tur-. Ethymologia Extremadura hispanice a Durio non certa, sed "extrematura", ut terra extrema.--Frater Carmona Valviensis 20:32, 3 Iunii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :Re vera etymologia verbi in Durio iacet, non in terra extrema. Numquam vidi "Extrematuram", et fontes nostrae regione Extremaduram necnon Extrematuram --Xaverius 21:38, 3 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

message: Linguae hic non multiplicandae sunt: hic enim encyclopaediam Latinam conficimus. Haec removi quia, si utilia sint, in paginis de locis singulis oportet inserere, minime hic: "(Hispanice, Lusice et Falice; Cáceres, Extremadurice; Caçris)"; " (Hispanice; Badajoz, Lusice; Badajós et Extremadurice; Baahó)"; " (Hispanice et Lusice; Mérida, et Extremadurice; Méria)".
Sententia "Praesens curiositas motus, Lusitanismus  nuncupatus, est" non intellego. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:49, 22 Iunii 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Explicatione sententiae carente, nunc retraho. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:53, 1 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nominibus