lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio Formulae:Civitates et regiones Europae

message: I think Armenia is in Asia. --Roland2 14:36, 29 Decembris 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Vtrum Armenia et Georgia in Europa an in Asia magna sint, dependet e conspectu: Geographice terminus Europae re vera iugum Caucasus declaratur, sed multis in conventibus eae civitates inter Europaeas numerantur, e. g. quod attinet ad pittacia cursualia / consilium Europaeum et alia. 3 Kal. Mart. 2006 21.51 (UTC) usor:Bohmhammel
replies: text: : 1) Would it be ok to say "Armenia (geographice in Asia, sed politice in Europa sita)"? 2) If Irlandia is incorrect, the article should be moved to "Hibernia". However, at the moment it seems, that it is distinguished between Irlandia the civitas and Hibernia the island, the territory.  Should the articles, possibly, be renamed to Hibernia (natio) and Hibernia (insula)? --Roland2 22:46, 27 Februarii 2006 (UTC)

message: If I understand correctly, these are supra-national geographical regions. Is that right? I think Gallia, Germania and Pannonia have no reason to be in this list. Britannia is dubious too (though when Scotland becomes independent, Britannia will belong here again). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:13, 15 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Territoria

message: ad Belgium: Lege C. Iulii Caesaris commentarios.
ad Regnum Britannorum: Non exstant plures Britanniae, inde verbum Britanniarum sensu caret.
ad  Francogalliam: plus placet quam nomen Franciae, quod etiam ad regionem Germaniae pertineat.
usor:Bohmhammel, 6. Non.Oct. 2009
replies: text: Dear Bohmammel, If you wish to dispute the name of a country please go to that country's disputatio and argue there. You will find for example that the issue of Britanniae has already been discussed quite thoroughly, and the consensus was to go with an attested source. Likewise with Francogallia, Francia is used in Hoffman's encyclopedia and is closer to the modern name. With Belgium I'm willing to conceed the point but it should be discussed on the disputatio of that country.--Rafaelgarcia 22:31, 2 Octobris 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :De nomine Regni Britanniarum, addo hic (sed vide et paginam disputationis respectivam): nobis non oportet nomen huius regni fingere. Nomen officiale Latinum est, seu recenter erat, Regnum Britanniarum. Si non credis Britannias plurales exstare, vide paginam Britanniae (discretiva)! Sed, si nomen officiale Latinum recentius scis, fontes cita, s.t.p. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:44, 6 Octobris 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  de nominibus regionum
Disputatio:Pannonia

message: I am no expert, however, :de:Pannonien says the capital of Pannonia was Carnuntum which is located in Austria. The latter is true, I was there. ;-) :en:Pannonia lists the following countries as being parts of former Pannonia: Austria, Croatia, Hungary, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovenia, Slovakia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. So this must be true. ;-) --Roland2 18:56, 1 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
Adding more specific information from :de:Pannonien: Um 103 wurde die Provinz zweigeteilt, in Pannonia superior mit der Hauptstadt Carnuntum und Pannonia inferior mit der Hauptstadt Aquincum (heute Budapest). Which means: At about 103 Pannonia was split into two parts: Pannonia superior with the capital Carnuntum and Pannonia inferior with the capital Aquincum (today :en:Budapest). --Roland2 19:33, 1 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Presens Hungaria est
Disputatio:Galaxias

message: Either way is in use, but the academic preference over here is to italicize them:
replies: text: The word galaxy = Vocabulum galaxias
non

text: The word "galaxy" = Vocabulum "galaxias"
That may be so as to save double quotes for actual quoting and single quotes for glossing (and for quoting inside double quotes):

text: He said, "I like the word galaxy."
We see the confusion in

text: He said, "I like the word 'galaxy.'"
Where now the quoting looks odd. The period goes to the left of quoting quotes (single or double), but to the right of glossing quotes:

text: "He said, "I like the word galaxias 'galaxy'." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:25, 22 Decembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: :I think in a section on names and etymology it makes some sense to use italics for (among other uses) citing words in a foreign language, i.e. not Latin, and use quotation marks for (among other uses) citing words in our own language, i.e. Latin. It can be useful to distinguish the one from the other.

text: :But, you know, I don't really mind so long as it makes sense. I thought at first I was correcting my own inconsistency, and only realised afterwards that I had reverted a purposeful edit by you! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:47, 22 Decembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Words cited as words

message: Usque hodie non habuimus. Nuper hunc librum repperi:
*Bodifee, Gerard, et Michel Berger. 2010. CMG: Catalogue of One Thousand Named Galaxies. 2 voll. Hove Belgiae: Volkssterrenwacht Urania. De hoc libro Recensio brevis
Mihi videtur librum utilem esse sed ab aliis astronomis haud receptum. Igitur nomina Latina ibi proposita in commentationibus inserenda censeo sic vel alio modo --
* Messier 110 (nomen Latinum propositum "Lucida Andromedae")Citatio ...
sed nomina Messier, NGC, etc., ab astronomis usitata, in titulis et lemmatibus praeferenda. Alii quid censent? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:15, 22 Decembris 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Mihi placet! Lesgles (disputatio) 15:59, 22 Decembris 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nomina galaxiarum Latina 

message: Anonymus qui in aliis paginis lemmata alternativa sine fonte addidit, hic addidit nomen alternativum "galactica" cum fonte "Ebbe Vilborg. Norstedts svensk-latinska ordbok. Editio secunda anni 2009". An re vera Vilborg nomen substantivum singulare "galactica" accipit, "galaxiae" alternativum? Aegre credo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:59, 8 Iulii 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Melius video. Anonymus re vera notam nostram, antea ad verbum "galaxias" positam, post additionem suam movit. Crimen severius reprimendum! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:07, 8 Iulii 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Galactica"
Disputatio:Rolandus Koch

message: Dubitamus facta enim vel facinora hic descripta esse recta.

message: Shouldn't it be Orlandus?
From http://www.infobitte.de/free/lex/wpdeLex0/online/d/di/Di_Lasso-_Orlando.htm:
* Italienisch: Orlando di Lasso
* Französisch: Orlande/Roland de Lassus (übersetzt in etwa: »von dort oben«)
* Lateinisch: Orlandus Lassus
--Roland2 22:28, 7 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orlandus 

message: UV, make your case here, who is this guy?--Ioshus Rocchio 04:24, 8 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: He is the prime minister (you might call him governor) of the State of Hessen in Germany. He was apparently involved in bad news headlines in the context of a money laundering scandal and he seems to be a somewhat controversial figure. Still, the plethora of insults contained in this article obviously do not comply with the requirement of a neutral point of view.

text: While, to me, at first reading the entire article seemed to be one huge insult, I agree with Roland that the first sentence is NPOV. What if we keep the first sentence and delete the rest? (sadly, because I really had to laugh when I read it, but in my view it does not fit in an encyclopedia)

text: Greetings, --UV 22:38, 8 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Yeah, you're absoluely right. Stercorem delebo!--Ioshus Rocchio 03:08, 9 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Gratias ago. --UV 22:31, 9 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  delenda, vide UV 

message: 
 hilarius sed POV. 
 --UV 00:03, 7 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
 At least the first sentence is ok.
 --Roland2 22:15, 7 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
 Delevi contenta quae NPOV disrupit, ob sententiam populorum.--Ioshus Rocchio 03:12, 9 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
I agree to delete the sections which are wrong or an insult.  is for
deleting a whole article. See Vicipaedia:Deletio. --Roland2 06:05, 9 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, Rol, I was just explaining why the article is now just one sentence.--Ioshus Rocchio 12:26, 9 Iunii 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree that  is just for deleting a whole article. At first sight, I failed to realize that the first sentence is NPOV. Greetings, --UV 22:31, 9 Iunii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ratio pro contentorum delendo 

message: don't you latinize the surname? there are many people in germany to this day where some ancestor latinized their surname a long time ago, like "Gropius", or "Sartorius". While i never worked at Vicipaedia before and thus don't know how it works, i would propose to move this article to Rolandus Coquus (or Orlandus Coquus, if the above editor has a point). --Sarefo 10:50, 30 Decembris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for asking. I replied at Disputatio Usoris:Sarefo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:24, 30 Decembris 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  surname
Disputatio:Musica

message: This article has a incorrect structure. It must begin: Musica .........est.........--Daniel bg 10:50, 3 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Musica est ars. . . ." What could be correcter than that?! IacobusAmor 12:27, 11 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :It was fixed in March 2006. The bad structure was before then.--Rafaelgarcia 22:04, 20 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

message: The two depicted Western composers are Liszt & Wagner: not at all a NPOV. Someday, we must work on this. IacobusAmor 12:27, 11 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Imagines

message: Currently Cantus redirects to Musica.  This doesn't seem right.  In addition, under "Vide etiam" there is Cantus, which in effect redirects to itself.  If a separate article for Cantus ("singing") were written, that would of course solve both problems.  LionhardusCiampa 16:28, 20 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I started a separate article. --UV 21:20, 20 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cantus ... Musica ... 

message: ... e bibliographia. Sed certe oportet bibliographiam multilinguem praebere si possumus, et, si privilegium Angloamericanis datum reperimus, tale privilegium deminuere usque ad aequalitatem! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:04, 12 Maii 2015 (UTC)
(Una ayuda para subdesarollados que quizás no lo comprendrán: conocimiento es algo que solo existe en inglés. Lo mejor de lo que fué escrito sobre música? Todo en inglés -- óbvio. Algo escrito en alguna otra lengua que sea digno de mención?  No, nada de nada! Welcome to Wikipedia! Now in Latin!)
thread_title:  Haec removi ...
Disputatio:Formica

message: I'm not sure if my translation was effective, and I know for sure I am missing at least one word so I would like some help on this if possible.
I meant to say "Ants are insects, that have colonized every region/kindom on earth."
Or in turn "Ants are insects, that (who/which) have colonies on every region of the earth."
I know "every" is missing, but I hope the rest is right. Alexanderr 22:51, 6 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro

message: Formica of course. --Iustinus 07:16, 22 Martii 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, Ioscius asks me to address the polysemy of formica. In my opinion it should be handled as follows:

text: #formica = :en:ant

text: #formica (genus) = :en:formica

text: #Formica (plastica) = :en:Formica (plastic)

text: --Iustinus 18:32, 22 Martii 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 2008
Disputatio:Nux

message: Omnes imagines:

message: Image:Walnuts02.jpg|Iuglandes
thread_title: Iuglandaceae

message: Image:Chestnut.jpg|Castaneae
Image:Amerikaanse eik eikels Quercus rubra acorns.jpg|Glandes
thread_title: Fagaceae

message: Image:Hazelnuts.jpg|Avellanae
thread_title: Betulaceae
Disputatio:Europa

message: Is that first sentence right...is "de" latin. I was told that it didn't have any word for the or a(n). Alexanderr
replies: text: de here means "about" --Iustinus 15:47, 10 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: : Aliquot elocutiones parum felices emendavi, aliquot usque supersunt. By the way, may I suggest you change "Si quod quaeris ..." to "Si quid quaeris quod ..."? --Neander 20:02, 1 Maii 2007 (UTC)

message: When I was in school I learnt that Mont Blanc is the highest mountain in Europe. It was also what children's books in geography told.
Skvattram 10:33, 7 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In Western Europe, apparently, according to our en friends. --Emufarmers 10:42, 7 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Montes

message: Sequentem sententiam dempsi, quod ad aliam commentationem (Unio Europaea) pertinet: "Unio Europaea civitates continet quae viginti septem membra esse; maxima res politica et oeconomica est in hac continenti. Unio Europaea orbis terrarum oeconomiam habet, cum GDP 14.2 trillionibus USD (2006) aestimata sit; quae facit 35 centisimae GDP orbis terrarum."--Utilo (disputatio) 22:20, 24 Iulii 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unio Europaea
Disputatio:Imperium Cossanum

message: Hodiernum congruit cum nomine feminino:--> hodiernam ?
thread_title: error ? 

message: Leaving out the h in Budda and the various derived terms was not arbitrary. The title Βουδδᾶς is in fact repeatedly attested in Christian accounts of Mani/Terebinthus. I have long since given up on the idea of uniformly enforcing this as an attested, and therefor preferred, form: the consensus of Vicipaedia has pretty firmly placed the article on Buddhism s.v. Buddhismus, et ita porro. But I think when we're writing about an ancient empire, with a large Greek population, with so many names attested in Greek forms, or at least Greek letters (including, I hasten to add, ΒΟΔΔΟ), I think it's fair for me to insist on the attested ancient form. --Iustinus 18:36, 1 Ianuarii 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Budd(h)ism
Disputatio:Bomba atomica

message: It has been my impression that the pseudo-classical pyrobolus or pyrobolum is in much greater use among modern Latinists than the Medieval bomba. 
Morgan gives the following citations:
replies: text: .bmb bomb / bomba* [Apinus, Glossarium, 1728; Vox Lat.] (Helf.)  ]]  pyrobolus, missile ignivomum, (ignei) globi dirumpentes (v. displodentes) (m. pl.) (LRL)  ]]  missile ignivomum dirumpens (or displodens or diruens), globus igneus dirumpens (Lev.)

text: .bmb bomb  subst.  pyrobolus, i* m. (Anc. Gr.; Bonon. Acad. I, p. 291; Eg. D.L. 24; Eg. R.A. 117);  v.t.  pyrobolis* verberare (Eg. D.L. 59: "bellicae aeronaves Bagdatum ... aliasque hostium urbes verberarunt"; Eg. S.L. 8: "dum aeronaves loca pyrobolis verberant"), pyrobolos* deicere (Eg. R.A. 117: "ex aëronavibus Americanis pyroboli sunt deiecti, quibus haec basilica ... est dire verberata")

text: bmb nuclear: hydrogen bomb / bomba* hydrogenica* [Vox Lat.] (Helf.)  ]]  pyrobolum ab hydrogeno, atomicum ab hydrogenio pyrobolum (Lev.)

text: .bmb atom bomb  pyrobolus* atomicus* (Eg. D.L. 27)
To which I would add the following gloss from Koller, Orbis Pictus Latinus, p. 50 s.v. atomus -i, f.:

text: ***pyrobolum vi atomica explodens terrificantem vim destructionis obtinet.
(*** indicates a modern term)
What are your opinions? --Iustinus 17:37, 14 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)

text: Bomba non solum verbum veterius est, sed etiam multis linguis hodiernis adhibitum. Inde ego hoc nomen malim. -- W. B. 19 Kal. Febr. 2006 21.18 UTC
thread_title:  Bomba vs Pyrobolus 

message: I'm surprised not to see an article in this Wikipedia for A Canticle for Leibowitz, which, after all, involves both Latina and the bomba atomica. 192.12.88.7 03:24, 7 Octobris 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See here. 192.12.88.7 03:28, 7 Octobris 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :More to the point, perhaps. 192.12.88.7 03:31, 7 Octobris 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ::How about writing it, then? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:59, 7 Octobris 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: ''A Canticle for Leibowitz''
Disputatio:Bellum Peloponnesiacum

message: This is on the queue Mycēs set up for the Pagina Mensis. 
Suggestions: I assume this article was taken from the Epitome Historiae Graecae. That's a good source, but it's not written like a modern encyclopedia. Consequently this article will require a good deal of  reworking. If we can confirm the source we should also credit it, e.g. with . -Iustinus 05:19, 14 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Until some adjustment has been done, I don't think this article quite earns its star. At the least it needs a good introduction. Meanwhile I've taken the stella off: is that OK?

text: I have taken out the following, which is mere fiction, I think.
replies: text: :== Hippocrates ==
Attamen remanserat Athenis Hippocrates ille Cous, praestantissimus in arte AEsculapii magister. Ad eum frustra venerant legati regis Persarum Artaxerxis, rogantes ut opem ferret Asiaticorum oppidorum popularibus, qui eadem peste erant ipsi exhausti. Nequidquam ei pretiosissima munera obtulerunt, et maiora etiam dona polliciti sunt, si secum abire vellet. Hippocrates respuit divitias et aurum, et operam artemque Athenis ac civibus afflictis condonavit, discipulosque ad auxiliandum aegrotantibus in urbes proximas dimisit. Vis morbi, quinque fere millibus hominum absumptis, tandem resedit ; sed Pericli non pepercerat.''

text: Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:45, 21 Augusti 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pagina Mensis
Disputatio:Carolus Marx

message: Quod scio neologismum exstare graecum pro Kapitalismus, Kapitalist sumptum de litteris Aristotelis. Pecunia pro Kapital malum est, quod pro Carolo Marx pecunia non idem est ac Capital, Capital conceptus gradus altioris est quam pecunia. Alex1011 21:02, 22 Maii 2006 (UTC)
.-> capitale --Alex1011 11:37, 2 Maii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quo modo verbum Kapital Latine reddamus? 

message: Quinam isti in Vicipædia sint qui talem horrendam Latinitatem notula "bonæ Latinitatis" necnon stellula AUREA(!) signandam curaverint, equidem ignoro. Quiquumque autem fuerint qui e.g. 'suae notiones' vel 'nonnulla suorum operum' pro 'ejus notiones' en 'nonnulla ejus opera' etc. necnon eos qui talem barbariem magno plausu laudaverint, amice rogare velim ut imprimis quadam cum severitate et industria linguæ Latinæ studendæ incumbant antequam eam sibi tam temere scriptis mandare satis valere videantur, non sine aliorum laude et plausu. 
Alia quædam a Latinitate abhorrentia:
'diurnista' quale portentum mixobarbarum pro diurnario!
'revolutionarius' pro rerum eversore
'socialista' iterum verbum mixobarbarum 
'notabilissimi libri' pro nobilissimi/notissimi
'doctrina Marxus' ???
'se a fide convertere' pro e fide, seu melius religione/fide se abdicere 
'juris doctrina' pro juris prudentia
'librum constituere' pro conscribere
Atqui eo vocabulis tantum me contineo ut de sententiarum prorsus puerili dispositione sileam...
replies: text: Cum plurimis tuis commentariis, amice (Artaynte?), consentio. Ipse nonnullas emendationes feci et te ad alias faciendas invito. Mea autem sententia, socialismus, quamvis barbarus sit, manere debet, quia facile cognoscitur et in scriptis novis Latinis est usitatus (vide, e.g. litteras encyclicas Quadrogesimo anno).  Lesgles (disputatio) 03:51, 17 Ianuarii 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bonane Latinitas? 

message: Iohannes Grammaticus scribebat: "Latinized Marx unto Marxius. Revert this if it is not a good idea, or Latinize the other references to his name according to propper declension." Sed amice, you ignored and let stand the attached footnote, in which Pope Benedict XVI plainly states that the name is Carolus Marx. The morphology of your Marxius is plausible, but without a respectable attestation of it, don't be surprised if the magistrates come around and revert you. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 00:18, 7 Februarii 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't take a magistratus. Any user can and should revert a mistaken edit. An edit that contradicts a footnote, while leaving the footnote in place, is technically vandalistic (though I'm sure Grammaticus didn't intend to be a vandal) and should be reverted without delay. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:47, 7 Februarii 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen
Disputatio:Atropatene (res publica)

message: Nationem illam "Adrabigania" sive "Atropatene" apellare debemus? -- Alexander Gerascenco 16:52, 15 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "Atropatene", dico ego. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:29, 8 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :Nomen civitatis hodiernae in litteris Vaticanis est Azerbaigiania: „In Azerbaigiania Praefectura Apostolica conditur Azerbaigianiensis appellanda.“ - Fons: AAS 103/9 (2 Septembris 2011)--Utilo (disputatio) 21:10, 7 Iulii 2012 (UTC)
Haec terra apud Romanos Albania nominatur. Atropatene, recte Media Atropatene apud Romanos Arianae vel Persiae pars nominatur. --Hajo-Muc (disputatio) 19:53, 29 Iulii 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Appellatio

message: Ignoscite, hic lego "in Mare Caspio", nonne rectius sit "in Mari Caspio" scribere? Gratias vobis Equula
replies: text: Sic, mari est forma recta usitataque, sed mare aliquando invenitur (secundum Allen & Greenough 76.a.3). IacobusAmor 16:31, 8 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: ''mare'' vs. ''mari''

message: Imperium Seleucidarum a Romanis primo saeculo a.C.n. finitum est. Comparando hanc paginam cum Anglica repperi nomen "Seleucidarum" hic pro "Seljuq Turks" adhibitum esse. Quod correxi. Si quis nomen Latinius invenerit, libere mutato (cum fonte)! --Fabullus 22:45, 21 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In pagina nostra de Armenia agente, Turcae illius nationis "Seliucidae" appellantur (fonte tamen non adhibito). --Fabullus 06:52, 22 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :Newtonus citans Elmacinum (versione quadam Latina) (vide hic aut hic) scribit: Salgjuki (gen.sg.?). --Fabullus 19:11, 22 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Et Hofmannus scribit: 'Selgkuk' et 'Selgkukidae'. --Fabullus 19:25, 22 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Paginam 'Selgiukidae' feci. Fontes praebebo. --Fabullus 21:09, 22 Februarii 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Seljuqs

message: How is that possible—how can we learn more?—when that article is nothing but a duplication of the words of the present section ("Historia")? It should be deleted. We don't want to deceive readers. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:31, 7 Iulii 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I am afraid you are right - I saw the "non annexa" in Historia Adrabiganiae  and put here in "Adrabigania" (section historia) a half-cocked "vide-etiam" - unfortunately without checking one article against the other!--Utilo (disputatio) 20:53, 7 Iulii 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: De: "plus cognoscere vis, vide Historia Adrabiganiae"
Disputatio:Dollarium Civitatum Foederatarum

message: Propositum (ab Eichenseer et aliis) est dollarium, dollarii, n.  W. B. 18 Kal. Febr. 2006 19.15 UTC
replies: text: Ita, aput Conventiculum Lexintonianum solemus dicere "Vel Dollarium vel Thalarus"" (sed iam vidi alias praeter has figuras in operibus Novae Aetatis) --Iustinus 22:07, 15 Ianuarii 2006 (UTC)

message: Diligenter atque severe movenda ad paginam Dollarium Civitatum Foederatarum Americae seu CFA dollarium. --Alex1011 13:38, 13 Martii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quippe recte dicis...confiteor inclinationem meam...annos habitabam in CFA...modo putamus Americanus aequare CFA. Move, certe.--Ioshus (disp) 13:43, 13 Martii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dollarium CFA 

message: Cur "dollarium" Latine nobis, vocabulum neutri generis adhibentibus, dicendum est, cum omnia nomina singulorum nummorum ("sestertii", "denarii" et ceterorum), quod sciam, generis masculini sint? MARCVS 11:36, 25 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Nomen non finximus. 'dollarium' dicit Traupman (cum 'dollarus'), Minkova et Tunberg (cum 'talerus'), et Morgan (cum 'dollarus' et 'thalerus').   Nec fuerunt omnia nomina generis masculini; fuit miliarense n., drachma f., tetradrachmum n., siliqua f., etc.  —Mucius Tever 23:09, 25 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
Tibi pro responsione tua, Muci, gratias ago. Erravi "omnia" dicendo et minam necnon talentum, de quibus etiam apud Plautum legere possumus, ad alia addere potes, sed de ratione proprie Latina intellegendi et loquendi cogitabam, sicut ex sermone Latinorum genuino patet. Reverentia ab eis adhibita, exempli gratia, erga genera grammatica vocabulorum Graecorum nihil valet cum de "dollar" agitur. Dollaro vel dollario masculino ergo adhuc faveo. Qui autem "talerus" dicunt recte faciunt, meo iudicio. MARCVS 04:07, 26 Novembris 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cur "dollarium"?