Disputatio:Index verborum Anglicorum sensu similium Germanicae et Latinae originis

message: I'm guessing that
replies: text: L.L. = Late Latin = lingua Latina postclassica?

text: V.L. = Vulgar Latin = lingua Latina vulgaris

text: M.L. = Medieval Latin = lingua Latina mediaevalis
I'm just not sure whether "postclassicus" is the correct translation of "late" here... Thoughts? Mattie 22:19, 26 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: : Interdum etiam pro postclassica de tardiore Latinitate loquimur. Neander 19:23, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Aha! Ecce verbum quod quaerebam! Mattie 19:26, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Latin

message: Did you notice that the links to Wiktionary have to be adjusted? At present they point to entries in Victionarium which don't exist. I guess you need to add :en: to each of them. Forgive me if that's already in progress.
The meaning of "aequivalens" might be a bit hard to specify here! But I don't claim there's a better word; the problem is that it's a woolly or lanose concept :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:08, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, yes, they point to the Victionarium, which as of right now doesn't have the pages, but I figured the idea's that the Victionarium's gonna work like any other Wiktionary, right? So the pages should hypothetically exist sometime in the future. But adding :en: wouldn't take long at all, and if you think it's for the better, I could! - [Mattie]
replies: text: :I see what you mean ... We normally don't make off-Vicipaedia links unless they lead to useful information, and if we come across a link that doesn't lead to useful information, we normally delete it. For example, our interwiki links at bottom left have to be real, and are deleted if there's no target. My inclination, therefore, is to stick with that and to encourage you to edit the links so that they point to en:Wiktionary. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:09, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::I'm reluctant to do so, because (1) the reader might not speak English, or only barely; (2) as I said, Vict. is supposed to have all these pages; and (3) whereas removing non-existent interwiki links does nothing to the article itself, changing links to the Victionarium from la: to en: does: it makes the article just a bit less Latin, which is always too bad. However, I took a look at the Victionarium's nuper mutata, and it seems very close to being dead, so I'm guessing no one will be writing these pages any time soon. Quam ob rem nexus mutabo, ut me volebas. Mattie 20:47, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :::In articles on all other subjects I would strongly agree with you on your point 1! With this article, however, we are talking about English words, and to find out more about them I guess the reader is going to have to make a stab at English sooner or later.

text: :::I wonder if a similar article could be made about French words (e.g. fauteuil/chaise). There wouldn't be as many, I would guess. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:34, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::Yeah, it's a bit of an English thing. I've never read a French text and thought, "This author uses way too many words of Germanic/Latin origin." But it's certainly happened once or twice with English. There was this one book I read, its style was so pretentiously Latinized that I kept reading it with a French accent!

text: ::::Have you read Politics and the English Language? Orwell talks about this quite a bit. Mattie 21:59, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)

text: Perhaps par instead of aequivalens?

text: "Woolly or lanose" :) Mattie 18:08, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: : Fortasse melius "Index verborum Anglicorum sensu parium Germanicae et Latinae originis"? Neander 19:20, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :: What if sensu parium → eodem sensu? It makes it seem less long-winded to me. But if you prefer yours, I'll take your word for it. Mattie 19:47, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::: Given "eodem sensu", how would you take care of the syntax? Neander 20:44, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: :::: Habebam in animo "Index verborum eodem sensu Anglicorum Germanicae et Latinae originis." Estne malum? Mattie 20:53, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::: If you construe eodem sensu as qualitative ablative, you get a syntactically rough construction: both eodem sensu (qual.abl.) and Germanicae et Latinae originis (qualitative genitive) depending on verborum. I'd definitely prefer verborum sensu ("abl. respectús") parium, which is syntactically easier to parse. Neander 21:12, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::::Ok, I understand; as I said, I'm not even going to argue. :) One thing, though – it seems parium should be replaced with similium, given that it's not a list of synonyms. Mattie 21:25, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::::: Ok. Neander 22:12, 27 Decembris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Links