lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Disputatio:Fetus biennalis

message: Traupman has biennialis, not biennalis. There's also the "very rare" (L&S) biennis, which Ainsworth has and Stearn recommends. (Maybe Linnaeus used it?) White's has biennius. And there's the widely known noun biennium. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:23, 1 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for commenting. Not sure where White found "biennius". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:08, 1 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: ::White credits biennius, -a, -um to "Pl."; maybe that's an error. It's not inconceivable that a noun having the form biennium implies an adjective having the form biennius, -a, -um. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:38, 1 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)

text: I don't find "biennialis" in Lewis & Short (I'm not sure therefore if Traupman's pen slipped) and the simplest move, I thought, was to "biennalis". But I agree with you, "biennis" is quite possible and perhaps better (Stearn is relevant). Feel free to move again! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:08, 1 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: ::English biennial assumes a Latin biennialis, but that's a backdoor attestation, and genuine classical forms should be preferred if they exist, unless some botanical authority (such as Linnaeus) has decreed otherwise. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:38, 1 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)

text: :Biennis may be rare, but there are a respectable number of occurrences in the classical authors (though more for the noun biennium), and none for biennalis or biennialis. Lesgles (disputatio) 12:41, 1 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Indeed, practically all the terms listed in that concordance attest the noun biennium (not the adjective biennis), but the authority of Stearn can't be denied. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:38, 1 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :::True, I didn't look closely enough; perhaps all of the bienni there are the genitive singular of biennium, and Gafflot goes as far as saying biennis is a "mot forgé." But I agree about Stearn's authority here. Lesgles (disputatio) 14:23, 1 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Bien.....
Disputatio:Anopheles

message: Quomodo Anopheles (m.?) declinatur? → Sing.: anopheles, anophelis, anopheli, anophelem, anophele? An anopheles, anophelae (cf. dynastes, -ae, m.). Ac pluraliter? Andreas Raether (disputatio) 13:44, 2 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Nomina Graeca in -ής (neutr. -ές) cadentia adeo raro (ut credo) in Latinam accipiebantur, ut ne nativi quidem locutores in illis declinandis consentirent. Quodsi anopheles anophelis ... declinaveris (ut isoetes,-is et isosceles,-is), certe satis recte ages. Et pluraliter secundum idem paradigma. Neander (disputatio) 17:48, 2 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: : Gratias, Neander. "In abore sescenti anopheles victimis inopinantibus insidiati sunt." Rectene? Andreas Raether (disputatio) 20:43, 2 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Recte, ut mihi videtur. Neander (disputatio) 21:14, 2 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Declinatio?
Disputatio:Rhamses I

message: In libris Anglicis reperiuntur nomina Ramses, Rameses, Ramesses. Sed quae forma nobis praeferenda est? Lesgles (disputatio) 08:49, 11 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, nunc video nos iam de nomine in Disputatio:Ramses II disputavisse. Lesgles (disputatio) 08:57, 11 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine
Disputatio:Ludgerius Westrick

message: : Ludger Westrick wird in Institutsakten als Ludgerus Westrick geführt, vide: . Wenn überhaupt wäre Liudgerus vom Namnespatron Liudger ableitbar, gebräuchlicher wäre jedoch Ludgerus. Eine Verschiebung nach Ludgerus Westrick ist sinnvoll und wünscheswert. Salutationes --Ἀστερίσκος (disputatio) 09:40, 15 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: : Ich habe nichts gegen eine Verschiebung, obwohl bei Wikidata und bei Munzinger nur Ludger steht. Dann müssten aber auch die Navigationsleisten aktualisiert werden, damit sein Name hervorgehoben bleibt.--Schulz-Hameln (disputatio) 06:53, 19 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Ich denke, du kennst dich damit etwas besser aus als ich. Vielleicht kannst du bitte gelegentlich hier einmal nachschauen, es gibt noch etwas Korrekturbedarf. Gratia et salutatio --Ἀστερίσκος (disputatio) 08:44, 20 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shift
Disputatio:Vulpes

message: Ecce litterae cursivae:
replies: text: Vulpes est animal.

text: Vulpes est nomen animalis.
(Anglice: italics for words defined as words, rather than as things.) Fortasse definitio emendari potest ut litterae cursivae evitentur per hoc exemplar: A fox is any of several animals. . . . = "Vulpes est ullum e nonnullis animalibus. . . ." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:21, 19 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Litterae cursivae

message: What's the evidence that genera Cerdocyon, †Dusicyon, Lycalopex, Otocyon, Urocyon are called "vulpes" or "volpes"? I suspect we're saying this with our fingers crossed, because these genera are called "fox" in English. If I'm right, we have no reason to copy the imprecision from English to Latin, and no reason to write an article about the extended meanings of an English word: that's a job for Victionarium. But I'll be happy to be wrong (I often am). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:05, 19 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, perhaps it's a stretch. I created the page mostly becuase it's one of the VP:10000. :it:Volpe, :fr:Renard, :de:Fuchs (Säugetier), and other Wikipedias cover roughly the same genera, which suggests that there is a cross-cultural notion of "fox" that is more general than just the genus Vulpes. To know for sure, I guess we need to look at older zoological literature in Latin. For example, at least Urocyon cinereoargenteus was once called Vulpes cinerea. Lesgles (disputatio) 18:51, 19 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :Yes, I guessed the impulse for writing the article! Well, I must admit that your last sentence provides some justification :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:57, 19 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Veritas?
Disputatio:Cereus paschalis

message: Haereo, utrum vocabulo baiulare recte utendum sit scribentibus de cereo portando. Mihi haud mediocriter displicet. Nonne ita dicimus, cum onera graviora tergo portamus vel potius dorso asini imponimus? --Bavarese (disputatio) 10:33, 20 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Ego quoque usum baiulandi verbi demiror. Emendationem tamen neglexi, quia nesciebam, utrum de errore an de ecclesiastica quadan dicendi consuetudine ageretur. Utique de sensu 'baiulandi' recte iudicasti. Neander (disputatio) 13:15, 20 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: : In scriptis ecclesiasticis hoc verbum reperio, sed tantum de crucem portando. Primo auctore huius paginae absente, verba emendavi. Lesgles (disputatio) 18:13, 23 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  de vocabulo ''baiulare''
Disputatio:Rationes inter imperia Sinicum et Romanum

message: An melius " ... imperia ... "? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:18, 25 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Ita, imperia! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:20, 25 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :Haesitabam, quia nonnulla exempla talium locutionum, qualium "lingua Graeca et Latina" () Sed fortasse recte dicite. Si omnes consentimus, ad "imperia" movebo. Aliter possumus enwiki sequi et scribere "rationes Sino-Romanae". Lesgles (disputatio) 14:53, 25 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Haesito et ego: talibus rebus linguae naturales non semper logicam "mathematicam" observant. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:04, 25 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Maybe inter Sinicum et Romanum imperium would work, the first imperium being understood. Or pluralize everything, as in Monumenta Graeca et Romana; this works, too, with arts, cities, coins, rivers, soldiers, and other things usually plural, but maybe not with empires, which are usually one-at-a-time entities in their proper locations? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:33, 25 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: ::::OK, since I haven't found any classical parallels for either construction, I changed it to imperia, which feels better to me as well. Lesgles (disputatio) 12:20, 29 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  plurale?
Disputatio Categoriae:Taxa Fischer

message: Haec categoria duos Fischer distinctos continere videtur. Est saltem unus alius Fischer, vide auctoritatem in pagina de Tulpidis. Lesgles (disputatio) 11:39, 28 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Errorem in pagina Dimyidae correxi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:18, 28 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :Gratias tibi ago! Lesgles (disputatio) 18:21, 28 Aprilis 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  De nomine
Disputatio:Brassica oleracea Grex Capitata

message: In :en:Brassica oleracea Brassica oleracea var. viridis dicitur "collard greens" esse, a "cabbage" Brassica oleracea var. capitata f, alba. Et in en:Cabbage#Taxonomy legimus "Cabbage (Brassica oleracea or B. oleracea var. capitata, var. tuba, var. sabauda or var. acephala)". Estne nostra pagina movenda? Lesgles (disputatio) 14:31, 4 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Strange: I can't remember making this move and it was uncharacteristic for me to do so without citing a source. Evidently I based the move on the pre-existing lemma in the text, which had been here for years, but there was never apparently any citation to support it! I would be happy now for you to move to whatever seems best (the simple "Brassica", as a classical name, remains possible). Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:12, 4 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :I moved to the scientific name, following our recent custom, but if people prefer plain classical brassica, that's fine with me too. Lesgles (disputatio) 14:53, 11 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  De varietate
Disputatio Categoriae:Museum Artium Universitatis Princetoniensis

message: This category formerly contained a single page. That page has been recategorized into a more fitting category. This category is now useless and should be deleted. 
Hac categoria habuit prius unam paginam. Illa pagina remota est ad categoriam majorem. Hac categoria nunc non habet usum et ergo delenda est.
Jujutsuan (disputatio) 02:14, 5 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It's back again now. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:00, 5 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion / Delenda
Disputatio Categoriae:Princetonia

message: This category is empty. It is therefore useless and should be deleted. 
Hac categoria est vacua. Nunc non habet usum et ergo delenda est.
Jujutsuan (disputatio) 05:47, 5 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No longer true. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:50, 5 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion / Delenda
Disputatio:Theatrum Orphicum

message: Cur hoc theatrum 'Orphicum' nominandum esse putatur? Nonne nomen proprium (theatrum) 'Orpheum' bonae latinitatis est? --Bavarese (disputatio) 08:21, 10 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Fortasse Orpheum (Memphis). Tibi consentio: verbum Orpheum per se aulam scaenicam vel musicam suggerit: haud necesse est mutare. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:43, 10 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :Constat inter nos omnes! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:27, 10 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orpheum
Disputatio:Pidgin

message: Definitio sic legitur: "Lingua pidgin sive piginanglica (-ae f.)Lexicon Latinum Morgan est lingua simplex." But surely piginanglica refers only to pidgins based on English? and it should therefore not serve as a lemma for the concept in general? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:34, 10 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: De hac re tibi Iacobe assentior. Itaque appellationem parum aptam dempsi. Et prout tempus vacabat rescripsi. Neander (disputatio) 05:43, 11 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Lemmata

thread_title: Notae
Disputatio:Officium foederale investigatorium

message: (1) For 'bureau', Traupman has ministerium. (2) For 'federal', foederalis, -e isn't found in L&S, and both Cassell's & Traupman have foederatus, -a, -um. (3) This is such a timely topic that one of the Latin radio stations is bound to attest a Latin term soon. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:34, 11 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Lemma

message: Arduum est alienarum civitatum institutorum appellationes convertere, sed forsitan operae pretium sit conari. Nam Intelligence agency mea quidem sententia melius Ministerium exploratorium aut Officium exploratorium dicitur quam Inquisitionis scelestae ministerium. Sed forsitan alius quis meliorem appellationem invenerit? Neander (disputatio) 08:41, 8 Iulii 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Vide :en:Frumentarii. --Grufo (disputatio) 10:55, 8 Iulii 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  De institutis convertendis
Disputatio:Claviatura

message: Claviatură, hujus verbi fontem scitum velim. Melius Latiniusque dum plectrologium plectrumque contra clavem videtur.Spukh (disputatio) 10:28, 14 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Exemplum hic invenies (Vogt, 1719). IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:59, 14 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :Exemplum ioculare hic ("lapsus claviaturae"). IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:54, 14 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Fons nominis
Disputatio:Eurovisionis Certamen Musicum 2017

message: Aliud nomen est Certamen Cantus Eurovisionis‎. Quid est melius? Vel fortasse Certamen Musicum Eurovisionis aut Certamen Cantuum Eurovisionis erit optimum? Attestationem habemus? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:24, 14 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen: Eurovisionis Certamen Musicum
Disputatio Formulae:Principes Franciae 1799–1946

message: Res huius capsae e Formula:Praesides Franciae die 14 Maii 2017 extractae sunt. De auctoribus prioribus vide historiam eius formulae. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:01, 14 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fons
Disputatio:Ioanna Valentine

message: The text is no doubt long enough to pass as a stipula, but I notice that most of the categories aren't supported in the text. This is an unsafe position, because the next reader could doubt their accuracy and would be justified in deleting them. Also there's a mass of hidden text, mostly external links and English categories ... and also I don't see the relevance of the bibliography item: maybe that, too, would need clarifying in the text? Page maybe still in progress? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:39, 17 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Chace, cited in the bibliography, had an A.B. from Harvard in Latin & Greek, translated from French to English for the CIA, published about nine books of history, and was the husband of the subject of this article. Nevertheless, it's not needed for stipulifaction, so it can readily be deleted. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:17, 21 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Augenda
Disputatio Formulae:Primi ministri Franciae

message: Res huius capsae e Formula:Praesides consilii Franciae die 15 Maii 2017 extractae sunt. De auctoribus prioribus vide historiam eius formulae. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:54, 15 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fons
Disputatio Formulae:Ministri rerum externarum Francici 1959–

message: Res huius capsae e Formula:Ministri rerum externarum Francici 1870–1959 extractae sunt. De auctoribus prioribus vide historiam eius formulae. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:39, 15 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fons
Disputatio Formulae:Ministri eruditionis Francici 1959–

message: Res huius capsae e Formula:Ministri eruditionis Francici die 16 Maii 2017 extractae sunt. De auctoribus prioribus vide historiam eius paginae. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:02, 16 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fons
Disputatio Categoriae:Alumni Collegii Radcliffiensis

message: Vide paginam, 51 hic. Nomen melius erit Categoria:Alumni Collegii Radcliffiensis. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 20:54, 16 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Bene repperisti! (Ibi insuper lego "Bibliothecae Widenerianae" (cas. gen.) aliaque nomina utilia.) Moveamus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:06, 17 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Radcliffiensis''
Disputatio Categoriae:Vira

message: Praesens titulus vira vocatur. Sed num hic rectus sit, dubito. Recta quidem forma pluralis vīrī (similiter vĭr: vĭrī) sit arbitror. Videte: http://latin.cactus2000.de/noun/index.php?form=virus Andreas Raether (disputatio) 08:57, 21 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Virus est nomen neutrum. Vide L&S. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 10:55, 21 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: : Vide disputationem ad virus pertinentem eiusque exitum. Neander (disputatio) 04:50, 30 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :: Vobis gratias ago, disputationem non perceperam. Andreas Raether (disputatio) 11:03, 30 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rectane superscriptionis declinatio?
Disputatio Categoriae:Scholae superiores per urbes digestae

message: This phrasing is misleading, in several ways. (1) According to Traupman, scholae superiores are high schools, not universities & colleges. (2) Schools, in the form of graduate schools, may be components, but not the totality, of some universities; Harvard, for example, has its Business School, School of Design, School of Education, Law School, Medical School, and so forth, but the whole, amalgamated enterprise (in English, at least) is not a school. (3) Major wikis (English, French, German, Spanish, etc.), in the title of their versions of this category, use a form of their word for 'university', not a form of their word for 'school'. Ergo, why not change the basic name to "universitates et collegia," here and in the other places where it occurs. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:03, 23 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It would be easy to change at this stage, but I'm not sure your examples have the last word here. "Scholae superiores" corresponds well to German Hochschule, French "haute école", "école supérieure", Spanish "Escuela Superior" for example, which are of this same level; universities are indeed called "schools" by some English speakers (also "high schools", cf. Traupman); as you say, their faculties or departments may also be called "schools"; in many countries there are "normal schools" or "écoles normales", also to be covered here. "Universitas" is a word that may be too tightly defined; while "collegium" in Latin doesn't necessarily mean a teaching institution at all.

text: The term we choose should be very general, covering what is now called "higher education" (or "tertiary education") in modern English, and equally including a similar level of education in non-English speaking contexts, modern, medieval and ancient. The medieval ones are usually called "scholae" or "studia" in the sources known to me. I see "schools" commonly used for the ancient ones. I still feel that "scholae superiores" is the best fit.

text: The German category :de:Kategorie:Hochschule nach Ort probably corresponds best to ours, demonstrating that perfect cross-linguistic linking is hard to attain. If, for conceptual accuracy, we linked this category to that one, it would lose the links to categories in other languages. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:37, 23 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Nomen categoriae: nunc "scholae superiores per urbes digestae"
Disputatio:Nervus oculomotorius

message: Pars nervi oculomotorii est pars systematis nervosi autonomici, ideo categoria "Systema nervosum autonomicum" addatur, opinor.Andreas Raether (disputatio) 18:01, 24 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Nonne nuper creavisti? Optime igitur.

text: Categorias rubras ad pedem paginarum relictas post dies fere 30 aut substituere (si possum) aut delere soleo. Si quis talem categoriam creare volebat (et fortasse oblitus est) oportet sine ullo metu recensionem meam revertere! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:45, 24 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :Salve Andrew, verum opinaris me categoriam novam enim systematis autonomici ad functionem autonomicam obliviscendi vitandum creavisse. Solum nec te nec in recensione tua offendere velim. Quoad permittas tuam hanc recensionem non reverterem. Andreas Raether (disputatio) 08:28, 25 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Gratias ago propter responsum tuum. Ego nunc novam categoriam ad pedem paginae addidi, sed te suadeo ut insuper addas et corrigas sicut bene tibi videtur! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:37, 25 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Systema nervosum autonomicum
Disputatio:Index fluminum Graeciae

message: Non omnia nomina antiqua Latina et Graeca inveni. Quae si quis cognoverit, quaeso ut indici addat. Lesgles (disputatio) 14:13, 25 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Περὶ τῶν ἑλληνικῶν ὀνομάτων
Disputatio:Ioannes Montagu (comes Sandvicensis)

message: Verum est oppidum quod Anglice Sandwich appellatur Latine aut portus Ammonis aut Sabulovicum nuncupari. Si autem per Googles quaeris, locutionem "comes Portus Ammonis" nunquam, "comes Sandvicensis" sic reperis. Qua ratione movi. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:22, 28 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  De titulo
Disputatio Categoriae:Litterae Americae Septentrionalis

message: Vide Disputatio Categoriae:Scripta per civitates digesta. Fortasse melius erit non "Litterae", sed "Scripta" sive aliud verbum idoneum praeponere, quia usque adhuc series categoriarum "Litterae ..." per linguas, non per regiones geographicas digeritur. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:49, 28 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Ergo, exitum ultimum definire nolens, ad interim hoc nomen imposui. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:31, 30 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :Haec categoria unam tantum subcategoriam usque hodie habuit. Aegre intellego, cur scriptas secundum continentes subdividere necesse erit; ergo hunc gradum delevi. Vide :Categoria:Scripta per civitates digesta Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:05, 1 Aprilis 2018 (UTC)
Vide nunc Disputatio Usoris:IacobusAmor#Likely overlap?. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:01, 13 Augusti 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  De "Categoria:Scripta per continentes digesta"
Disputatio:Polypharmacia

message: Pro polypharmacy, vocabulo Anglico, fortasse melius multimedicatio? Hoc poly elementum Graecum, sed medicatio Latinum est. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 10:28, 31 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Recte mones, mi Iacobe. Hmm ... Is qui multa medicamenta sumere solet Graece iam a Galeno "polypharmacus" appellatur (Galen has a word for it, old English proverb); unde Neograeci verbum πολυφαρμακία "polypharmacia" derivant (vide e.g. Victionarium Neograecum :wikt:el:πολυφαρμακία). Aliis linguis aliis modis, sed etiam Batavice Polyfarmacie habes. Fortasse polypharmacia nobis utilis erit?

text: Rubrica "pharmacovigilantia" idem problema monstrat. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:31, 31 Maii 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: :Salve Iacobe et Andrew: consiliorum vestrorum gratias vobis ago. Si medicamentorum supra modum (supra numerum, non dosin) usum cum verbo polypharmaciae rectius descriptum est, superscriptionem mutemus! Andreas Raether (disputatio) 18:43, 31 Maii 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: "Polymedicatio"