Disputatio:Chemia

message: __FORCETOC__

message: Scientia Chemicae data est nobis a Epicurus, Herodotus, et Lucretius. Lucretius, Romanus, Credidit atomos Primos principios rerum esse. 
Multi rationi boni opinioni tradebatur eo.  Credidit atomos creari vel perderi non posse.  Crededit esse duas res solam, atomos et inani, et species omnes esse mixturas illius.  
"Nam neque nihil conlidi esse sine inane."
-Lucretius 
--64.216.41.145
replies: text: Bene novimus Lucretium, sed quae describebat erant potius physica quam chimica. Ipse epos suum nominavit De Rerum Natura, et si bene calleas Lingua Graeca, scias "physicon" nihil sibi velle nisi "naturalem". Vale. --Iustinus 17:20 sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

text: Addere huic volo, ut ars physica fundamentum Chemicae sit. In cunctis paene Chemicae libris Graecos Leucippum Democritumque eius discipulum primos fuisse putantes materiam ex atomis constantem scribitur. --88.101.168.142 14:02, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: :Macte, adde!--Ioshus (disp) 14:49, 19 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Scientia Chemicae

message: Are these synonyms? --Rolandus 13:58, 17 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :They are not. Chemia is chemistry (noun). Chemica is chemical, both a noun meaning chemical substance and an adjective meaning pertaining to chemicals.  The Vicaepedia pages on chemistry have been inconsistent with this, partly due to the fact that the terms for chemistry in italy and spain sound similar to chemica, e.g. quimica (spain) and chimica (italy). In those languages the definite article is used to distinguish which meaning is intended, eg. in spanish, la quimica means chemistry but quimica means chemical. However, in all other european languages the word for chemistry is derived from the neolatin chemia meaning chemistry, which comes from alchemia.Rafaelgarcia 14:54, 17 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ::Oh, I could have read that on page Vicipaedia:Taberna Fornicus 1#"Chemica" aut "Chemia". Thanks! Then the category should be moved to "chemia" as well? --Rolandus 15:33, 17 Februarii 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: :::Yes it should.  I've tried to change all the occurences of 'chemica' meaning 'chemia' but I may have missed some instances such as in the categoriesRafaelgarcia 15:52, 17 Februarii 2007 (UTC).

text: ::Well, but :Categoria:Chemica may still make sense as a place for articles about chemical substances? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:47, 25 Iunii 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: chemia vs chemica

message: The suggestion here is that the correct term is 'chimia' rather than 'chemia', although I understand that the etymology is not as clear as might be suggested by the link. Nevertheless, some discussion may be warranted, as there is a large number of current chemistry research journals with Latin names, and some of them use the 'i' and some the 'e' spelling (e.g. Analytica Chimica Acta vs Croatica Chemica Acta). Indeed, it seems to me the majority of current publications with Latin names use the 'i' spelling (Acta Chemica Scandinavica and Acta Physica et Chemica are both defunct, while e.g. Chimia, Analytica Chimica Acta, Helvetica Chimica Acta are all well-respected journals). 129.67.105.227 17:00, 30 Septembris 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: From that link: "Stroux’s first contribution was to point out, that according to the ‘Glossarium mediae et infimae latinitatis’, the term ‘chemia’, being of Greek origin, had to be replaced by ‘chimia’, even if the same error occurred regularly on the doctor diplomas of the University of Basel." Which isn't convincing at all; on first reading it seems to say that 'we need to use chimia because it's not the Greek spelling' (though if the word came through Greek, as Stroux admits and certainly seems to be the case, then the Graecizing spelling, if attested, is exactly the one we should prefer).   The Glossarium mediae et infimae latinitatis itself appears to have as its entry s.v. chimia:
replies: text: :CHIMIA, Auri conficiendi ars sacra, seu flatoria, ἱερὰ τέχνη ϰαὶ θεία, ut est in Lexico hujus artis ; χημεία veteri Scriptori, et Johanni Antioch. apud Suidam : χημεντιϰή Zozimo Panopolitæ. Scientia Chimiæ, Firmico lib. 3. cap. 15. uti hunc locum restituit Salmasius : Ἀρχημία, infimæ Græciæ auctoribus, nostris Archimie et Alchimie. Pseudo-Ovidius lib. 1. de Vetula :
replies: text: ::O quam ferventer tales hodie sequerentur,

text: ::Alchymiam, cujus est fructus ditatio tanta.

text: : At unde χημία, et Chimia, dicatur hæc ars, nemo adhuc assecutus est. Vide Petrum Lambecium lib. 6. de Bibl. Cæsarea pag. 174. Georg. Syncellum pag. 14. et Menagium in voce Alquemie.

text: So they themselves spell the Greek with the eta.  Liddell & Scott place the headword under χυμεία (relating it to χύμα) and gives variant attested spellings in χημ- and χειμ-; these would give chym-, chem-, and chim- respectively.  Modern Greek retains the eta in χημεία, suggesting that it was, or at least became, sooner or later, the standard spelling; most of the familiar Romance languages, however, point to a source with -i- or -y- (though Spanish at least attributes this to it being loaned via Arabic).  Chemia, chimia, and chymia, or forms thereof, are all found by Google in Latin on vatican.va. --Mucius Tever 12:26, 6 Octobris 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Chemia vs chimia