Disputatio:Finnia
E Vicipaedia
Index |
[recensere] Finns/Lapps
Sorry, for writing in English, I am not active Latin. I just want to mention, that the quoted text on the "Finns" is in fact about the Sámis (Lapps), as far as I know.
Laurentius
- Writing disputatio text in English is generally accepted.
- Yeah, I noticed that En:Sami had a link to En:Germania (book), and that En:Lapponia implies that Fenni can refer either to Finns or Sami. But on what basis can we rule out the Finns in this passage? I am certainly interested in hearing any evidence or arguments that have been used to pin down this passage, but I am kind of skeptical that we can say with any certaintly that it refers to the Sami to the exclusion of the Finns.
- Furthermore, even if there is sound scholarship proving your point, it seems to me that at least part of that passage should remain, because Fenni is still etymologically connected to Finnia if nothing else. --Iustinus 18:51 feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
[recensere] Quid significat
Quid significat "Cum Europeam Unionem praeest" (locutio originalis) vel "Cum Europeae Unioni praeest" (praesum et casus dativus)? Anglice: "When it presides/rules over the European Union"? "When it takes the lead over the E.U."? Non intelligo. IacobusAmor 12:30, 12 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
[recensere] Esse
That's a serious question, by the way : do textbooks in Central or Eastern Europe actually tell students always to put the verb at the end of sentences? That's not how the old Romans spoke & wrote, especially with regard to forms of esse. IacobusAmor 21:25, 14 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
- Finnice, si tibi placet, vide disputationem meam. IacobusAmor 14:16, 15 Octobris 2006 (UTC)
- This is a translation from my latin book: When translating latin text you should first of all find the verb; it's usually at the end of the sentence. Finnicus 15:06, 6 Novembris 2006 (UTC)
-
- Keyword: usually. Except when a form of esse follows a past participle (as part of a verb in the perfect system), esse works differently. I've put some evidence for this on my disputatio page. If you have contrary evidence, please bring it forward. Everything I've read suggests that "A B est," especially when it controls a large structure (like "A blablabla B blablabla, quem C blablabla amat, est"), would have struck native speakers as a horror. IacobusAmor
Ehm .. in Ciceronian or Sallustian books you find almost always "est" in the end it s normal to put the verb at the end apart when is "infinite" or in some constructions
- Re: "in Ciceronian or Sallustian books you find almost always "est" in the end." Yes for Sallust and Cato the Elder, but no for Julius Caesar, Cicero, and later authors (Devine & Stephens, Latin Word Order, Oxford, 2006, p. 216–220). See our discussion on another page ; maybe someone will find it and link it here. In general, information that's a focus of the sentence—especially new information offered in the pattern "A est B"—comes to the RIGHT of the verb. Noncopulative examples from Caesar's De Bello Gallico :
- Castra opportunis locis erant posita (7.69)
- magnusque eorum numerus est occisus (4.37)
- omnes introitus erant praeclusi (5.9)
- quae ad ancoras erant deligatae (4.29)
- Diu cum esset pugnatum (1.26)
- Eo cum esset ventum (7.61)
- ab equitatu sunt interfecti (7.62)
- ut erat a Caesare praeceptum (7.47)
- Schoolbooks for beginners probably tend to ignore this reality, and want students to write "posita erant," "occisus est," and so on. Grammar is easier if you can reduce it to exceptionless rules. IacobusAmor 19:18, 28 Martii 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, the only variant I have seen on this is in Sicilian, which occasional puts to be at the end of a very short phrase, and only when it's a noun-adjective pair. Never with a noun-noun pair. Ie: John happy is. But not John a doctor is. Esse, Finnice, like all verbs to be in indo-european languages is in a class of its own and you shouldn't necessarily treat it like the rest of the verbs.--Ioshus (disp) 16:08, 6 Novembris 2006 (UTC)
[recensere] Finnish and Swedish translations
I'd like to move all Finnish and Swedish translations from this page to the several specific pages. Main reason: It is easier to maintain. Any objections? --Rolandus 11:39, 18 Martii 2007 (UTC)
- Vide Vicipaedia:Redundancy. --Rolandus 11:55, 18 Martii 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. The place to specify and discuss the variant forms of any name is the page that deals with that specific name. Elsewhere, we should stick to our preferred Latin form. AndrewDalby 20:06, 28 Martii 2007 (UTC)
- I can't see any problem with having both translations there. In the present article someone has deleted the Swedish names but not the Finnish ones, which I think is very sad and I really can't understand why. Some of those places are majority Swedish-speaking and Neo-Carolina for example is unilingually Swedish. The Swedish names are often the original ones, (such is the case in Helsingfors (Helsingia)), and the Latin and Finnish are derived from the Swedish. Swedish is an officiall language of Finland and has equal status with Finnish. All readers of Latin wikipedia are interested in languages thus I also think our readers would apreciate to have both languages there. Aaker 20:30, 29 Martii 2007 (UTC)
- I see a problem when we have redundant data, see Vicipaedia:Redundancy. We should not have any translations on other pages than on the one page where the lemma is explained. The translations should be on Helsinkium, on Vantania, on Aboa, on Carolina vetus, on Neo-Carolina, on Sala etc. but not on page Finnia. On each of those pages there is enough room to provide translations, ethymology, sources etc. Unfortunately we have many pages where we provide translations near a blue (!) link. This should not be a reason to do it here as well, but at reason to fix this problem. Additionally, in this special case it seems to be a political issue, so I am strongly against keeping any translation on page Finnia, except translations for the word Finnia itself. (However, translations are ok where we do not have a page yet.) --Rolandus 20:52, 29 Martii 2007 (UTC)
- Aaker, you say "I can't see any problem with having both translations there." But there is a problem, which Rolandus has explained. Also, it is against the normal practice of the Latin Vicipaedia. Also, it is against the Redundancy policy. And, finally, it appears to involve a childish dispute between speakers of Finnish and Swedish, while not really explaining the reasons for the dispute (if there are any reasons).
- Therefore, let's take the non-Latin names of cities off this page. Let's have a paragraph, or an article, about the language situation in Finland. Let's make sure that Finnish cities have articles of their own, in which the history of Finnish, Swedish and Latin place names is properly explained. The result: Vicipaedia will be improved. AndrewDalby 12:07, 30 Martii 2007 (UTC)
- Agree with Roland and Andrew for the ,ost part. Redundancy is not the end of the world, but it should be avoided where possible. For instance, on both Scacchi and Notatio scaccorum algebraica I have put the same index of translations for pieces in as many languages I have found. I do not think that to be an egregious case of redundancy, it is quite pertinent on both pages (though perhaps a tiny bit moreso on the notatio page). Andrew brings up a good part with his comment about "childish debate": certainly if an argument is getting in the way of fair encyclopaedic practices, we should make steps to intervene. If the concern is that readers who might not know Latin might be reading this page, and you'd like it if they knew what city they were clicking on, then maybe we can solve this problem by organizing the lists of cities in groups by region or something of the like.--Ioshus (disp) 02:22, 2 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't know about Redundancy policy (a very good policy by the way), and you're right, the issue is way too exagerated. Aaker 22:40, 12 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
- Agree with Roland and Andrew for the ,ost part. Redundancy is not the end of the world, but it should be avoided where possible. For instance, on both Scacchi and Notatio scaccorum algebraica I have put the same index of translations for pieces in as many languages I have found. I do not think that to be an egregious case of redundancy, it is quite pertinent on both pages (though perhaps a tiny bit moreso on the notatio page). Andrew brings up a good part with his comment about "childish debate": certainly if an argument is getting in the way of fair encyclopaedic practices, we should make steps to intervene. If the concern is that readers who might not know Latin might be reading this page, and you'd like it if they knew what city they were clicking on, then maybe we can solve this problem by organizing the lists of cities in groups by region or something of the like.--Ioshus (disp) 02:22, 2 Aprilis 2007 (UTC)
- I can't see any problem with having both translations there. In the present article someone has deleted the Swedish names but not the Finnish ones, which I think is very sad and I really can't understand why. Some of those places are majority Swedish-speaking and Neo-Carolina for example is unilingually Swedish. The Swedish names are often the original ones, (such is the case in Helsingfors (Helsingia)), and the Latin and Finnish are derived from the Swedish. Swedish is an officiall language of Finland and has equal status with Finnish. All readers of Latin wikipedia are interested in languages thus I also think our readers would apreciate to have both languages there. Aaker 20:30, 29 Martii 2007 (UTC)
- Agreed. The place to specify and discuss the variant forms of any name is the page that deals with that specific name. Elsewhere, we should stick to our preferred Latin form. AndrewDalby 20:06, 28 Martii 2007 (UTC)