Disputatio:Iazium

E Vicipaedia

[recensere] Cur Anglice blues = Latine glaucum?

Three problems:

1. Glaucus, -a, -um is more like 'gray, grayish, gray-blue'.
2. Modern Latin words for varieties of 'blue' include azureus, caeruleus, caesius, cyaneus, cobaltinus, lazulinus, venetus. According to the way the OED sorts the senses & examples of the term (in English), the bluishness here is a generic bluishness, perhaps akin to Oxford blue and the blue imagined in the phrase true blue. Those aren't likely to be glaucus in Latin.
3. English blues is a plural word, and it has a genuine singular (blue) ; accordingly, the Latin for blues could better be plural.

Perhaps the connotations of the Latin adjective lividus 'blackish blue, black-and-blue', are not irrelevant here. IacobusAmor 19:58, 17 Februarii 2007 (UTC)

[recensere] "iazium" → "iazzium"? melius "iazza"? vel indeclinabile "iazz"?

Vide supra. IacobusAmor 03:42, 16 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

On a purely graphic level, 'z' is a double-length consonant. Doubling it in a Latin word would be like writing three or four l's in a row. Of course in foreign words the rules bend a little, but for one reducing the zeta count, that would be the justification: in English it needs to be doubled to show that it is long (or rather, that it makes the vowel short, which in the English system is essentially the same thing), but Latin does not need to do this. (The argument for keeping the 'zz', of course, is that it is in the original.) —Mucius Tever 17:44, 21 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
As for indeclinable iazz, I'm pretty sure the LRL has 'musica iazzica' or some such, so reverting to an indeclinable should be unnecessary. —Mucius Tever 17:44, 21 Iulii 2007 (UTC)