Talk:List of Latin phrases (P–Z)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-02-02. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
Contents |
[edit] Remerge proposal
See Talk:List of Latin phrases. Edward Grefenstette 15:37, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
This page has the quote "vi veNi universum vivus vici,"but "vi veRi universum vivus vici" seems correct and is the form most often given on other web pages. Also, there seems to be uncertainty about its origins. We all know it's in the movie V for Vendetta, but does it come from Goethe or Marlowe? This page says Marlowe. Many other web pages say Goethe. I've not yet found a web page that gives the exact citation: act, scene, perhaps even line number.Interlingua 14:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dog Latin
Is sola lingua bona lingua mortua really Dog Latin? Granted it's not an ancient expression, granted it's not the most idiomatic phrasing, but normally I think of "Dog Latin" as being more like solus linguisticus benus est mortis or something the like. THis is real Latin words, and real Latin grammar.
As for whether or not Dog Latin/Mock Latin/Latinitas Culinaria phrases should be in this list, surprisingly I think they should stay, but be strongly and plainly marked as such. Why? Because the list is not necessarily intended for people who already speak Latin. The problem with Mock Latin is that people often spread the joke without "getting" it. How many people, apparently, think that Illegitimis Nil Carborundum or Semper Ubi Sub Ubi is real Latin? They should be able to look them up on the relevant page and find out the truth.
We used to have such phrases in their own section, which made sense at the time. Now (given that we have broken this up into smaller pages, then created a master page that combines them like templates) I'm not so sure that would work. --Iustinus 16:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
- I thought about the lookup issue. My first idea was to put a (templated) message on top of the page along the lines of: "You may be looking for a moch Latin phrase. --Gennaro Prota 17:56, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- All mock, garbled, dog, pseudo-, etc. Latin should be listed just like the normal Latin, but with the comments clearly noting that it's not a true Latin phrase. We already have a large number of such phrases in any cases, like "Busiris", and simply leave them untranslated to make it clear that they mean nothing (or mean nonsense) in Latin. -Silence 12:53, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Silence, what do you think of setting a different background color for such phrases? That would be a nice way to separate them out. --Iustinus 17:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Perhaps. I'm not sure it's necessary, and sometimes phrases are "borderline dog latin", such as phrases with proper grammar but fabricated vocabulary, or ones which do have a meaning in Latin, but not the one intended by the originator. But I don't mind the idea in general of using unobtrusive background colors for some phrases, if we end up deciding on an important distinguishing trait that'd work well with that. -Silence 17:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Point taken. We'll have to consider that. It's probably a good idea to mull that over in any case. I for one would generally still count Medieval Latin as "real", even if it contains non-classical words. --Iustinus 23:14, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Yes, but complications arise when we try to draw the line between new Latin words that constitute "real Latin" and new Latin words that constitute "dog Latin"; the distinction is often arbitrary, as in both cases such vocabulary words often have illegitimate or dubious histories, frequently are borrowed from non-Italic/Romance (even non-Indo-European) languages, are vulgar or bizarre, etc. There's nothing new to that; only the distancing effect of posterity has caused us to view Medieval Latin as "real" while modern quasi-Latin is "fake", when in reality many modern dog Latin phrases are many times more well-written (i.e., more in the classical style) than much of that Medieval hogwash. :) In the end, it's just too tricky a distinction to make; even distinguishing between humorous and non-humorous Latin phrases is a major task, and, like distinguishing "dog Latin" from "real Latin", risks heavily POVing the list with uncited prescriptivism. But I agree with you that it's a very good thing for us to think about and muddle over. -Silence 01:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
[edit] Sursum Corda
up the hearth
[edit] Technica Impendi Nationi
- technica impendi nationi||"Technology impulses nations"||Motto of Technical University of Madrid
What? I can't construe the Latin, nor am I sure what "impulses" means (perhaps "impells"?) --Iustinus 02:14, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Qui Prodest
I was about to delete the recently added qui prodest, assuming it was a mistake similar to qui bono, but I note that it gets a huge number of google hits, and it is conceivable that it is not incorrect: this could be the other quî that means "how." Anyone know anything about this phrase? --Iustinus 17:54, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yes, I added that phrase, because I`ve used for a long time, and I`ve never guesses that it might by spurious. I don`t speak latin however, and I guess that you may be right (check the saying Beatus, qui prodest, quibus potest, meaning "who is lucky the one who gets an advantage"). AdoniCtistai 19:08, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Looks like you were right! There`s already cui prodest meaning "for whom it advances" [1]. Guess I have learned something new today :D It`s cui, not qui. Thank you Iustinus! AdoniCtistai 19:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] 'Sensu strictu' or 'Sensu stricto' or 'Stricto sensu'
I came across this in a journal article. It doesn't seem to be widely used, and I don't know enough to tell whether the grammar is correct. (See http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2006/02/the_di_and_the_astonishingly_t.php.) Antonym is apparently 'sensu largo'. ...Actually, it seems to be more popular in German: even the article I read was written (in English) by a German. 128.250.204.118 07:56, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I have come across a published instance of 'sensu stricto' now, apparently authored by native English speakers (although in the context of citing an Austrian). However, the only entry in the list is 'stricto sensu', which I have not encountered elsewhere. 128.250.204.118 07:01, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, the OED has the main entry at "sensu stricto", with a brief entry at "stricto sensu". The latter entry states explicitly that "strictu sensu" is erroneous ...although there is no mention of "sensu strictu". I think I can trust the OED enough to add "sensu stricto" to the list. 128.250.204.118 06:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Post partum
And how about adding this?? 128.250.204.118 08:05, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Abbreviations
I am continually irritated by Latin phrases abbreviated (or rather ellipted?) to lose their literal meaning. As in "de facto" — de facto what? "Pro bono" — pro bono whom? et cetera. Whereas de facto can precede many words, if "pro bono" is generally only ever used with "publico", then can't it be listed in full under the 'Latin' column?? And if not, then please enlighten me! 128.250.204.118 09:03, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Scire quod sciendum
I don't know much Latin.
- The above phrase I found on the Title Page of a 1920 book by publisher Small, Maynard & Company. Will some please work on the stub I've commenced?
- Thanks, Ludvikus 04:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
PS: It also occurr in an English language poem: Last Songs from Vagabondia by Bliss Carman and Richard Hovey, THE NORTHERN MUSE.
[edit] Refrescumne?
Someone added the following:
- Pimentatis Anus Outrem Refrescum Est||"Pimenta no Cú dos outros é Refresco"||Expressão muito utilizada no jargão popular brasileiro.
This was promptly deleted as fake Latin. Fair enough, but we have a number of other fake Latin phrases, clearly marked as such, on the list. Perhaps if this motto is indeed significant it shoudl be included under that rubric. --Iustinus 21:24, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
