Disputatio:Dalit

Categoria : Gentes Asia[fontem recensere]

I think this should be incolae Indiae. The reason should be obvious.Jondel (disputatio) 01:40, 21 Decembris 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We can create Categoria:Gentes Indiae any time you like; and when we are sure of the best Latin name for "Caste", we can create that too. It isn't especially logical to place "Gentes" as "inhabitants of" a single country. Many of them may be, but, in a free world, they are allowed to move around. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:28, 21 Decembris 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For 'caste' (nomen quod fortasse 'hereditarius societatis ordo' significat), Morgan has: "casta* (socialis) [Vox Lat.] (Helf.) ]] ordo (Lev.)." The English word comes from Latin castus, -a, -um, so the question may be whether the noun is to be casta, -ae (scil. fortasse 'res') or a bare *castus, -ús. Since attestation is held to trump invention, casta looks best. The classical ordo should be OK for 'social class', but a caste is more than that, isn't it? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:22, 21 Decembris 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Probably the full name 'hereditarius societatis ordo' is good. Then in future reference , use ordo. This will be useful in the future.Jondel (disputatio) 11:30, 21 Decembris 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Jondel, that "ordo" (expanded where necessary) is potentially a good term. "Casta" is tempting but would (I think) be more difficult for the average reader of Latin to understand. "Ordo" seems to me to make immediate sense. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:57, 21 Decembris 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Let me expand on my view (since we're both just saying "I think"!). I'm an antinationalist. I think it's unwise and leads to serious misconceptions to assume that any named group of people belongs in the boundaries of a particular country; likewise to assume that any named language belongs in the boundaries of a particular country. It often corresponds with the view that other named groups, and other languages, don't belong: and that leads to discrimination, forced migration, genocide and war.

I also think that categories for where people live, what language(s) they use, and what people(s) and group(s) they identify with, should be developed independently. No assumption that because you write French you belong in France, because you are Tamil you belong in India. That's why, soon after I first came here, I started developing the language-and-literature categories separately from the where-people-live categories. I believe that has worked well -- better than on most other wikipedias -- and I think we should do the same, whenever anyone's ready, with the categories for peoples and groups. Not make them in any way subcategories of "where-people-live": develop a separate category tree, but of course with cross-references and links so people can easily find whatever they want. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:28, 21 Decembris 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. maybe, I would like to leave it as it is. There are many Tamils in Sri Lanka and Singapore. Jondel (disputatio) 10:52, 21 Decembris 2012 (UTC)[reply]