Disputatio:Donaldus Anas

Nomen[fontem recensere]

ex huius versione paginae antiquiore:

Nomen Donaldus Anas non recte est, quia Donaldus masculini generis et Anas feminini. Sed est in comicus.

Donaldus Anas is correct. Being both Donaldus and Anas nouns, the only way to make them agree between each other, being Anas only feminine, is through their case, which in fact is nominative for both.

Correct : they stand in apposition ; and though appositives must agree in case, they don't have to agree in gender. IacobusAmor 14:39, 14 Martii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you possibly have a substantized appositive in a different case? Caesar, Iulianorum. Obviously this can be read simply as "Caesar of the Julii", but could it be read "Caesar, the one of the Julii"? (not arguing, curious)--Ioshus ^(disp) 14:51, 14 Martii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But then Iuliorum wouldn't stand in apposition with Caesar. I can imagine "Caesar, one of the Julii" as Caesar, unus ex Iuliis, and there you have your appositives ; but perhaps there are other ways of saying it. IacobusAmor 17:09, 14 Martii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is of course moot, as there are already Latin translations of some of his books, and those use Donaldus Anas, q.e.d. But the idea that this is a problem is ridiculous from the start. Yes, anas is feminine. Did this mean that the Romans had never heard of male ducks? Of course not! If there is somethign wrong with Donaldus Anas, then what are we to make of paradoxical phrases like anas mas? --Iustinus 17:51, 14 Martii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tangentially germaine, but dirty quote. Latin-speaking children drawn here by their love of Donald Duck should not read this next paragraph:

Nemo enim dicit "haec futuens," nisi in epicenis nominibus animalium, ut "haec aquila futuens," in quo quamvis femininum proferamus, tamen marem intelligimus. -Priscian, 3.473.14 (or so)

...given that, I don't see how anyone could argue that a duck cannot have a male name ;) --Iustinus 18:09, 14 Martii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anas is also masculine. THE PROBLEM WAS CONSIDERED WHEN THEY GAVE THE NAME "DONALDUS ANAS", AND SOLVED POSITIVELY BECAUSE THEY FOUND 1 CASE IN (ANCIENT) LITERATURE IN WHICH "ANAS" IS MASCULINE. One easily find on the net this text: "la scelta di Anas, tuttavia, provoco' grosse discussioni (...) perche' il sostantivo risultava femminile (...) finche' lo stesso Eichenseer non trovo' in Strabonius Largus, paragrafo 177, un bell' Anas usato al maschile". ("the choice of Anas, however, provoked big discussions (...) because the noun resulted female (...) until the same Eichenseer found in Strabonius Largus, paragraph 177, a nice Anas used as masculine"). (Probably "Strabonius Largus" is a typo of "Scribonius Largus"). -- Alexor65 Alexor65

Good find! It indeed occurs in the recipe for one of Dr. Marcianus's antidotes: "p. III, anatis feminae <sanguinis> recentis p. II, anatis masculi sanguinis aridi".[1] The feminine gender should probably still be considered standard. Lesgles (disputatio) 20:23, 25 Februarii 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In modern science, Anas is universally feminine. See Anas americana, Anas aucklandica, Anas luzonica, and so forth. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:08, 26 Februarii 2015 (UTC)[reply]