Disputatio:Georgius Smith Patton Iunior
Could someone help me see what I'm missing here?
- Post bellum Germanicum ad Mannheimum in autocineto sauciatus est.
- After the Germanic war to Mannheim, he was injured in a car.
Is 'to Mannheim' supposed to be 'at Mannheim' (Mannheimi)? or what? IacobusAmor 20:50, 30 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
Maybe 'apud Manheimum' (near Manheim)? -Amphitrite 20:57, 30 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe it is a translation from the German WP: Am 9. Dezember 1945, wenige Tage vor seiner geplanten Rückkehr in die USA, wurde George S. Patton in der Nähe von Mannheim bei einen Autozusammenstoß mit einem amerikanischen Lastkraftwagen schwer verletzt. --Rolandus 21:00, 30 Decembris 2006 (UTC)
Ita est. Ad Mannheimum (near Mannheim) synonymous imo to apud Mannheimum. --Alex1011 02:56, 1 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- OK then (though I wonder if "in der Nähe von Mannheim" isn't Latinized better as prope Mannheimum), but how do you want to resolve the problem with the word order?—
- Post bellum Germanicum apud Mannheimum in autocineto sauciatus est.
- After the Germanic war at Mannheim, he was injured in a car.
- Since it wasn't a Germanic war at Mannheim, that order doesn't work. Howsoever you solve that problem, you have another: which is the more important fact: that he was injured? or that the injury happened in a car? If the former, you want to end the sentence with order 1; if the latter, with order 2:
- 1. . . . sauciatus est.
- 2. . . . est sauciatus.
- At least that's how G. Iulius Caesar would have done it (Devine & Stephens 2006:180–181). IacobusAmor 05:56, 1 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- OK then (though I wonder if "in der Nähe von Mannheim" isn't Latinized better as prope Mannheimum), but how do you want to resolve the problem with the word order?—