Disputatio:Laurentius Onsager
The title of this article is inappropriate. Laurentius is not latin for Lars which suffices on its own. Have you not heard of Lars Porsena, which is on the English Wiki but not on this one? The name of this article should be changed. Xxanthippe 01:30, 14 Novembris 2009 (UTC).
- Do you suggest that the Norvegian (and Swedish) name Lars is an Etruscan name? --Neander 11:49, 14 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
- Who can discern the percolation path of linguistic usage from Etruria to Scandanavia of two and a half thousand years later? Xxanthippe 01:49, 18 Novembris 2009 (UTC).
- Right, who? You? We're all waiting for proof. --Neander 02:25, 18 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
- That's a side issue and it could be a long discussion :) The main issue is: is it true, as Xxanthippe says, that Lars does not equal Laurentius? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:07, 18 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, that's a side issue in view of the initial claim: "The title of this article is inappropriate." Be it as it might, there is a convention to equal the Nordic name Lars to the Latin name Laurentius (on which all extant Wiki articles on Lars are in agreement). Such is the convention, and whoever wants to challenge a convention is liable to give a bunch of historical reasons why the convention came about on false premises -- and yet, this would hardly be enough to challenge the convention, once it has been born. %% It's quite true that Etruscans had quite an impact on Roman culture but Lars wasn't a popular name among the Romans, so it's hard to see how it would have "percolated" to the Nordic people only. Among Romans, Lars (gen. Lartis; cf. also larθ) was a side issue, but quite obviously, the same root (lār-) appears in Roman institutions, witness Lār(es) and (Acca) Lārentia. It's my guess that Latino-Etruscan Lārentius may have given rise to the folk-etymological Laurentius (IMHO there's no urgent need to assume that the "Proto-Laurentius" came from the ancient city Laurentum). --Neander 16:03, 18 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
- If indeed Laurentum was a city. But that, too, is a side issue! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:10, 18 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, that's a side issue in view of the initial claim: "The title of this article is inappropriate." Be it as it might, there is a convention to equal the Nordic name Lars to the Latin name Laurentius (on which all extant Wiki articles on Lars are in agreement). Such is the convention, and whoever wants to challenge a convention is liable to give a bunch of historical reasons why the convention came about on false premises -- and yet, this would hardly be enough to challenge the convention, once it has been born. %% It's quite true that Etruscans had quite an impact on Roman culture but Lars wasn't a popular name among the Romans, so it's hard to see how it would have "percolated" to the Nordic people only. Among Romans, Lars (gen. Lartis; cf. also larθ) was a side issue, but quite obviously, the same root (lār-) appears in Roman institutions, witness Lār(es) and (Acca) Lārentia. It's my guess that Latino-Etruscan Lārentius may have given rise to the folk-etymological Laurentius (IMHO there's no urgent need to assume that the "Proto-Laurentius" came from the ancient city Laurentum). --Neander 16:03, 18 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
- That's a side issue and it could be a long discussion :) The main issue is: is it true, as Xxanthippe says, that Lars does not equal Laurentius? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:07, 18 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
- Right, who? You? We're all waiting for proof. --Neander 02:25, 18 Novembris 2009 (UTC)
- Who can discern the percolation path of linguistic usage from Etruria to Scandanavia of two and a half thousand years later? Xxanthippe 01:49, 18 Novembris 2009 (UTC).