Disputatio:Portulaca oleracea

Although I am normally the most ardent advocate for distinguishing a Latin name's common use from its scientific use, I'm thinking portulaca is a good candidate for covering the whole genus. Unlike allium and prunus, for example, where the species are very diverse, and have different common names attested, portulaca seems like a good name for everything in this genus. So far I'm only covering veggie purslane (Portulaca oleracea), but a few other species could easily be thrown in.

Obiter I happen to be in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin today, and I see some species of purslane growing wild everywhere here. --Iustinus (disputatio) 19:26, 8 Septembris 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For an article on an edible weed, this page is getting to be awfully awesome, if I do say so myself ;) --Iustinus (disputatio) 22:37, 10 Septembris 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Iacobe, I'm about to undo two of your changes, so I'm explaining here:

"cum nomine Graeco quod est χοιροβοτάνη" > "cum χοιροβοτάνη, nomine Graeco." I deliberately used a relative clause there to avoid the problem of putting a Greek word, spelled in Greek letters, in the ablative. If I remember rightly (I'll have to check Adams) when Roman authors did this they normally just used the Greek dative, but I'd rather avoid the problem altogether, and I don't see what's wrong with using a relative clause here.
"Portulacae flos" > "Flos Portulacae." I don't see why italics are called for here: the intended meaning is "purslane flower" not "flower of the genus Portulaca." As for the word order, as I periodically mention, when captioning images, I enjoy so arranging the sentence that the lemma (or one of the already-mentioned synonyms) is the first word. Sometimes this produces weird, but still grammatical sentences, but in this case there is absolutely nothing unusual about a genitive preceding the noun it modifies. And frankly, my little habit here seems like the kind of thing you would enjoy.

As for appellationum ... I have no idea how I keep making that mistake. I know perfectly well that that word has two ps and two ls, and yet you keep catching me dropping a letter! --Iustinus (disputatio) 19:03, 4 Octobris 2012 (UTC)[reply]