Disputatio:Ante praesentem

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Genus?[fontem recensere]

Praesens (scil. annus)? Credebam praesens (scil. tempus) usitate nomen neutrius generis esse. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 22:48, 14 Novembris 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ita, "annum" intellegi (haec est enim mensura annorum). Sed fontem Latinum non iam repperi. Vide s.t.p., o amice, mutationem quam nuper in pagina "Datatio" feci: an recte?
Fortasse ad "Ante praesentem annum" movere oportet; quam locutionem saepe reperimus, sed non hoc contextu. In textibus nostris nihilominus brevius "ante praesentem" sive "a.p." dicere possumus quia numerum anni semper anteponimus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:57, 15 Novembris 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The phrase appears to be ante praesens [tempus?] in a source from 1772. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:39, 12 Iulii 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, but, as I said, one can also find "ante praesentem annum". Neither phrase, in cases I have seen, really refers to the same era as the modern terms "BP" (etc.), because no one then imagined these archaeological and palaeontological eras.
I repeat that we are talking specifically about years, not about a vague time. So I don't see any strong reason to move without a more relevant citation. Possibly some article in Ephemeris uses this era?
If we can't find one, would you think "Ante praesentem annum" a more comfortable solution? That would be fine by me. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:37, 12 Iulii 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]