Disputatio:Anulus nuptialis
Lemma[fontem recensere]
De: "'''Anulum nuptialis'''<ref>[[Iohannes Traupman]], ''Latin and English Dictionary'' (Novi Eboraci: Bantam Books, 2007), s.v. ''wedding ring''</ref><ref>[[Reijo Pitkäranta]], ''[[Suomi-latina-suomi-sanakirja|Suomi-latina-suomi-sanakirja: Lexicon Finnico-Latino-Finnicum]]'', sub voce ''vihkisormus'' (Helsinki 2002).</ref>"—It's anulus nuptialis in the edition of Traupman here on my desk. Would somebody check Pitkäranta? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:04, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)
- Φιλέτυμος helpfully added the references, but maybe didn't notice the dispute between our lemma and our pagename. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:30, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)
- A fair guess would be that anulum is a typo, especially because nuptialis isn't neuter. Something must be done, but what? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:52, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)
- Well, it happens there was a 15th century book called "Anulus nuptialis". I'll cite it. That gives us two anyway. If anyone can then verify the citation of Pitk., so much the better. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:12, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)
- Anulum was indeed a typo. I'll remove the Citatio verificanda. Φιλέτυμος (disputatio) 17:58, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)
- Well, it happens there was a 15th century book called "Anulus nuptialis". I'll cite it. That gives us two anyway. If anyone can then verify the citation of Pitk., so much the better. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:12, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)
- A fair guess would be that anulum is a typo, especially because nuptialis isn't neuter. Something must be done, but what? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:52, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)
Origo Europae?[fontem recensere]
De: Consuetudo induentis talem anulum extensa est ultra originem Europae. 'The custom of putting on such a ring has been extended beyond the beginning of Europe'. (1) Quod? (2) Melius: talis anuli induendi. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:02, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)
- About Europe, no comment :) About the verb, my sources say that "to wear" (of a ring) is gesto. But there may be better sources. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:32, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)
- It wasn't my verb. Take any verb you want! The point was that (as Gildersleeve says) gerundive + obj. is more usual than gerund + obj. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:23, 17 Octobris 2017 (UTC)