Disputatio:Argilla

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Salve. Categoria 'Categoria:Humus' hic fortasse non utendum esse. Sive? Scio terrae est, sed non est terra. Quid scitis?

Donatello (disputatio) 00:36, 9 Augusti 2012 (UTC).

Age. Nam nescio quomodo differant. Neque mihi videtur sit categoria terrae sicut iam dices . Qualibet muta ut te placeat.Jondel (disputatio) 01:06, 9 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
Repperi:Categoria:Terra Jondel (disputatio) 01:10, 9 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Fons verborum huius commentarii[fontem recensere]

Societas Fundata Wikipedia alibi nos iussit fontes commentariorum novorum indicare.

La: Argilla est creata in natura ex cumulis silicatium aluminium hydratium, ex dissolutis mineralibus aluminium procedenti, et cuius formula est Al2O3 · 2SiO2 · H2O.
En: Clay is a general term including many combinations of one or more clay minerals with traces of metal oxides and organic matter.
De: Tonminerale bezeichnet einerseits Minerale, die überwiegend feinstkörnig (Korngröße < 2 µm) vorkommen, andererseits jedoch die Schichtsilikate, die nach ihrer schichtartigen Kristallstruktur aus Silizium und Sauerstoff, sowie Wasserstoff und meist Magnesium und Aluminium benannt sind.
Es: La arcilla está constituida por agregados de silicatos de aluminio hidratados, procedentes de la descomposición de minerales de aluminio.
Fr: L'argile est une roche sédimentaire, composée pour une large part de minéraux spécifiques, silicates en général d'aluminium plus ou moins hydratés, qui présentent une structure feuilletée (phyllosilicates) qui explique leur plasticité, ou bien une structure fibreuse (sépiolite et palygorskite) qui explique leurs qualités d'absorption.
It: Argilla è il termine che definisce un sedimento non litificato estremamente fine (le dimensioni dei granuli sono inferiori a 2 μm di diametro) costituito principalmente da allumino-silicati idrati appartenenti alla classe dei fillosilicati.

Qui commentarius hic conversus est? Hispanicus? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 10:57, 9 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Ita. Conversus ex hispanico. Age. Fontes ponamus.--Jondel (disputatio) 12:09, 9 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
Quod velim dicere: Clay is created in nature from aggregates of silicates of aluminum hyadrates proceeding from the descomposition of aluminum minerlas and his formula is Al2O3 · 2SiO2 · H2O..Jondel (disputatio) 12:27, 9 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
'Is created' = creatur, sed creatus est = 'has been created, was created'. Apud Lucretium et Ciceronem locutionem creet natura et natura creat legimus; nihilominus, aliud verbum fortasse sit melius, e.g. fit. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:53, 9 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
Es rectus. Nunc pono et muto. Pensabam in Anglice cum scripsissem.Jondel (disputatio) 23:12, 9 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
Oh, ignosce mihi serum sum. Ut scripsi in tabernam, verbum Anglicum pro clay inveniebam e lexico meo. Sunt 'lutum' (quid in terram videtur) et 'argilla' (quid fictile facis). Sim id addere sive rescribere in 'Notae'?
Donatello (disputatio) 12:49, 10 Augusti 2012 (UTC).
Apud Cassell's, argilla Anglice = 'white clay, potter's clay'; lutum = 'mud, mire, dirt' (et solum sensu translato 'loam, clay'). IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:53, 10 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Definitio[fontem recensere]

Argilla fit cum lutum aquae particulas ammittit Anglice = 'Clay occurs when mud loozes particles of water'. What? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 13:24, 10 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

ammittit = admittit non amittit. but 'clay occurs when mud admits particles of water' also doesn't make any sense (mud already contains water by definition) and doesn't describe what clay is according to any of the linked pages. Maybe he means saxum instead of lutum?--118.169.174.23 15:22, 10 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
I was puzzled by that too, but it may mean 'Clay is (what is left over) when mud loses water(particles of).(not admit water)incertus sum. But the artcile (clay) I intended to be presented was supposed to be a material, even without or existing even without water, which is naturaly found in soil/nature, and as faithful as possible to the Spanish and English wikis.Jondel (disputatio) 11:01, 11 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
Well, water : Al2O3 · 2SiO2 · H2O.is part of its formula.Jondel (disputatio) 11:12, 11 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

I would like to restore or change it to Argilla creatur in natura ex cu.....(connect the next line, and remove the fit cum lutum aquae particulas ammittit)Jondel (disputatio) 11:15, 11 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Rather than "Clay is created out of something," why not start with a real definition? See en: "Clay is a general term including many combinations of one or more clay minerals with traces of metal oxides and organic matter," which is a lax way of saying "Clay is any of numerous combinations of one or more clay minerals with traces of metal oxides and organic matter," or just plain "Clay is a combination of one or more clay minerals with traces of metal oxides and organic matter." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:57, 11 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
Very good suggestion and timing! I was about to change it. I translated it as verbatim as possible from the Spanish. It seems the original clay is from nature( and not artificial). Let me investigate from the English, Spanish and other wikis. I read and will try to translate, that it is from mud containing feldspar(English wiki) and of course incorparteincorporate your suggested definition.Jondel (disputatio) 23:34, 12 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

You know, Iacobus, the existing definition is a summarized version of the spanish. In English:
Clay is constituted(I will reflect this in Latin too, posterior) from aggregates of silicates of aluminum hydrates, proceeding from the decomposition of aluminum minerals. Diverse colors are present according to impurities it contains, being white when pure. Clay occurs from the decomposition of rocks containing feldspar, orginating in a natural process that endures for thousands of years.

Spanish:La arcilla está constituida por agregados de silicatos de aluminio hidratados, procedentes de la descomposición de minerales de aluminio. Presenta diversas coloraciones según las impurezas que contiene, siendo blanca cuando es pura. Surge de la descomposición de rocas que contienen feldespato, originada en un proceso natural que dura decenas de miles de años.

Thus we can say this a 'real definition'. Is there a conflict with the language versions of the wikis?Jondel (disputatio) 23:52, 12 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Definitions tell us what things are. (Think equations: A = B.) "La arcilla está constituida por" ('Clay is created from') does not tell us what clay is. It reads like the second sentence of an article; the definition, which should precede it, is missing. Perhaps it could be turned into a definition thus: "La arcilla es un agregado de silicatos &c." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 00:07, 13 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Ok. How about if we insert this as the first sentence?: 'Argilla est vocabulum communis, multas compositiones(/combinationes?) includent mineralium (argillarum/lutium?)cum vestigiis metallium oxidum et organicium materiarum.

By the way, I clicked on the clay material link and it says pretty much the same thing. Silicates of aluminum hydrates.Jondel (disputatio) 00:45, 13 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

I think that is not an encyclopedia definition. You're talking about the word. "Clay is a common noun ..." Our job in an encyclopedia is not to talk about the word: we have to talk about the thing, the object, the concept. "Clay is a mineral aggregate ...".
But I'll leave this to Iacobus -- forgive me for intruding! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:44, 13 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
Please intrude! Deliberandum est semper, statuendum est semel.Jondel (disputatio) 09:06, 13 Augusti 2012 (UTC)
Andrew said what I'd have said. The definition in the English Wikipedia ("Clay is a general term including many combinations") is feeble, for the reason Andrew indicated. Praeterea: clay is most definitely NOT a term; clay, however, is. See the diff? When we talk about words as words, our typography should show them as words (italicized or inside quotation marks), not as signs for nonwords (the default in writing). Wikipedia might want to change its definition to something like "Clay is any of numerous combinations." Ergo: "Argilla est quaelibet ex multis permixtionibus"? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:26, 13 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Decrementum[fontem recensere]

And sadly, the same defect has just appeared in a new article:
Decrementum est vocabulum a multis . . . adhibitum.
But according to the typography: no, it isn't! Confer:
En: Degrowth is a political, economic, and social movement
Es: El decrecimiento es una corriente de pensamiento político, económico y social
Fr: La décroissance est un ensemble d'idées soutenues par certains mouvements
It: La decrescita è una corrente di pensiero politico, economico e sociale
And these are typographically sound: the thing is a movement, a corriente, an ensemble, a corrente, not a vocabulum. Our definition reproduces the faulty typography seen in de:
Unter Wachstumsrücknahme wird eine Rücknahme des Konsum- und Produktionswachstums verstanden.
Oh well. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:44, 13 Augusti 2012 (UTC)

Iacobus and Andrew your opinions are highly valued. I will try get this down this week. Im a bit tired now.Jondel (disputatio) 12:40, 13 Augusti 2012 (UTC)


Ok. I hope the new additions are acceptable.Jondel (disputatio) 07:56, 17 Augusti 2012 (UTC)