Disputatio:Ars athletica

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

What does deportus mean? I did not find it anywhere (Vicipaedia:Lexicon). What is the relation to exercitatio corporis? --Roland2 20:45, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

Could it relate to deporto 'carry off'? The past participle would rightly be deportatus. How that would relate to 'exercise of the body' is unclear, unless, perhaps, somebody thinks it means 'weightlifting'. :) IacobusAmor 21:30, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
It's meant to mean "sport." *disportus > It. sporto. Because it "takes you away" from your troubles, and whatnot. --Iustinus 21:54, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
I hasten to add that I don't approve of this translation, and that the page itself is full of such barbarisms. --Iustinus 22:00, 15 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
My old dictionary gives 'to disport oneself' as ludo, iocor. For 'sport' meaning 'play' or 'pastime', it offers these nouns: ludus, iocus, oblectamentum, delectamentum, oblectatio, delectatio, lusus. It says 'sports, or public shows' are spectacula or ludi. It gives the idiom 'to entertain with a variety of sports' as spectaculis varii generis delectare. And it has this note: "When sport denotes the pleasure taken in the exercise of any particular game, it is to be rendered in Latin by some word expressing that species of recreation; as, for hunting, Venatio, venatus; for fowling, Aucupium, aucupatio; for fishing, Piscatio, piscatus." Under ludus, the same dictionary has ludi circenses 'games or exercises'.
Applying this to soccer, would we call the entire series of World Cup events a spectaculum and each match a ludus? Or are all the events spectacula and the game of soccer itself a ludus? Or is there any point in trying to make such distinctions? IacobusAmor 00:37, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
Certamen is certainly attested...see book V of the Aeneid. I think the tournament style nature of the world cup qualifies it for this usage. The superbowl, in contrast, I would call a spectaculum, while an individual american football game, or a game of soccer is probably rightly a ludus. I wonder if also exists an antique word predating "partido".--Ioshus Rocchio 00:54, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I'd agree: certamen should be fine for any contest and can be used for any competition (it comes from certo 'I vie'), though dictionary entries suggest it may ordinarily bear a more general sense than ludus & lusus (which, after all, come from ludo 'I play, sport, frisk, dance, make a pastime, banter, jest'). That is, certamen would be less specific to sports. IacobusAmor 01:32, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
Remember that a tournament is essentially a passage through a course, a decursio, originally involving horses. :) IacobusAmor 02:25, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
So deportus and exercitatio corporis apparently have a sive-relation (see also Disputatio_Vicipaediae:Redirectio#Templates_for_some_types_of_redirects) and a {{contribuenda}} would be appropriate? And shouldn't the summary of these explanations go into a <ref>...</ref> section? Or maybe we should have a special section "De titulu" or "De nomine"? It's the same with Fragor Maximus: There was a discussion about the term which is not mentioned in the article and not mentioned in the talk page. What policy do we have here (see Vicipaedia:Fontes)? Is it desired to have such information included in the article? I'd say yes. --Roland2 08:03, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
Unless we can find a locus classicus or a modern authority that uses this word, I would not consider it correct. --Iustinus 14:21, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
I agree: deportus looks like a nonword, and we've already got several well-attested terms for 'game' and 'sport'; see above. IacobusAmor 15:05, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
Looks like a place where they might send off exiles. Catilina, e Roma relegatus, ad deportum advenit.--Ioshus Rocchio 15:15, 16 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

In the afternoon of July the 17th, I read this page, so I decided to clear up some points, because I created this text when I talked about sport in Italy and I did not find names of sports in Latin.

  • According to my dictionary of Italian language, "sport" is a English word that meaned "amusement" at first and derives from French word "desport", like Italian word "diporto"; "diporto" comes from verb "diportarsi", in the sense of "to move, for entertainment, from a place to another one"; "diportare" is composed of "di-" and "portare"; "di-" is a folk form of Latin prefix "de-", that indicated separation.

According to my English monolingual dictionary, "sport" is a short form of "disport", that derives from the Old French verb "desporter"; "desporter" is composed of "des-" ("dis-") and "porter" (in Latin "portare", that means "to carry"); "dis-" is a direct form of Latin prefix "dis-", connected with "bis" ("twice"), originally "duis" ("dyis") in Greek, and "duo" ("two"), or is a form of "dés-", "dé-" (in French), "des-" (in Old French), "dis-" and "di-" (in Latin) or "dis-" (in late Latin), that come from Latin prefix "de-".
According to my bilingual dictionary of Spanish, "sport" is traslated with "deporte".

  • According to my bilingual dictionary of Latin, "sport" includes "ludus" ("game"), "certamen" ("competition"), "corporis exercitatio" ("exercise of the body") and "delectamentum" ("amusement").
  • I do not know if my translations are barbarisms, but I am sure that I controlled all my books and I chose the best words. I looked for terms in my bilingual dictionary of Latin; I read etymologies in my monolingual dictionaries of Italian and English; I compared words in Italian, French and Spanish (but in English and German, as well); I used foreign terms only when it was strictly necessary, for words that have their roots in Germanic or Oriental languages.

I have an explanation for every word!

  • I think that "ice-skating" is a kind of "patinaticum".
  • I have a long list of sports to traslate in my dictionary of Italian.

-- 13:28, 19 Iulii 2006 (UTC)Andreas Victor

You have used an intriguingly archaic sense of the word 'control' in your English (calqued from your Italian?). This may illuminate the type of problem existing in the approach made to the other languages.—Myces Tiberinus 22:51, 19 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
I noticed that, too. On first glance I thought it was "patrolled". Myces is right, though. An explanation for every word is not necessarily enough. Has anyone ever called sport deportus in an attested latin text? Then we may have a case. A logical coinage is not sufficient. It's like my italian teacher always told me, just because I know latin, doesn't mean I know italian =].--Ioshus Rocchio 23:03, 19 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry to have used words without cases in attested Latin texts: I thought that etymological criteria were sufficent; in fact, I read many terms which are missing in my Latin dictionary, so I considered that Latin Wikipedia accepts even Latinized present words. When I created the page about "deportus", I thought that it was a good idea, because there were not a link to sport in the home page; I made a list of sports because I needed these terms and I considered that anyone can add synonims, because I need various words. I will write remaining texts I prepared, maybe, before I go back to geographical and historical subjects about Italy, that do not need modern words.-- 13:15, 27 Iulii 2006 (UTC) Andreas Victor

Well, the public nature of wiki means people will (hopefully) always be trying to improve the text as it stands. And as far as I can tell when people think of improving a Latin text, they mean classicizing as much as possible, and avoiding neologisms—which is basically what this talk page discussion is trying to do. Personally I would prefer to see a foreign word kept foreign, and italicized, than see it clumsily Latinized. Someone who knows better can always come by and translate a foreign concept later, while a strange construction may be indecipherable to everyone but the person who made it. —Myces Tiberinus 22:08, 27 Iulii 2006 (UTC)
This discussion may have been going on elsewhere, but I think it's one of the most vital to the Vicipaedia. Is it predominantly formal-etymological Latinization that is being strived for or is there some ambition to describe modern terms as an ancient Roman would see them. I think there are advantages to both. Of the latter, there is an excellent example in the autocinetum article (a part of the motor works machinae molaris instar or something).
Whatever way, I think that finally Deportus has to go. How about keeping it for the time being and just adding suggestions for every sport before someone made an article of them. Some words are in the Vaticans Lexicon recentis Latinitatis, but not all are in terms of the latter goal mentioned above.--Iovis Fulmen 09:18, 28 Iulii 2006 (UTC)

On August the 1st, I read two comments about my opinion concerning deportus, so I prepared a list of considerations.

  • I use Italicized foreign words only in extreme cases: first of all, I fear that nobody understands original names, because they always relate to marginal questions, which are missing in my Latin dictionary; al last, I suppose that the text can not be understood without declension.
  • When I had to traslate "car", I did not use autocinetum, because I did not know this word: my Latin dictionary suggests currus motorius, but I sometimes need a single term, so I write automobilis, because it is called automobile in Italian, the Romance language which is more similar to Latin.
  • I can divide the words I wrote in three classes: terms I found in my Latin dictionary, terms which have solid etimymological explanations, terms which can be guessed logically.
  • The page must be orderly and precise: texts and illustrations about every sport must be in the page concerning that sport.
  • I started to write this page much earlier than this disputation had originited and I thought to enumerate all sports before I describe them.-- 13:44, 3 Augusti 2006 (UTC) Andreas Victor
Isn't it funny how we keep inventing things? A car is a wheeled vehicle (or, since the 19th century, the compartment under a balloon, or, since the 20th century, the compartment of an elevator), and if you look up car in a nonrecent English-Latin wordhoard, you'll see it given in Latin as carrus, -i and currus, -us (and plaustrum & rota), and because English-speakers hardly ever say motorcar anymore, there's no need to expand the Latin term to include the idea of "moving," as in c(a/u)rrus motorius and autokineton and the like: we've had a serviceable term for 2,000 years. As for quasi-Latin automobile, -is (n.) 'self-moveable thing', Cicero redivivus, after a quick view of an urban expressway, may instantly understand the word, but won't he chuckle at the silliness of combining Greek & Latin? In general, I think, the first principle in finding Latin words for objects & concepts that postdate the Golden Age (or even the Renaissance) should be to start with attested terms. IacobusAmor 14:32, 24 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

Um... don't you think "sport" is a universal and ancient enough concept that we don't really even need to coin a neologism for it by any method? --Iustinus 02:54, 25 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I fully concur with both of you. I consider finding attested words for modern concepts is one of the most rewarding and creative tasks for Vicipaedia and may well serve to demonstrate the vigour of the Latin language. As for "sport", we all know of course that the primary aim of physical exercise was usually military, but for games like the Olympics and so on... Hence the term Categoria:Ludi athletici. On the other hand, physical exercise, to our modern understanding, extend beyond what the ancients would have understood by ludi, so is exercitatio a satisfying solution or should the separation be kept?--Iovis Fulmen 18:13, 27 Augusti 2006 (UTC)
Actually I would say that the Romans were big on sport for its own sake as well, and that conversely the Olympics were at least symbolically preparation for war (all the competitions in the ancient Olympics were of a military nature, if you think about it). For "sport" I have generally used certamen athleticum, and unless someone can find a good locus classicus for something better, that's what I would recommend going with. --Iustinus 02:36, 28 Augusti 2006 (UTC)

On August the 30th, I had read four comments about sport, so I wrote some considerations after I had added last parts I found on my dictionaries.

  • I used currus motorius because I had thought that dictionary means currus cum motore (cart with engine) and I reckon useful to distinguish wagons and chariots from cars.
  • I consider usual to have combinations of Latin and Greek: Italian an French feminine words automobile, but Spanish masculine term automóvil too, justify the use of automobilis (-is, f.), because a immortal Cicero would have used it. I want to say that I translated the Italian word autostrada (expressway) with automobilis via strata (paved road of the car) and via curribus motoriis pervia (road passable to cars). Because of same reasons, I would translate autocarro (lorry) with autocurrus.
  • I am convinced that erudite and vulgar words in the etymological part of my dictionaries are attested terms.
  • I think that my dictionary says sport is not equal to a single Latin word, so I wrote four classical terms and I coined the etymological equivalent neologism, to include every meaning.
  • I think that Latin has a vital structure, but I consider that vocabulary is "quantitatively" poor: my dictionary of Italian has 134000 words, my bilingual dictionary of Italian and English has 145000 words and my monolingual dictionary of English has 85000 words, but my bilingual dictionary of Italian and Latin contains only 47000 Latin terms and 30000 Italian terms, so I need to use strange words when the translations are missing or there are not bijections with modern things.
  • I think that page exercitatio corporis must exist, but her category has to be called deportiva.
  • I think that certamen athleticum is a good translation for "competition of athletics": ancien events included only this discipline and I could use it, but I would not define every contemporary tourney in this way.

-- 13:40, 5 Septembris 2006 (UTC) Andreas Victor

With so many terms, it's hard to know where to start. Rowing has been remigatio (and remigium) for more than 2000 years. Why does it need to become remigandi certamen? A sled has been a traha for about as long, but why must it now become a sled? For "dogsled," instead of the proposed Latin sledog, some appropriate combination of traha and canis should work. Etc. IacobusAmor 17:05, 5 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Well remigandi certamen is not exactly the same thing as remigatio, so I'm OK with that one. But that still leaves dozens of other problems. --Iustinus 03:04, 6 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Except in the Real World, when asked what sport they did in college, people are much likelier to say "rowing" than "competition in rowing" or "competitive rowing" or "rowing regatta." As a rule, people shorten words & phrases. We almost invariably say "soccer," not "association football"; "Rugby," not "Rugby football"; "Soc Sci 1," not "Social Sciences 1"; "the U.S." or "the United States," not "the United States of America." Most of the time, We deploy extra terms only when they're needed to distinguish the special from the general, as in "Canadian football" and "table tennis."
Also, my dictionary has this note (quoted above): "When sport denotes the pleasure taken in the exercise of any particular game, it is to be rendered in Latin by some word expressing that species of recreation; as, for hunting, Venatio, venatus; for fowling, Aucupium, aucupatio; for fishing, Piscatio, piscatus." Just plain remigatio & remigium fit this pattern. IacobusAmor 03:36, 6 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Andreas, please keep in mind that even when we're dealing with modern things like automobiles, we are not the first people to deal with the problem of writing about them in Latin. For instance, most Latinists use autocinetum or less formally raeda (when context makes it clear) for "car." Currus is generally used instead for "tank." Now, this is just an example of a wider point: before it comes down to creating your own brand new neologism, you should check to make sure it's truly needed. The sporting events are not exactly an obscure subject, so it is not that hard to find precident for what to call them in Latin. There is no need to reinvent the wheel. --Iustinus 03:04, 6 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

why?[fontem recensere]

We concluded a month and a half ago that the majority of this page, including the title, is less than classical, for less than perfect, and as Iustinus said, "barbaric". Yet we still allow it to grow, under false title. Before I suit up and dive into the thing, can I at least get confirmation on what we want to call this thing?--Ioshus (disp) 02:36, 6 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

For "sport," Iustinus's certamen athleticum sounds OK to me. Are there any sports that aren't certamina athletica? IacobusAmor 03:36, 6 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
That's what I was wondering as well...Is competition necessarily involved in the modern understanding of sport? OK, when it comes to football, the Olypmics, etc., no deal. But the lonely jogger or Nordic walker who just wants to relax from his office job, with no competitive ambition? Is he not sportsman?--Iovis Fulmen 15:26, 7 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Likewise whitewater rafting, mountain climbing, bicycling, fishing, hiking, skiing, swimming, and other sports when performed noncompetitively. So we're back to ludus, aren't we? Or do people deny that the cited noncompetitive activites are sports? Perhaps relevant: Wittgenstein famously argued that the concept of "game" can't reliably be defined. (He could have been wrong though.) IacobusAmor 16:11, 7 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Responding to Fulmen, no I don't think that certament is implicit in he concept of sport. Skiing, running, martial arts...all these are sports in the sense of the english word, and do not necessarily imply competition of any sort. Do we dare just use a substantive "athletica" or to agree with an implied ludi, "athletici"?--Ioshus (disp) 17:12, 7 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Ludus athleticus might solve that problem. But honestly, I don't think it's that bad to put non-competitive sports under the same header: white water rafting is definitely a certamen of sorts, even if you're not competing against other humans. Likewise, long-distance runners always describe their sport as a struggle with one's own body, right?
Anyway, I did once ask this question of some of my Latinist friends. I only have a record of Stephanus Berard answering, though. Here's the relevant exerpts:
  • Die 27 Augusti, 2004, haec scripsi:
Quid reremini aptissimum modum esse verbum quod est "sport" Latine redendi in his sententiis:
1) Judo is both a martial art and a sport. [fortasse certamen ludicrum?]
2) Here is a list of Olympic sports. ["certamina" dicere nolim, nam Olympia ipsa sunt "Olympia Certamina", nonne?]
  • Quibus die 30 Augusti, 2004 respondit Stephanus:
De versionibus: Pro "sports" soleo dicere "ludus/lusus athleticus" vel "certamen athleticum." Ergo: "Judo est et ars martialis et lusus athleticus." Et forsan: "Ecce index omnium generum certaminum Olympicorum."
I could swear David Morgan answered too, but I can't find that email. --Iustinus 17:33, 7 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

What about mental sports, like chess, checkers, go etc.? I wouldn't categorize them under the heading ludus athleticus! Nor would I do that with motor sports, sailing, horse riding .... Why not loan the very word sport(s) from the English? It's already in use in many other languages! Sport, -tis. Seems ok to me. --Agricola 19:09, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  1. Hmmm...for one, as an avid chess player, and an avid athlete, I have to take issue with chess' inclusion as a "sport"...checkers decidedly less so (not that there isn't a ton of skill, but it's not in any way comparable to a sport).
  2. I don't think I would call car racing a sport either, but you're getting closer. Sailing and horseriding are most decidedly sports, are certainly athletic, and can certainly fall under that "ludus athleticus" categoria.
  3. Lastly...I cringe and reel at the idea of sport, sportis. If you follow the thread above, you'll see the etymology of "sport" is actually from a latin root, so I cannot bear to retroactively assess an etymology like that. Furthermore, our business is not neologism, but research. Only proper terms need included (which, unfortunately, is why such debates drag on as long as they do, here). I think we should go with ludus athleticus, and deal with nonstandard sports as the need arises.--Ioshus (disp) 19:59, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Sport, sportis, f.? Nooooooooo! It's badly formed. Native Latin phonology would require spors, sportis. The nominative wants to end in -s; and in the nominative, -rts gets compressed to -rs, as in mors, mortis, for *morts, mortis—unless it's neuter, in which case spor, sportis might be plausible; cf. cor, cordis. But still I ask: for sports of all kinds, why not just plain ludus? IacobusAmor 20:04, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Iacobus has it right on all counts. In sum, let's just say ludus athleticus for physical sports in general, certamen athleticum for physical competitions (and in some cases, just for sports seems fine to me), and when a sport is not physical, we can surely just say ludus or certamen. The fact that the categories we use on the Latin wikipedia do not map exactly onto some conceptions of "sport" (or "sports", for us Yanks) is hardly the end of the world: we already have plenty of entries and categories that do not match perfectly with the other wikipedias, and the same is true in every language. --Iustinus 20:16, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
@ Ioshus:
  1. Well, maybe that's just in the Netherlands, then, I don't know. Chess and the like are often called here something like mental sports.
  2. Athletics have the feel of running and such to me, but, hey: I'm not that sportive myself. What about the noble sport of darts? ;-)
  3. I've read the discussion, but I don't feel ludus athleticus covers all that we mean by the general term of sport(s). Things change. We're living more than 20 centuries after Julius Ceasar! Why would we want to use exactly the same words as he did? They are so many things different in our time than in his; e.g. how we look at sport. Why not have different terminology for different things, ideas? (I'm sure, btw, that this discussion has been done many times already here at Vicipaedia!)
@ Iacobus:
Spors, -tis would be fine too ;)
--Agricola 20:52, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)


  1. I don't think it's just in the Netherlands. That usage is somewhat casually applied here, and usually results in an argument between one person who thinks chess and the like are sports and the other who doesn't. =] I would just like to make a semantic difference (even as you did by calling it a "mental sport") between games played with the body and games played with only the mind.
  2. Hmm, maybe we should also include the noble sport of Beer Pong =].
  3. Reconsider ludus athleticus. It really just means "athletic game". As far as terminology goes, what can I say, we're just a bit Catonian in our modo operandi.


  1. Who you calling "Yank"? ;]
  2. Let's go with "ludus" for non mental games, to stay consistent with the ludus athleticum terminology.

--Ioshus (disp) 22:40, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

  1. Heh, well, I mean "Yank" in terms of its international usage, of course, not it's purely American one. Kind of like how the Greeks couldn't tell the Persians and Medes apart (then when the Parthians took over it only got more complicated)
  2. I'm not sure what you mean.
--Iustinus 22:52, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

2)I just mean that if a sport (americane) is a ludus athleticum, then a sport mental or otherwise should be a ludus of some sort, as well.--Ioshus (disp) 23:03, 8 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

I concur with Ioshus and Iustinus and would be glad if the term ludus came to be universally accepted. I think it best translates our idea of sport into Latin usage, implying something that is done for the sake of itself. athleticus aptly adds the physical character. A disambiguation page ludus could distinguish between certamina, physical exercise, mental sports, and -not to forget- the Roman elementary school.--Iovis Fulmen 09:13, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
I reiterate, though, that these won't quite map onto the categories the English wikipedia (and probably most others) use. Ludus does not, and cannot, just mean "sport": it means "game." So not only is Chess a ludus, but so are all other board games. Ludus athleticus is, need I say, an athletic game, and certamen athleticum an athletic competition (or challenge). I think we've covered the majority of sports right there, and for those that fall outside those categories, it won't be hard to come up with something. The idea taht we need to coin a neologism just because of the slight mismatch is absurd. --Iustinus 16:16, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Ping Pong (it's a trademark)[fontem recensere]

Now that I've mentioned it...the article on beer pong seems too cool an article not to translate. Besides, there're no other interwikis on the en page, latin would be the first! So I ask, anyone know a word for ping pong? Or where to find one? I'm inclined, if not, to do something like Pongo cerevisiana...--Ioshus (disp) 05:39, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Ponge cerevesiana!? I'm pretty sure I've seen an expression based on "table tennis." I should look in my dictionaries. --Iustinus 05:42, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
OK, doesn't seem to be in the PONS, and I'm too lazy to check Calepinus Novus right now. David does list it, but he seems pretty unsure:
26 tennis: table tennis, ping-pong ? tennisia mensalis, ? pila mensalis
(Tennisia, I must say, is not my favorite Latinization of "tennis." His authority on that, though, is Latham... but I must admit that I'm not sure who that is ;) )--Iustinus 05:49, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
German edition of Lexicon Recentis Latinitatis: Tischtennis ludus pilae mensalis --Roland (disp.) 09:15, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Ack! That's what I meant by the PONS, and I only looked s.v. Pinpong, because that's what the LEO online dictionary gave me. I shoudl have thought to look under Tischtennis, duh. --Iustinus 16:16, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
The textbook PiperSalve (Septimanae Latinae Europaeae ed.) does translate tennis as tenisia, -ae (f) (so, with one 'n') and table tennis as tenisia mensalis.
Roland, you say tennisia is not your favourite translation, but I find those descriptive translations of modern terms quite cumbersome, like tennis, manubriati reticuli ludus; to play -, manubriato reticulo (ac pila) ludere. In my opinion, that's not translating something but describing it. --Agricola 10:08, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
It was not me who said that. ;-) --Roland (disp.) 15:25, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that was me, Agricola. Honestly, I lean towards tenniludium (even if that article isn't great), which I've seen in a number of places outside of wikipedia, but for the life of me can't remember even one. It was frequent for sports and games to have compound names ending in -ludium, -pila, or -folium even in Classical Latin. The word "tennis" apparently comes comes, as the author of this article, and the one on tennis, notes from the French tenez!, and thus from Latin tenite! David Morgan in his research did apparently find a Latin description of the Jeu de paume, the direct ancestor of our tennis. It was called jeu de paume (as the linked article notes) because it was originally played by striking the ball with one's hand. This name stuck even after rackets became standard. This game was apparently called ludus palmaris in Latin. --Iustinus 16:16, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Ack, this is going to be an unwieldly title...it's not quite ping pong...it's beer pong. Which is a nice short little phrase that well captures the essence of the sport, and believe me, some people take this game seriously. Are we sure we can't do something like Pongo cerevisialis? Because Ludus pilae mensalis in quo poculi cerevisia implentur is ghastly. I don't really see "beer pong" entering any respectable Lexicon Recentis, so I think in this case, we might flex our neologistic muscles. It is, after all, a lighthearted article, the fun of translating would be the quirkiness of the thing. I think the latin title should reflect the brevity of the english term.--Ioshus (disp) 14:14, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Pogno surely: "gn" is the only way to get a velar nasal in Latin, no? Of course that's pronounced like "pong-no," and people may not be happy with that. (So say it fast!) The Latin for "Ping-Pong" could then be Pigni-Pogno (indeclinable?), but if you want an authoritative source, why not ask the Planet Pong Sporting Goods Co. (formerly the Ping Pong Mania & Sporting Goods Co.), the owner of the trademark? IacobusAmor 15:09, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Nullo pacto! Pinguis, singulus, sanguis, spongea, iungo, etc. etc. --Iustinus 16:16, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Obviously. (What was I drinking?!) But you know I was jesting anyway. The serious point is that "Ping Pong" is a trademark, and therefore shouldn't be altered without its owner's permission. Of course if millions of people go along with an alteration (as they do, for example, when they use "Google" as a verb), the owner won't know whom to sue, and will have to put up with the alteration. IacobusAmor 18:23, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Aha! So all we need to do is get millions of Latin speakers to agree with us, and the we've got it made! --Iustinus 21:21, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Ah, you didn't say you meant en:beer pong. The only problem with pongo cerevisialis would be that pongo is used for "orang-utan" in modern Latin! (It has been pointed out, again by Morgan, that scientific names based on pongo, such as pongidae seem to imply that the name is actually pongus -i, but most people decline it pongo -nis). --Iustinus 16:16, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I mentioned it in the previous thread, thought people would follow my scattered tamgential thinking =]. How about Pong cerevisialis indeclinable?--Ioshus (disp) 16:32, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Or perhaps pongum. In either of these cases, though, the word will be neuter, and thus cerevisiale. Now of course since we're dealing with a drinking game perahps we should use one of the shorter forms of the word for beer ;) --Iustinus 17:04, 9 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

.[fontem recensere]

After I had read this page on September the 7th, many things were flashed through my mind and now I can add them; this discussion is indispensable, but I hate that it is in English, because I must save the text on a floppy, go home to translate it, prepare my considerations and come back to send them: I waste much time because I succeed in using potent computers of my university only two times a week.

I would waste the same amount of time (maybe a little less) writing in Italian, how's your sicilian? We could try latin, too?--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

For once, I have to explain the construction of the page about deportus. First of all, I wrote the names of the sports found in the lists of my Italian dictionary; then I looked for translations in my Latin dictionary, I checked synonyms and etymologies in my Italian dictionary, I added translations into English, I read etymologies in my English monolingual dictionary, I turned words into French, Spanish and German; finally I wrote last possible Latin terms.

There are only three type of translations: I seldom found Latin versions in the dictionary; I used the original words for terms which have Romance etymologies; I kept modern terms in desperate cases.

We can debate about single words, but I want to say that many accusations are baseless, because translations are assured by dictionaries.

Whoah, no one is accusing you, we are merely trying to write an encyclopedia. Per favore, Presumi la buona fide.--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Moreover, it has to be kept in mind that the correspondence between ideas and words in Latin is more similar to that one in Italian than to that one in other languages, because Italian is the direct evolution of vulgar Latin spoken by Etruscan countrymen around Florence; anyway, I always tried to propose terms that could be understood at least by who knows main Romance languages, even if this site seems to be created for the translation between American English and Latin.

This site was created for writing IN LATIN! Not from american english, or english at all. I have translated many articles, or parts of articles, from bunches of wikipedias, most notably sicilian, italian, napulitan, russian, and spanish. I know many other people have done the same. The same rules apply to everyone of every nationality; WRITE IN LATIN! We use english to communicate, because most people on here speak/read/understand it better than any other language (including latin).--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Sporting events are not an obscure subject, but the terms which are necessary for their translations do, otherwise this discussion would not begin: I did not find good terms in my dictionary and I did not discover a link to exercitatio corporis in the home page.

Have you considered your dictionary may be inadequate? Especially living in italia, you should be able to find great dictionaries of latinitatis recentis. A small 15,000 word entry dictionary is not enough with which to write an encyclopedia.--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

I do not want to reinvent the wheel, but I need many specific words. For example, football (soccer) is called calcio (kick) in Italy, so I must maintain the shade of meanig: gioco del calcio (game of kick) is calcis iocus, associazione calcio (association kick) is adsocietas calx, football club is pedepilae sodalitas and società sportiva (sporting society) is deportiva societas. How can I be precise without neologisms?

Calcio is from latin calceus, which means shoe, roughly. So we DO NOT reverse an etymology, the italian word came from the latin word, the latin word does not come from the italian word. Pediludium is an attested word that very accurately describes the thing. People wrote about soccer while latin was still a popular correspondence language, so we have that.--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

How can I know that automobilis is considered wrong, if nobody has never corrected the page where I used it? Why cannot autocurrus (or automobilis currus) be used, in spite of etymology, but Bush was translated with Boscus, because of same reasons? Must automobilismus (motor racing) be changed with autocinetismus?

Vide autocinetum... Where did you use automobilis? I'd be happy to correct it.--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Also, whoever wrote Boscus was either making a joke, or was completely wrong. His article is properly at Georgius W. Bush.--Ioshus (disp) 20:43, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

I am unshakeable about football: there are Association Football, American Football, Rugby Football Union, Rugby Football League, Australian Football... so Latin merits to have an unequivocal expression for every sport.

Agreed, especially since you only use your feet in one of them.--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

I feel aware about boat racing, because four rowing world reigning champions live in my province, so I can give explanations: my Italian dictionary uses canottaggio to indicate both sports supervised by FISA (international federation of water sports); I concluded that rowing is remis remigandi certamen or remigatio or remigium and canoe (also for rafting) is linter or scapha.

Iacobus adressed this above, it has been remigatio or remigium for millenia. So you're right about that.--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Sledog is a English word used in Italian: I did not find a Latin version and the etymology is not Romance, so I would use it as a word of third declension, because I do not dare to coin traheacanis.

Traheacanis is far better than sledog-sledogis. If we take a word in from english, let's leave it undeclined, and neuter. But let us NOT take sledog, since dogs pulled sleds WAYYYY before english was invented. Furthermore, I have been speaking english for almost 22 years now, and I have never seen the word "sledog" in print, and if I did see it, I would severely chastise its author. "Sled dog" or "sled-dog", but no way sledog.--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
In English, a sled dog is a dog—a living, breathing animal, also called sledge dog. A dogsled is a sled drawn by dogs. A sport involving dogsleds is dogsledding. Latine, sicut infert Ioshus, sledog est incomprehensibile. IacobusAmor 21:32, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Athleticum certamen could be translated ambiguously in Italian, because someone could understand literally "track-and-field events and competitions of weightlifting, wresling and (maybe) boxing".

Of course it could be ambiguous, they are different languages!--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

Is chess an athleticum certamen? Is ludi, certamina, corporis exercitationes et delectamenta a too long name for a page and a category?

No, see above.--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

I was born in the birthplace of both Plinys, a colony established by Caesar, inside a hospital which is a hundred metres away from the ruins of Roman thermae, and I am affected in Latinity, but I am more worried in respecting grammatical rules than in using ancient words; what really matters is that everybody can understood.

That is not true, if everyone were to understand, why didn't you make this page on the simple english wikipedia? This is a latin wikipedia whose entries must be in latin, not in "latinish", or "latinesque". Latin is a relatively difficult language to comprehend for newcomers, and not everyone understands it. I know this firsthand from teaching it.--Ioshus (disp) 19:47, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Andrea, you seem to place an = sign between Latin and modern Italian. But, the thing is, Italian is not Latin, it's a daughter language of Latin. The vulgar Latin of the late Roman Empire period has been heavily influence by the languages of countless invaders: Visi- and Ostrogoths, Lombards, Arabs, Normans, Germans, French, Spanish and what-not. You can't claim the Latin language just because you were "born in the birthplace of both Plinys, a colony established by Caesar"!
You write: "football (soccer) is called calcio (kick) in Italy, so I must maintain the shade of meanig: gioco del calcio (game of kick) is calcis iocus". Frankly, I don't see any reason why football should be calcis iocus just because the Italian term is calcio. Moreover, a little further on you call it pedepila in the term pedepilae sodalitas!
--Agricola 19:58, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
Furthermore, the Florentine dialect whence modern Italian derived isn't even the clsoest daughter language from latin. Some of the southern dialects much more closely resemble latin. --Ioshus (disp) 20:40, 14 Septembris 2006 (UTC)
  1. American football and Rugby are closer to the Ancient Roman sport of Harpaston--we can of course distinguish the three variations with adjectives, e.g. harpaston Americanum, Brittanicum, veterum.
  2. It is true that what we call "track and field" in the U.S. is generally called "Athletics" aborad, but the ancient meaning seems to have been pretty broad as well. We can perhaps refer to track and field as athletica classica--an expression I've encountered in Modern Greek, for instance.

--Iustinus 06:59, 15 Septembris 2006 (UTC)

reversion[fontem recensere]

What gives Marc? None of the emendations you made were helpful. Ludere is transitive, luda is not a word, you unlinked pediludium... --Ioshus (disp) 21:39, 28 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Iocus Calcis[fontem recensere]

Hehehehe, "heel joke" --Iustinus 19:32, 29 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)

Criccetus Ludus?[fontem recensere]

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but that looks way more like Hampster game than Cricket game to me. "Cicadicus Ludus", maybe? 13:01, 2 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

The name of the game 'cricket' is not related to the name of the insect, though. —Mucius Tever 11:56, 5 Iunii 2009 (UTC)

Ludicra exercitatio[fontem recensere]

I would like to suggest Ludicra exercitatio (ex Traupman) for 'Sports'. Jondel (disputatio) 01:28, 26 Novembris 2012 (UTC)