Disputatio:Cenomannica

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Is "Cenomannica" the official Latin name for Maine as used by other bodies? If not, we should Latinize it as "Maina". Maine might have been named for the ancient province of France with the same name (which was likely named Cenomannica in Latin), but this is not for certain and we should not use apply a Latin name based on an unverified claim. -Kedemus 07:48, 19 Novembris 2007 (UTC)

This translates US names in all sorts of other languages. For "Maine" it has in Latin "Cenomannica": [1] --Alex1011 08:03, 19 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
If Cenomannica is well established as the Latin name of the state, we should go with that, I guess. But Kedemus is quite right that it begs the question, to which no one (except the state legislature) seems sure of the answer, whether it is named after the French province or not. If we keep this name, we ought to have a paragraph explaining the problem. Does anyone have a reference to somewhere where the issue of the origin of the state name has been discussed? en:wiki is a start, but not adequate. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:08, 19 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
The English Wikipedia does briefly discuss the origin of the state name. According to that source, the state legislature has officially decided that it was named after the place in France, even though no one can be 100 percent sure that it was really named after that. If it is only the attestation of one person, we should not go with "Cenomannica", especially if no one really knows how the state got its name. However, if it is used in several other sources and is used much more often in Latin than "Maine" or "Maina" or the state legislature at one time used "Cenomannica", we should use "Cenomannica". -Kedemus 04:33, 20 di Novembre 2007, UTC (20:33 19 Novembris 2007 PST)
What's the French Maine called in Latin? IacobusAmor 05:21, 20 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
Cenomannica. We don't have a page on it yet, but we have the modern département Cenomannica et Liger (Maine-et-Loire). Both the Latin and the French names derive from the Celtic tribe of this region, Cenomanni; hence also the French name of Le Mans, capital of the region. That part all ties in. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:51, 20 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
Kedeme, the problem with your view on "how Latin should be for everyone" is that not everyone, present company included, can be bothered to find out how to properly say things in Latin, even when they patently exist, or can be constructed with valid "Latin elements". A lot of times what you propose, the Romans would have called "sermo barbaricus". I agree with you every now and again, but most of the time it seems you just want to Americanize the project, for no good reason. It is the easy way out. Why do you so resist sources, even when you don't have to go looking for them yourself? I have substituted the citation on the name with a respected, if not perfect, source for modern American Latin. I hope it should settle the debate, for now at least. --Ioscius (disp) 05:48, 20 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
But it was right to raise this particular question, (1) because there was originally no citation for the name [2], (2) because it is really disputed whether the state name is based on the French name. Now that we have citations, let's spend the time even more usefully, improving the page! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:03, 20 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
I think relevant is your point (1), is there an attested citation or not. To point (2): Whether the attested name is correct or not, is secondary in my opinion, but should be mentioned in the articles. "Saravipons" for instance is attested for "Saarbrücken" and remains so even if people (would) find out that -brücken has etymologically nothing to do with "pons". --Alex1011 09:30, 20 Novembris 2007 (UTC)
Yes, attestations rule! Where none has been found, we can apply a standard (preferably attested) method of Latinization, like the Finnish method, or we can leave the name un-Latinized & indeclinable. IacobusAmor 14:17, 20 Novembris 2007 (UTC)

The page was moved to "Meduana". I've moved it back. To be clear about it, (1) the state isn't named after the French river Maine "Meduana"; (2) it is possibly named after the French historic province Maine "Cenomannica"; (3) anyway, more compelling, we have a source for "Cenomannica", already cited on the page. So, unless other sources outweigh this one, no move is called for. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:50, 7 Februarii 2015 (UTC)

Onomastic patterns tell us the default here is the province, not the river. Generally, things are named for their likes: people for people, cities for cities, rivers for rivers, provinces for provinces. Exceptions occur (especially with people), but that's the way to bet. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:45, 7 Februarii 2015 (UTC)