Disputatio:Cereus
Candel, it seems to me, should be under candela, cereus being specifically made out of wax, as opposed to tallow. --Iustinus 23:20, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Maybe I was over-classical. In Stowasser, classical Latin, candela is only "filum cereum", not expressis verbis candle. I saw the wax/tallow problem, but then decided that most of candles are made out of wax. --Alex1011 23:30, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Well, when there's a classical expression and a later expression, the classical is often to be prefered, but not always. One particular concern is that if we use classical terms for everything, we will need more disambiguations than if we use voces propriae. Besides, candela is hardly a barbarism: it shows up in Juvenal and Pliny (though apparently in Pliny it refers to a metaphorical candle: a waxed chord that is not meant for burning), whereas I don't know if the substantive cereus ever turns up at all. --Iustinus 23:42, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- According to Stowasser Cereus is explicitely wax-candle. According to Langenscheidt there is a disambiguation, for candle you find Wax-candle Cereus and tallow-candle Candela. If the latter is true, then you would have with candela the same problem, only the other way round. --Alex1011 23:48, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know why I never answered this (two years ago). I don't think this is the case:
- The L&S defines candela as "a light made of wax or tallow, a wax-light, tallow-candle, taper."
- If candela can also signify a waxed thread (per Stowasser's filum cereum & L&S's II.B.), then how likely is it that it only refers to tallow candles? Granted, I have not looked at the loci antiqui to make sure that those threads are explicitly covered in wax, but then who wants to floss their teeth with tallow? ;)
- For an expressly tallow candle, there exists (at least once) sebaceus
- --Iustinus 15:45, 9 Martii 2009 (UTC)
- I don't know why I never answered this (two years ago). I don't think this is the case:
- According to Stowasser Cereus is explicitely wax-candle. According to Langenscheidt there is a disambiguation, for candle you find Wax-candle Cereus and tallow-candle Candela. If the latter is true, then you would have with candela the same problem, only the other way round. --Alex1011 23:48, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)
- Well, when there's a classical expression and a later expression, the classical is often to be prefered, but not always. One particular concern is that if we use classical terms for everything, we will need more disambiguations than if we use voces propriae. Besides, candela is hardly a barbarism: it shows up in Juvenal and Pliny (though apparently in Pliny it refers to a metaphorical candle: a waxed chord that is not meant for burning), whereas I don't know if the substantive cereus ever turns up at all. --Iustinus 23:42, 19 Ianuarii 2007 (UTC)