Disputatio:Democratici Christiani et Flandrici

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I don't know what to do with this. In Dutch, it's just two uninflected adjectives, and you can imagine whatever noun you want (homines, factio, grex, motus,...). It's definitely "Christian-democratic" (Christen-democratisch) and not "Christian Democrat(s)" (Christendemocraat/-democraten) and also definitely "Flemish" (Vlaams) and not "Fleming(s)" (Vlaming(en)), but other than that there is no linguistic clue. The only explanation they gave, as far as I can see, was that they wanted to express in the most simplistic way their core identity, i.e. being both Flemish and Christian-democratic. When you hear people talk, they will use the article "de" (masculine or feminine, but not neuter) and singular verbs. The "virtual" noun behind this could therefore well be "partij" (=factio). Thus "Democratica-Christiana et Flandrica"? But it just doesn't sound right to me without a noun. On the other hand, if we keep the nouns that are there, then the "et" is wrong, because it's not Christian Democrats (who may not be Flemish) and Flemings (who may not be Christian-democratic); you need to be both to fit in. That would leave us with "Democratae Christiani Flandrici" or "Flamingi Democratici Christiani", but even that would be far from what they tried to do in Dutch... Sigur (disputatio) 22:11, 16 Maii 2019 (UTC)

The obvious noun is factio, whether it's explicit or not, and that makes the adjectives feminine, just as the unstated terra makes the participle continens feminine. Wouldn't Democratica Christiana et Flandrica then be OK? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 03:19, 17 Maii 2019 (UTC)
If a sentence like "Démocratica Christiana et Flandrica decem candidatos in comitiis habet" then sounds OK to everyone, I'll be happy to go along with that. Sigur (disputatio) 06:42, 17 Maii 2019 (UTC)
Democratica Christiana et Flandria est factio politica Belgica quae decem candidatis in comitiis populi anno 2019 confecturis favet ('which is sponsoring ten candidates in upcoming national elections in 2019') seems grammatically OK, though better idioms (unknown to me) may be available. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 10:56, 17 Maii 2019 (UTC)
You added "est factio politica ... quae", and that was a bit what I was worried about: Can one really use a label like "Democratica Christiana et Flandrica" like one would use a noun like "factio"? But I don't have a better idea, so if nobody else has one either, I think that's where I'm going to move it in the end. Sigur (disputatio) 15:38, 17 Maii 2019 (UTC)
But that is a reasonable point. A Latin reader will say "why does the name consist of three adjectives in the feminine singular?" If the meaning is "(a person who is/people who are) Christian-Democratic and Flemish", then three adjectives is fine, and I understand that the original is equally singular or plural and equally masculine or feminine, but in Latin we have to choose, and -- if anyone is going to understand us here -- we had better choose a name that will be understood as "a group of people", because a faction is a group of people. So, masculine plural. Maybe "Democratici Christiani et Flandrici" would be the very closest we could get. So you begin "Democratici Christiani et Flandrici sunt factio ..." and that's quite OK. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:10, 17 Maii 2019 (UTC)
Are they really the Christian and Flemish Democrats? The Spanish wiki solves the problem with a double lemma and a hyphen: Cristiano-Demócrata y Flamenco o Partido Cristiano-Demócrata y Flamenco this partido being the word for factio. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 19:50, 17 Maii 2019 (UTC)
They are lucky, because the form "Cristiano-Demócrata" is commonly used in Spanish. I would be reluctant to invent a similar form in Latin because hyphens are rarely used to make compounds in Latin. It looks to me as if members of this party are said to be all three of those things, anyway, so the reading of the phrase that you suggest would not be a disaster. The even more careful reader would say "why is there an "et" in this phrase?" and perhaps, led by that question and by a glance at the Dutch form, grasp the intention :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:04, 18 Maii 2019 (UTC)