Disputatio:Franciscus Boyce

Uhmmm, Is my latin so bad that no one can fix it...only add the translatio infecta template? Alexanderr 21:48, 18 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No one fixed it within the 27 hours that this article now exists.

I do not think this article is bad outright, but there are still a few issues (and I am sorry I am not completely sure about how to fix them):

colabor is not in my dictionary.
cuius notitia est per pelliculas – not sure about this phrase.
dux cinematographicus – ?
pelliculas quae creatas erat – I do not recognise this tense.
pro quo accepit – did he trade it in?
Est ab credenti Ecclesia Catholica – what is the meaning of this phrase?

Greetings, --UV 00:21, 19 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some corrections. Notes:

The Latin for "actor" (at least in the context of theatre/cinema) is histrio. An actor is one who acts in the non-theatrical sense.
For imperator in the meaning "director", cf. Plautus, Poenulus 4, where the term is imperator histricus.
"Famous for": honestly I didn't really know how best to say this, and have used a couple work arounds in my previous contributions. But just for you, I did a token amount of research, and here's what I found:
- "ob amicitiam summa fide servatam maximam gloriam cepit" -Cicero
- "vir ingenio celebris" -Tacitus; "Daedalus ingenio fabrae celeberrimus artis -Ovid
- "notus animi paterni" -Horace
- "omni dedecore infamis" -Cicero, pro Cluentio 47.130 (but infamis is always bad: more "notorious" than "famous")
- "veneficiis famosa" -Tacitus, A 3.7 (famosus can be good or bad)
- "omni genere turpitudinis insignis" Cicero, Rab. perd. 9 (also either good or bad)

Let me know if you have any further questions. --Iustinus 00:41, 19 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, looking over my comment it may have been a bit rude (I intended it to be half joke...) so if anyone felt that way sorry. As for UVs comments I think Iustianus got most of them, but in case he didn't here is the answers to his questions. By colabor I meant in collaboration, maybe I should have used a "-". cuius notitia est per pelliculas = whose noteriaty (fame) is through the films.... dux cinematographicus - by that I meant "film (cinamagraphic) leader" or "director". pelliculas quae creatas erat - ..movies which were made/had had been made(?). And no he didn't trade it in :P Alexanderr 05:47, 19 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this morning, I did consider your comment a bit rude – I very much value the fact that quite a number of people who know and write excellent Latin (MUCH better than I do) contribute to this wikipedia voluntarily.

I am happy to accept your explanation and I apologize for not grasping that your comment was meant jokingly (I have become so much accustomed to the Internet habit of using smilies ;-) for statements that are meant as being humorous or ironic that I must have excluded this possibility concerning your post this morning). Greetings, --UV 15:35, 19 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]