Disputatio:Acubus textus

'to knit' = 'texere'? ('thread' = 'filum') 71.208.238.48 01:17, 17 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change and correct if you must... this just looks like a culprit to wind up in VP:IOCI. Harrissimo 01:19, 17 Decembris 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Can anyone explain lanam nere to me as a Latin phrase? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:54, 17 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Me too, please~~--147.96.1.106 10:01, 17 Decembris 2007 (UTC)~~ Xaverius[reply]

Oh, yes, I see now. I missed neo, nere when I looked in Lewis & Short but it's there all the time. Thanks, Massimo. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 16:20, 18 Decembris 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The definition—"Lanam nere . . . est vestes aut multa alia . . . cum lana facere"—means 'To spin/weave wool is to make clothes or many other things in accompaniment with wool'. Despite the interwiki links, our lemma doesn't refer to knitting, because neither spinning nor weaving is knitting (and knitting can involve materials other than wool); and according to Cassell's, 'to knit' is acubus texere. IacobusAmor 02:38, 3 Novembris 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, nere is spinning, i.e. turning natural fibres, such as wool and flax, into threads. I don't know if the Romans did any knitting, but the concept is closer to weaving (Latin: texere), i.e. turning threads into fabrics (or textiles). I'd therefore move to move the present page to acubus texere, as Iacobus suggested. --Fabullus 11:22, 24 Februarii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nonne ad netionem sit haec paginula adiungenda? Neander 14:44, 26 Novembris 2010 (UTC)[reply]