Disputatio:Naufragium

Latinitas[fontem recensere]

Can I ask what is dubius or unintelligible in this article?--Jondel (disputatio) 10:40, 23 Maii 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The main problems are in the second sentence: "Consociatio Nationum aestimat 3 decem centenam milliam reliquias navium in fondo maris esse.." 1,000,000 in classical Latin is "decies centena milia", so 3,000,000 could be "tricies centena milia", or you could go with post-classical "tres milliones". Milia is a neuter plural noun, so check the declension, and the thing numbered has to be in the genitive, "reliquiarum". "Fondo" is Italian/Spanish, not Latin. Lesgles (disputatio) 15:53, 23 Maii 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Lesgles. I sometimes write at from the top of my head without checking the dictionaries/grammar books. 'fundo'(ablative for fundum) is ok? Let me look at this, this weekend.--Jondel (disputatio) 16:13, 23 Maii 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unfortunately, in order to write good Latin, we all have to check the dictionaries fairly often! Fundo, ablative for fundus, is good. Lesgles (disputatio) 18:28, 23 Maii 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The suggested changes were made. Do you think we can remove the '-4 (corrigenda) Latinitas ' notice now?--Jondel (disputatio) 11:23, 31 Maii 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Censeo nunc Latinitatem acceptabilem esse; formulam mutavi. Lesgles (disputatio) 16:54, 4 Iunii 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Optime, papae! Eugepae! Adhunc laetor cum erroris meis mihi consilia des.--Jondel (disputatio) 12:07, 5 Iunii 2014 (UTC)[reply]