Disputatio:Oppida Graeciae antiquae

Salve Jondel, Textus huius tuae novissimae paginae paret mihi difficiliter comprehendum esse. Bis-Taurinus (disputatio) 00:34, 20 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Salve Bis-Taurinus. Me paenitet. Me doce si tibi placeat, quas partes? Conor ex Anglice vertere.Gratias.--Jondel (disputatio) 00:42, 20 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Salve iterum Jondel, sententiam primam interdiu clariorem iam fecisti. In sententia ultima clarum jon est, ad quid pertinet "maiorem", Ad latinitatem: "alia genera coloniarum" -- "accurate" vel "exacte" "secundum Thucydidem" -- "Sparta fuit 4 vici" Te saluto e nocte europaea. Lecticum me vocat. Vale!

Heu. Iam pauco emendavi. Emenda libere tu etiam,amabo te ut arbitraris tibi videtur probus sit. Postea ex anglice versione vertente addero.Vale.--Jondel (disputatio) 01:31, 20 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Salve Jondel, concede mihi novam quaestionem, oro. Sententiae ultimae paragraphi "catoicia" sensus mihi velatum est. Potesne id clarius facere? Potes etiam mihi respondere anglice si vis. Vale Bis-Taurinus (disputatio) 21:18, 23 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Of course , Bis-Taurinus. catoicia seems to be popular in the latin of this Wikipedia. Please check the taberna. I need to change the middle ages to classical age. I am translating from the English,little by little. From the English Wikipedia the catoicia, comes from the greek word for 'to inhapbit' and became popular after Alexander the Great made his conquests.--Jondel (disputatio) 23:28, 23 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Latin spelling would have to be "catoecia". Popular may be exaggerated! Anne said on the Taberna that there was no reason to rule it out, which is true, but no one gave an example of its use or linked to a page where it is used. It looks to me as if it's an introduction by the anonymus who writes geographical articles and introduces a lot of invented names and Greek words. That's the way wikis are, the articles are very useful but they will have to be cleaned up eventually, and this word may then disappear from all of them.

Looking at the English page from which this one is translated, it's not much of an article; it's a series of definitions written by someone who doesn't know the subject in depth. In the section about katoikiai there are two "citation needed" tags, and I would have added at least two more. There's no equivalent page in any other language. Generally, in classical studies, I'd trust a German wiki page rather than an English one, but I guess that's no use to you here, Jondel!

In real Greek, so far as I can see, the word katoikia was not commonly used as a technical term for a kind of settlement (except in Greek Egypt). It meant a settling-down or a settlement as an almost abstract thing. But that's just a quick impression, could be misleading.

Good luck with changing the middle ages to classical age, Jondel. When you've done that, please start on reforming the modern age -- there's plenty of work to be done there :) And have a very happy Christmas! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:54, 24 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Belated merry Christmas and advance Happy New ear Andrew. I will to add sources and citations both at the English and Latin wikis as well complete the article.I brought down my German A Structural Approach book and put it on my bed. I makes a wonderful decoration, bed pillow, platform for coffee, paperweight. There is a remote possibility that I will open it next year. kiddng aside, German is a great language and will try to learn it. Middle ages will be changed to Classical age. --Jondel (disputatio) 04:42, 25 Decembris 2014 (UTC)--Jondel (disputatio) 04:42, 25 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not belated at all. Around this side of the globe we shall be sitting down to our Christmas dinner in a couple of hours and will be practising our German (or, much more likely, our German guests will be speaking their fluent English). We will toast you, Jondel. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:01, 25 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wow , I'm elated, thank you. Coincidentally I'm listening to an old German song Herr Kommissar to familiarize myself with the words.--Jondel (disputatio) 12:14, 25 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Polis[fontem recensere]

De polidis ut "genitive, patterning after paris." Why would the paradigm of polis match that of Paris ? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 16:17, 26 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Traupman p.11 genitive of Paris is paridis.I'll check my ancient greek book now.--Jondel (disputatio) 16:27, 26 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

genitive πόλεως, thus poleus.--Jondel (disputatio) 16:52, 26 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

With reference to polis, where would the /d/ come from? If πόλεως is the Greek genitive, are you going to keep that or Latinize it? And how about the plural nominative & accusative? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 17:08, 26 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We should use poleus for the genitive shouldn't we? I will base it from the wiktionary and work on this tom.It's 1:14am here. Since paridis was the genitive for paris, I assumed polidis would be the genit4ive for polis.--Jondel (disputatio) 17:18, 26 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Poleos ? IacobusAmor (disputatio) 19:43, 26 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "poleos" would be the closest-to-Greek form, as you rightly say, Iacobe. The reason why not "polidis", Jondel, is that not all Greek nominatives in "-is" had the same stem; "Paris" had a stem in "-d-", but "polis" didn't. The reason why not "poleus" is that the o in this Greek genitive is an omega, which doesn't normally convert to a Latin "u".

However, in place-names that are compounds of "-polis" -- of which we have many -- I think we more often use an unchanged "-polis" as the Latin genitive. On the very useful page made by Fabullus, both -is and -eos are given as possible Latin genitives (the relevant example on that page is "thesis", which declines like "polis" in Greek).

Iacobus asks about the nom. and acc. plural. We know that the English and Latin plural of "thesis" is "theses", and this pattern can hold good for "polis", so we could have a plural "poles" (the Greek is πόλεις, but a Greek ει is very rarely retained in Latin). I don't know if it's possible to find any modern Latin text in which "polis" is used as a Latin word, giving us a potential source; I have a feeling that most modern scholars who have written about this subject in Latin would have retained the Greek word πόλις in Greek script. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 21:55, 26 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recte monuisti Andrea et probe demonstraveras Iacobe ! I will try to plug in the correct Greek forms at the appropriate places in the latin article, to play safe and since educated Latins knew Greek.--Jondel (disputatio) 00:25, 27 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Constat polim apud antiquos verbum non mutuatum sed peregrinum fuisse, quod Graecis litteris scribi solebat. Quodsi hoc vocabulo uti volumus termino technico de Graecae urbis vel potius civitatis genere loquentes, inutile est flectendi exemplum ex Graecis declinationibus sumere. Ut dixit Andreas noster, optimum declinandi exemplum exhibent thesis atque alia nomina a poli deducta, sicut propolis, metropolis, Neapolis aliaque nomina urbium in -polim cadentia. Quod ad thesim attinet, hae sunt verae apud antiquos attestationes huius verbi:

Nom.sg. thesis (Quint.)

Acc.sg. thesim (Sen.), thesin (Quint.)

Gen.sg. thesis (Suet. Rhet. 25.8) [nusquam apud antiquos *theseos aut *-poleos]

Dat.sg. thesi /thesī/ (Maur.)

Abl.sg. thesi /thesī/ (Maur.)

Nom.pl. thesis /thesīs/ (Quint. 2.4.24; 7.10.5) (nusquam apud antiquos *theses)

Acc.pl. thesis /thesīs/ (Quint. 3.5.14; 10.5.11; 12.2.25)

Gen./Dat./Abl. pl. (apud antiquos non attestati, quamquam more Fabulli nostri per analogiam dici possunt).

Itaque oportet nos hoc modo polim declinare: Nom.sg polis, Acc.sg. polim (aut graecissanter polin), Gen.sg. polis, Dat./Abl.sg. poli /polī/, Nom./Acc.pl. polis /polīs/. Neander (disputatio) 06:42, 27 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It may be worth noting that when cited IN ENGLISH, the plural of polis is poleis. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:29, 30 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gratias ago, mi Neander. Formas plurales non verificavi: "polīs" et "thesīs" meliores esse agnosco. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:19, 27 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gratias tibi ago Neander, nobis clare explicas.--Jondel (disputatio) 23:05, 29 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Salve Jondel, I have great problems with your latin, I must say. There have been several nights, when I was puzzled about the sense of your sentences. For a while I decided to contribute no more anything to this page. But today I tried to correct faults and make the content clearer. But as I don't know the original text from which you translate, as you wrote, it is possible that I missed the intended content while adjusting the style. Then it would be your turn again to correct the text again. Bis-Taurinus (disputatio) 01:07, 30 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Salve Bis-Taurine.Thank you very much for your help Bis. I am doing my best to impove my latin. Please bear with me. 'importare' means to be part of? My dictionary is not clear about that. --Jondel (disputatio) 02:51, 30 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The word import in English (with cognates in other modern languages) gives you the basic sense. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:29, 30 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am more concern about the content and less about the style. The original text can be found in the English version. Just click on the link at the left. --Jondel (disputatio) 02:51, 30 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Over here, it seems to be not so much a matter of style as a matter of grammar. In particular, the concept of case wants review. Consider what you're actually saying:

Phrourion collectus munitus fuit aedificium, instar castellum Romae vel Anglici.

A phrourion was a fortified collection, a building, an image, a castle at Rome or the English.

Case! IacobusAmor (disputatio) 14:22, 30 Decembris 2014 (UTC)[reply]