Disputatio:Potentia (physica)

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Definitio[fontem recensere]

Potentia in physica est celeritas in quo energia applicata est. Potest definire (in motu mechanica) vis in velocitate multiplicata.—Glossed with phonetic warping to capture grammatical quirks: 'Potency in physics is the swiftness in whooch energy has been applied. Force (in mecheenical motion) can limit in manifold swiftness.' The subject of the second sentence is vis. Pantocrator, are you listening to what you're saying? IacobusAmor 17:09, 21 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the grammar. No, when I write I don't really listen to what I'm saying, the words just come out of my fingers. Pantocrator 20:25, 21 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Pantocrator, I hope that you're joking. Do you wield the same method, when publishing in other languages? Quite obviously, you have very much interesting things and expert knowledge to contribute to Vicipaedia. What worries me a bit is that everything that's being published here, will immediately be listened and quoted by the whole world. And those who know Latin, will draw conclusions. Four or so years ago Vicipaedia was generally ridiculed as being a playground for ambisinister Latinity. The years that have passed since those days have been very felicitous: people have improved their Latin skills by acquainting themselves with grammar and texts, and as a result, Vicipaedia is growing in appreciation. I sincerely hope that in due time you'll be a master of Latin grammar. (That won't be insurmountable for such an intelligent human.) After all, as is evidenced by Lewis Carroll's Jabberwocky, the gist of an autonomous language (the Saussurean langue) is its grammar, not its vocabulary. --Neander 22:38, 21 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Adhuc nescio quid dicere coneris. Cur non scribis barbarice ut nosmet Latine reddamus?
Interdum et mihi videatur illud melius esse. Pantocrator quid facias si nesciens Latine scribere non modo inspicis id quod scribis? --Ioscius 06:58, 23 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]