Disputatio:Res novae Francicae

E Vicipaedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Magna Charta aut Charta[fontem recensere]

I think Charta would be enough to translate Constitution because, in french, we had, in 1814 and 1830, a "Charte" because the kings didn't want to use the word "Constitution" they considered as to "révolutionnaire". so, a "Charte" in french would become Charta in latin. Moreover, Magna Charta is the text signed by King John in England regulating king's power (e.g. creation of the habeas corpus). tell me what do you think about. -- Thoma D. 16:36, 9 Iulii 2007 (UTC)

Isn't Constitutio a possibility? the Decree of Caracalla of 212 (by which all the free men of the Empire became citizens) was called the Constitutio Antoniana--Xaverius 16:57, 9 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
that would be better but in the article, i saw Magna Charta, that's why i was talking about it. -- Thoma D. 17:03, 9 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
I see... then I guess that charta would be better, because has you have said, we Magna Charta is a specific thing in England--Xaverius 17:05, 9 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
OK, i'll make the changes tomorrow. -- Thoma D. 17:10, 9 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
Indeed, Charta is certainly better than Magna Charta, but the thing is the two different words mean two different things as Thoma said at the beginning of the Disputatio, so I'd like that we use the word Constitutio to translate Constitution, as Xaverius offered it... Ricardus 12:06, 24 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
I'm with Ricardus on this. To me, charta is just a charter, and Magna Charta is specifically English. A national constitution wants a good solid word, e.g. constitutio. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:04, 24 Iulii 2007 (UTC)
If i've all understood, you'd rather use Constitutio for the translation of "Constitution" than Charta. If everybody agree, i'll make all the changes tomorrow or the next week (I can't come between thursday and sunday). answer me... -- Thoma D. 16:15, 24 Iulii 2007 (UTC)


Some notes on grammar[fontem recensere]

  • "res novae" is plural, so it needs "incipiunt" not "incipit"
  • Don't form adverbs with "mente", that's modern Roman langages, better is "acriter" than "acri mente"
  • "decretavit" The principal parts of the verb "to decide" are "decerno,decrevi,decretum", so it has to be "decrevit"
  • "Constitutionem parare debere" Where is the A of the Aci. I think one should insert a "se", if I catch the sense.
  • "multi tumulti" Tumultus is u-declension, like senatus,in classical Latin, so "multi tumultus"
  • "carcerem expugnatum est" Carcer is subject in the passiv sentence and masc., so "carcer expugnatus est"
  • "prooemium promulgata est" No concord: "prooemium promulgatum est"
  • "ut est"? You need subjunctive in a consecutive sentence. After perfect in the main sentence subj. imperfect, so "ut promulgaretur" (consecutio temporum)
  • "rex coactum est" It's masculine. So "coactus est"
  • "iusiurandum supra" what's this "above"? better: de aliqua re, best +AcI, so maybe "eos Constitutioni novae oboedire", PS: "supra" reigns the accus., so it would have been "supra novam Constitutionem" also the first time
  • "in Lutetiam" Don't use "in" with cities and minor islands, like "Romam, Delphos, Delum proficisci", it's "Lutetiam redire"
  • a lapsus "interditum", not with "d"
  • "novos tumultos", as said have to be "novos tumultus"
  • "contra" reigns the Acc., so "contra Angliam, Hispaniam"
  • "domus finis est factus" Dativ is better than Genetiv (Cicero: finem facere iniuriis, Caesar: sermoni sui) so write "domui"!
  • "scriptores putant" +Aci, so not "habuit" but "habuisse"
  • "se aliqem facere" so Napoleo se primum consulem fecit
  • "Constitutiomem promulgata est" It's subject, so "Constitutio promulgata est"
  • "Tempus dicitur terroris regimen, inter quem" Tempus and regimen are neuter, so why quem? And what sense has "inter" "between"
  • maybe "tempus, in quo / cum" or "regimen, quo"
  • "multissimi"? it's multus, plures, plurimus. Maybe you prefer "permulti"

Anny comments? I'm sure I have not seen everything, but my few suggestion may improve the grammatical quality of the text.

(Ingeborg Hartung, 13.10.07)

Cur non conventum tuum creas? In hoc modo tu paginam mutare potes! Certe melior est si ut vicipaedianus paginas mutas quam ut usor ignotus in dispotatione correctiones scribes--Xaverius 20:09, 13 Octobris 2007 (UTC)
tibi gratiam ago propter bonas emendationes. Non intellego solum emendationem "ut prooemium + cong.". This is'nt a consecuvite sentence but only "the declaration....AS a prologue to the constitution"--Massimo Macconi 06:55, 14 Octobris 2007 (UTC)

Revolutio aut ResNovae[fontem recensere]

Hi yall, just a little question. I'd like to know why you use the word "Res Novae" instead of "Revolutio", like in the book of Copernic De Revolutionibus (orbium celestius)??--Ricardus 14:55, 30 Septembris 2008 (UTC)

You should look at the page Res Novae and its disputatio page as well for discussion. Although res novae can mean a great many different things depending on the context, the chief defect of revolutio in the sense of revoltion is that it is a late latin term for which an ancient term already exists.
The meaning of revolutionibus in the sentence you suggest is totally different, " concerning the rolling back of celestial spheres" which referes to astronomy.
The original coinage of "revolutio" in the sense of "political revolution" came from a 18th century book on law by a vatican scholar Guglielmo Audisio (Iuris naturae et gentium privati et publici fundamenta) who described the ongoing rerum eversiones in America and France as a "rolling back" of the political order to the time before the church, with the replacement of religious law with secular principle. Later of course in many languages the term revolution was generalized to mean any old rerum eversio a populo facta and later any fundamental cultural, economic, scientific or political change. It is doubtful however how many of these new meanings should be taken up by the latin term "a rolling back" ="revolutio". A new scientific or fundamental change can hardly be justifiably called a "rolling back". In most instances for political revolution I personally would prefer the ancient rerum eversio but an argument can sometimes be made for other terms.--Rafaelgarcia 15:19, 30 Septembris 2008 (UTC)
Ego hunc articulum vocarem "Gallica eversio", quia "Eversio rerum gallorum" sive "Eversio rerum gallica" nimis longa nomina mihi videntur. Quid censetis?--Alfonsoz (disputatio) 11:12, 1 Maii 2013 (UTC)
Secundum Cassell's, revolution = 'res novae, reipublicae conversio, reipublicae commutatio'. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 11:27, 1 Maii 2013 (UTC)
Certe bona sunt verba locutionesque, sed mea sententia inveniendum est unum tantum verbum ad hoc dicendum et ex "res novae" nullum sumere possumus, ex "reipublicae conversio/commutatio" possumus sumere "conversionem" et commutationem" sed sunt verba nimis frecuntia aut potius significant res frequentiores, scilicet possunt adhiberi facilius. Contra "eversio" mihi videtur nomen sat aptum nam significat "vertere aliquid omnino" et non tam facilius adibetur... Credo. Sed ut patet et sententia sat subiectiva. Etiam possumus uti "rebellione", quamquam hoc implicat pugnam quandam.--Alfonsoz (disputatio) 21:15, 1 Maii 2013 (UTC)