Disputatio:Lingua Indonesiana

I would like to do some progress on this. Please feel absolutley free to make corrections. There has been no answers to my inquiries to the original author. I will be putting up a 'tiro' notification as appropriate.--Jondel 16:33, 21 Februarii 2009 (UTC)

Quod Indonesia archipelago est genus hominum {?} in natione habitant, ergo langua dicta saepe non similis lingua scripta est.

(?)Because the Indonesia archipelago is a tribe of people inhabiting a nation, therefore the language is often not similar to the written language.

I can not find any definition in the English wiki nor the Spanish wiki and therefore I will be removing this.--Jondel 16:33, 21 Februarii 2009 (UTC)

ergo langua dicta saepe non similis lingua scripta est.

Authoritive sources for this statement really is required.--Jondel 02:00, 25 Februarii 2009 (UTC)

Actually this is true of all languages that have a written form: people's everyday speech is a bit different. I don't know any special reason to say it about Indonesian.

The logic of that original sentence is also odd. True, Indonesia has a lot of local languages (so do many other countries): but this is a fact about "Languages in Indonesia" rather than about the "Indonesian language". I believe the "Indonesian language" does not differ from region to region as much as some others do, and if we look for a reason, we might say it's because there is a lot of long distance contact among the islands. This is quite the opposite of what the original sentence is trying to say.

So I would agree with removing the whole sentence. Andrew Dalby 10:45, 25 Februarii 2009 (UTC)

Languages in Indonesia should differ depending on the region. (There are many languages in my country, for example I totally can not understand Ilocano, a major Filipino language. ) I was focusing on pronounciaton (being different from the written word). But you're right, local speech differs from the written word in any language. Please do feel free to change /improve.--Jondel 18:43, 25 Februarii 2009 (UTC)

"indonesica" et nomen "Indonesia" voces dissimiles factae sunt

Secundum Iustinum alibi scribentem, substantivum et adiectivum talium verborum sunt unus et idem. Ergo Polynesia substantivum et Polynesius, -a, -um adiectivum. Simile Indonesia substantivum et Indonesius, -a, -um adiectivum.IacobusAmor 09:46, 11 Septembris 2010 (UTC)

"'Indonesia' non est adiectivum" (Neander)

If memory serves, Iustinus recommended this adjective for all Latin words founded on νησος, reflecting the well-attested pattern seen in Peloponnesius, -a, -um. Ergo Austronesius, Indonesius, Melanesius, Micronesius, Polynesius. In addition, Cassell's offers potential models in Peloponnensis, -e, and Peloponnesiacus, but not Peloponnesianus. However, -(i)anus remains a productive suffix (Clintonianus, Carteranus), so all seems well. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:40, 20 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

Similarly, though not necessarily founded on νησος and not cited by Iustinus, the well-attested pattern Magnesia, -ae → Magnesius, -a, -um. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 12:47, 20 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

Also, though likewise far afield from -nesia : Silesia, -ae → Silesius, -a, -um, as seen in the name of Angelus Silesius (the Silesian angel), not Silesianus. IacobusAmor (disputatio)

I too would personally prefer the Greek pattern in -ius customary to the 'island' root—it is what we put in Victionarium—but I'll also add that the modern Greek for the name of the language would give us Indonesiaca. —Mucius Tever (disputatio) 13:18, 20 Iulii 2013 (UTC)

250,000,000

De "ducenties quinquagies... =200x50x... aut = (200+50)x... ?" + "ducenties et quinquagies": exempli gratia, secundum Gildersleeve (#98), 1,000,000 = decies centies millies (sine "et"). IacobusAmor 11:23, 18 Septembris 2010 (UTC)