Disputatio:Principatus Monoeci

Combine?

Can we combine Principatus Monoeci and Monoecus? The difference between those is extremely small, and it may cause confusion. --Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 15:46, 2 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was right to split them -- the town is not the same as the state, and the boundaries of the state have changed. It once included Mentonum and Rocca Bruna. All that is history of the state but not of the town. However, the interwiki links for Monoecus need to change. At present both pages seem to have the same links: am I right about this? This is not a good idea. I think our Monoecus should be linked with fr:Monaco-Ville and similarly in other languages. Compare with Mons Caroli, another subdivision of the principality of Monaco. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:01, 2 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For that reason I have now changed the interwikis at Monoecus. If this wasn't the best move after all, please explain here. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:18, 2 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you. I get your point about having to split them. --Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 18:42, 2 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Name?

Have get any reason for the name "Principatus Monoeci", any Latin sources? As someone has already noticed, sources list Monaco as Herculis monæci portus^[1] or simply Herculis portus^[2]. Monoecus is listed, though as an adjective, a citizen.^[3] What do you think?--Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 17:17, 3 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Duas quaestiones recognosco: (1) nomen urbis; (2) nomen principatus vel civitatis.

De nomine urbis oportet fortasse in Disputatio:Monoecus disputare. Pro certo nomine pleno "Portus Herculis Monoeci" uti licet; de nomine breviori usque adhuc nescio.
Licet nobis vertere, si singula verba nominis verti possunt (ita VP:TNP intellego). Si igitur "Monoecus" accipimus, nomenque vulgare Principauté de Monaco cognovimus, "Principatus Monoeci" seu "Principatus Monoecensis" conficere licet. An alii consentiunt? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:11, 3 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to have created too much problems, adding that rite, Principatus Monoeci (a long time ago, when I first found the page Monoecus; look the version of 22 Decembris 2012). I've written it as a litterally translation of Principauté de Monaco, because I'm for the translation of the official names of the official language(s). Anyway, I think no Latin sources mention the name Principatus Monoeci. Franciesse 10:37, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Neither do I. But as Andrew states, literally/word-for-word translation is accepted, so I have no further objections regarding the title.--Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 11:26, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just read the Hofmann article here patiently. It confirms "Monoecus" as a noun, as the place name: his initial words mean "MONOECUS, to its inhabitants Monaco, to the French Mourgues, [is] a port and stopping-place of Liguria, accessible to small ships, 480 furlongs distant from the town of Albenga." I never knew the French name Mourgues: is he right there? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:28, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Adjectives and nomen gentis

What should we put in adjectives and nomen gentis? I say, Monoecus can mean both[[1]]. Some have been using Monoecensis recently, and I like that, if we can have some sources please. And all out of a sudden, this Franciesse comes and alters all of it to Monoecanus and Monoecicus. So it looks like we have a little confusion and I'd like if we can agree on some common terms.--Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 11:45, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

English Wikipedia says that if one is born in Monaco he has to be called Monégasque, and I've translated it with the classical -ensis (Monoecensis); if one is emigrated in the Principality, he has to be called Monacans, so for me it was Monoecanus, with the simple adding of -anus. Sicerely, I haven't seen the link of Hofmann, and I think you're completly right to use Monoecus (I'm sorry again if I've made confusion in the page). I also added -ic (pattern for Lingua Francica, Italica, Anglica), making Monoecicus, only for the language. I finally am for Monoecus, as you suggest. Franciesse 14:39, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I must say that although English is supposed to be my native language I have never heard "Monacan" and don't quite believe it! Monégasque is of course fine, though I don't think many English speakers would use it. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:12, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that I've heard Monacan, but I've probably heard Monegasque (written in English without the accent), and Merriam-Webster attests both words. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:31, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"This Franciesse" and "this Nicolaus" are both newcomers (so far as I know) and both welcome, and I think we're all doing our best :) No confusion has been made: there's plenty of time to sort out Vicipaedia ...

We do sometimes allow ourselves to invent geographical adjectives in -ensis, but Nicolaus is quite right that it is better to have a source. So, thanks to Google, there is. If you search for "monoecensis" in Google you find several names of species (no doubt because of the oceanographic research unit at Monaco).

Monoecus is a well-formed Greek adjective meaning "housed all alone". It originated right here as an epithet for Hercules, patron of this inhospitable port (see Strabo 4.6.3): hence the full classical name, Portus Herculis Monoeci, "the port of Hercules-who-lives-alone" (Plinius, Naturalis historia 3.47). I am finding some other classical versions of the name and I will add them in a footnote at Monoecus.

Since Monoecus is an adjective, Nicolaus is grammatically right that it could be used as an ethnic term: whether anyone has used it this way I don't know.

[Added afterwards:] Having now read the Hofmann article, I think Nicolaus is incorrect that Hofmann gives "Monoecus" as an ethnic term. I see why you would think that, but I am sure that the meaning of his first sentence is as I translate it above: he gives no Latin ethnic term at all. My conclusion, for what it's worth, is that "Monoecanus" is better forgotten (unless we have a source) but that Monoecensis is fine and is the best term to choose. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:12, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't understood, can we delete the adjective Monoecus? Franciesse 19:01, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it seems that we can. We have no citation for "Monoecus" as "nomen incolarum" (the quote from Hofmann has been misunderstood). Also we have no citation for "Monoecus" as "adiectivum". As I said above, it is a Greek adjective originally, but as adjective it doesn't mean "of Monaco", it means "living alone". We can find citations for "Monoecensis" as adjective -- see google. I don't think we have any word for "nomen incolarum" as yet -- but since "Monoecensis" exists, it would be acceptable in that sense. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:59, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How has the quote from Hofmann been misunderstood? It says quite clearly: MONOECUS, incolis Mònaco[[2]]. How would you interpret this, other than to the citizens of Monaco (i.e. of the cit.)? I may have missed something.--Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 20:20, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you haven't understood why he uses the dative. It is a Latin encyclopaedia, and so he starts with the Latin place-name in the nominative. Then he says "(to its inhabitants [it is] Monaco; to the French [it is] Mourgues)". Then, the aside about modern names completed, he goes on in the nominative. So the basic sentence, in the nominative, is "MONOECUS ... [is] a port and stopping-place of Liguria, accessible to small ships, 480 furlongs distant from the town of Albenga." So "MONOECUS" is the noun, the place-name that he is defining. As you read more of Hofmann, you will agree with me that this is his normal style.

Unluckily, in the remainder of the text of this article, he doesn't give us an adjective or an ethnic name. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:30, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:30, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok, that kind of dative. Thank you :)--Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 22:41, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I don't do crossword puzzles; instead I enjoy puzzling out this kind of stuff.

The other-language names are interesting. What Hofmann wrote made perfect sense in his time, but we would now say "to the inhabitants it is Múnegu; to the French it is Monaco". The French now use the Italian name; the local speech is now counted as a distinct language, whereas previously it was counted as an unwritten variant of Italian, which was the official local language. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:02, 6 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Lingua Anglica hic non nobis interest"

I understand that one might want to remove the the English name, but according to the English article English is one of the four most common languages which is understandable, when considering that 7,5 per cent is of British breed. So maybe we should keep it?--Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 16:56, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In my idiolect "breed" applies to cats and dogs, not people. But I'm not offended, some of my best friends are cats :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:03, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, now to answer seriously and briefly (this is a topic for the Vicipaedia:Taberna surely). It was discussed long ago: the conclusion was that the international language for Vicipaedia is Latin. We include information on names that are rrelevant to the local subject of the article -- here French, Occitan, Monégasque, maybe Italian for historical reasons -- and that's enough. That's my view, anyway. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 17:09, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, how I wish, I'd written that on purpose :) Though, having looked it up, the Oxford dictionaries mention something about "a sort or kind of person or thing: a new breed of entrepreneurs was brought into being"[[3]]. And so I naturally supposed, it would apply to "British" as well. But now I see the Oxford logic: entrepreneurs may be more bestial ;)--Nicolaus Augurinus (disputatio) 17:20, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford logic doesn't exist: there is only Cambridge logic!

Quite true, now that you remind me, I have seen the word "breed" used in just that way ... Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:01, 5 Ianuarii 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttp://www.uni-mannheim.de/mateo/camenaref/hofmann/hof4/s0937c.html

[2] ttp://www.uni-mannheim.de/mateo/camenaref/hofmann/hof3/s0203b.html

[3] ttp://www.uni-mannheim.de/mateo/camenaref/hofmann/hof3/s0203b.html

[1]

[2]

[3]