Scrub-down
edit&Nbsp;&Nbsp;&Nbsp;This has too long made not much more sense than chopped lever, but I may have failed to produce a perfect result. Overall, I surely improved compliance with English syntax, but I hesitate to have confidence of having captured the colleague’s intention. I’m confident it’s more compehensible, but urge colleagues to add one or more pairs of English-fluent eyes to the mix. (Monocular colleges of course equally welcome.)
- If we're classifying names by how they were written a thousand years ago (or whatever your cutoff is), likely most of the examples in that paragraph are wrong; but still I'd like to know when Sanctus ended in e. —Tamfang (talk) 05:07, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Still without explaining anything, but thanks for find information and share it with the community of wikipedia. The sanctus or santus (= santo, sacro, santificati), i.e. the spelling still does not lose validity, ends at us, I know that this means a suffix of filiation, as well as the termination on the letter E or termination in I and another similar spellings (I know the language and I am Italian and I know latin, however it is very good that you show your point of view). Please, I would ask you to continue looking in greater depth, but do it as an exercise for yourself as something cultural. Receive a cordial greeting. Again, the theme is finished. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sapience78 (talk • contribs) 06:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- (I moved your cryptic remarks to where they seem to belong.)
- I know enough Latin and enough Italian and enough history of the Romance languages that you cannot bluff me by saying "trust me, you only need to study more."
- No, –us is not (in itself) a suffix of filiation. I don't think any of the names in that list have such a suffix. (Dionigi = Dionysios is a derivative of Dionysos, but not filial.)
- The sentence in question does not say "Here is a list of names that, at some unspecified time in the past, had forms with final –e"; it says that some names NOW end with –e. You have added Sanctus to that list; it is the ONLY name on the list which does not NOW end with –e, and you owe the reader more explanation than the non-answers that you have given. Similarly, Santo/Santi does not NOW end with a consonant, even though the Latin nominative singular form sanctus did. This article's title is Italian name, not Latin name or Names of Latin origin.
- I'll do you the favor of guessing that you have in mind the Latin vocative sancte; but – since you're so smart – you know as well as I do that the vocative is dead in modern Romance languages.
- If we're reclassifying words according to their past spellings, then clearly Achille, Aristotele, Ulisse need to be removed, because their nominatives formerly ended with –s.
- —Tamfang (talk) 08:47, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
news flash: modern Italy ≠ ancient Rome
edit- Italian names are not entirely equivalent to ancient Latin ones, for instance, the Italian nome is not analogous to the ancient Roman nomen, since the former is the given name (distinct between siblings) while the latter the family name (inherited, thus shared by all siblings).
I rewrote the above, partly because "not entirely equivalent" can easily be read as implying that they are mostly equivalent except for a change in the usage of the word nome(n) – which is wrong. My version:
- Modern Italian naming customs have little in common with those of ancient Rome, though some Latin names – both given names and the Roman equivalents of surnames – have been adopted as given names.
This was reverted with the puzzling summary "It is not a euphemism but it is a very bad explanation". What is not a euphemism for what? And this passage, being part of a quick overall summary, is not meant to be an explanation. —Tamfang (talk) 05:15, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- This is a link to the wiki and speaks for itself, and it is very clear who did it, is fine: Latin Declension. A little more information Declension. Have a beautiful day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sapience78 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- I can probably recite all the regular Latin declensions from memory (even after forty years). To the extent that declension is at all relevant to naming customs, I think it supports my approach here. —Tamfang (talk) 22:52, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- Are you sure?, Or, is it the pride that was injured and hurt?. You saying the latter is not as bright or as smart as I thought you might be, it's a shame, keep exercising...nothing more to say. If you are a good Italian, you will do things very well and you do the right thing, I know it, look at that Italians are angry quickly and mastered oneself is one of the things you learn in life, and I have I say with modesty or humility. Good day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sapience78 (talk • contribs) 23:32, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
- I guess the problem is that I'm not a good Italian (though I was born there, whence my interest). —Tamfang (talk) 22:06, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Nonsense
editThese paragraphs are almost nonsense. I moved them from the article to the discussion.
gibberish
|
---|
1) There are some Italian names which only popular and used in Italy, San Marino, and Swiss Italian : Male : Arrigo, Italo, Gaetano, Italo, Urbano, Ludovico Female : Fulvia, Ornella, Petronella 2) Specific Surnames Style double consonant :
specific letter :
Common Prefix :
Common Suffix :
|
--Carnby (talk) 20:35, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
- Good call. —Tamfang (talk) 08:53, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
- I collapsed them to save space. —Tamfang (talk) 23:53, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
osso
edit- Other endings are characteristic of certain regions: […]
- Sicily: -aro, -isi and "osso": Cavallaro, Cherisi, Rosi, Rosso (Sicily, Piedmont and Veneto)
Does the paranthesis apply to everything on the line – i.e., "characteristic" Sicilian forms are equally common in two other distant regions – or only to Rosso? That is a common adjective ('Red') and so its wide distribution is to be expected. Are there many other Sicilian names ending in osso? —Tamfang (talk) 23:52, 9 April 2023 (UTC)