Talk:catapultæ
Latest comment: 2 years ago by This, that and the other in topic Citations problem
Citations problem
[edit]AFAICT, the 1966 citation is an extract from an 1868 translation of the w:History of Rome (Livy). Also the link in the citation didn't display anything at all intelligible for me. @Kiwima DCDuring (talk) 16:40, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
- @DCDuring Fixed, I think. This, that and the other (talk) 01:32, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Plural of English catapult! Surely this can't be right...? Perhaps catapulta can also occur in English, and it's the plural of that? Equinox ◑ 15:18, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- I think you are right about it being the plural of catapulta, to be defined as "a Roman catapult". See the Google Books link associated with the third cite at Citations:catapultæ, where the singular also appears. None of the uses on our citations page are italicised and the authors seem to treat it as a naturalised English word. This, that and the other (talk) 06:27, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- I created an English entry at catapulta and reframed catapultæ as its plural. I think we can call this RFV-resolved This, that and the other (talk) 01:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
RFV-resolved Kiwima (talk) 09:01, 23 December 2021 (UTC)