Talk:frixorium

Pronunciation

The pronunciation information included need not only refer to contemporary usage. Modern students and scholars reading texts aloud will typically either follow a classical-type or a church-type pronunciation. The IPA gives them information. Calling it anachronism is beside the point. 3charles3 (talk) 19:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

.

@3charles3

Didn't exist in Classical Latin, and doesn't exist in modern Latin. Both the Classical and modern Latin pronunciations that you are trying to add are therefore anachronistic and fantastical. Nicodene (talk) 19:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Fantastical? It is listed in Lewis & Short, Gaffiot, and in Georges. 3charles3 (talk) 19:08, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I have inserted references to L&S etc. 3charles3 (talk) 19:13, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@3charles3 Correct - fantastical. The anachronism of a pronunciation of the 1st c. BCE stretches across half a millennium. The Plin. Val. mentioned by Gaffiot and Lewis & Short is Plinius Valerianus (6–7th c. CE); Gaffiot's Fort. Carm. refers to the Carmina of Venantius Fortunatus (6–7th c. CE). Nicodene (talk) 20:09, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

I also added what is, to my mind, the most famous example usage, viz. Psalm 101 in the Psalterium Romanum. 3charles3 (talk) 19:34, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) 3charles3 (talk) 19:37, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

If someday I discover that my life has in any way been improved by your misformatted quote I'll be sure to find you and express my sincere thanks.

"'Most famous" is quite a description for something that brings up a grand total of 679 results on Google. I'd try "least obscure". Nicodene (talk) 20:22, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Google is not the world, friend. And I have already improved your knowledge -- you're welcome! 3charles3 (talk) 14:59, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

@3charles3 Oh interesting, I didn't know that throwing random useless quotes is ‘improving someone's knowledge’. Let me return the favour, then: did you know that coleo (“testicle”) is attested in a Frankish glossary from the eighth century AD? 🌈 The more you know. 🌈 Nicodene (talk) 16:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

You first expressed interest in the word frixorium by coming on the page and deleting content on the basis that the word did not exist, so the quote is not random: it's an attested use of the word in question. Whether or not that is "useless" depends, I guess, on whether one feels an interest in substantiating one's claims. 3charles3 (talk) 16:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

@3charles3 The man who made this entry in the first place and cited a source for the word's existence thought ‘the word did not exist’? Perhaps the real issue here is reading comprehension. Nicodene (talk) 16:47, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Friend, I appreciate your devotion to the Wiki project ideals. Yes, I misunderstood what you wrote. Whether that is a problem of my English comprehension stands as a question. But for now, I wish you all the best. 3charles3 (talk) 16:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

@3charles3 It's either lack of reading comprehension or unawareness that there exists any kind of Latin besides Classical and Modern – such as for instance Late and Medieval Latin, which this entry was and is clearly labelled as, an identification that is also corroborated by your own quote about bones and frying-pans. If you can find an example of a Latin writer in modern times actually using frixorium to mean ‘frying-pan’ then that point can be revisited. Nicodene (talk) 14:25, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

I already responded to your point about periods at the very start: the pronunciation guides are not statements about the history of words or the history of Latin. They are guides for readers today. Most readers of Latin in the Anglosphere will use a variant of either a classical or a modern, church-type pronunciation. That is why there are shortcuts for them.

Since you mention reading comprehension, I will freely admit that I -- a native speaker of English -- misunderstood what you wrote.

With all that said, you have already deleted the content you objected to and I would rather not argue further so won't change it. If you feel additional information detracts from the definition, so be it. Please enjoy your victory. 3charles3 (talk) 15:02, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

The point is accuracy not who's right or who's wrong. I may well be wrong about the modern side of things - if you substantiate the point that modern people refer to a skillet as a frixorium, then a Classical pronunciation makes sense for the reason you describe. If that turns out to be the case then you will be improving my knowledge, as it would be a surprise to me.

If on the other hand it is a historical fossil, then I don't see how an ahistoric pronunciation is justifiable. Nicodene (talk) 16:00, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

The point is not that modern people calla frying pan a frixorium. The point is, the pronunciation guides give information about pronunciation, and most people who pronounce Latin do so in either a classical or a modern style. Since the Book of Psalms is widely studied and thus read in all its translations, the words it contains, including inter alia frixorium, are pronounced in those ways. 3charles3 (talk) 17:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah, ‘most famous’ and all, of course. Why, every catholic boy and girl pops out the womb already chattering about frixoria. That's why it barely has any hits on Google. That's why if I actually look up Psalm 101 in Latin I instead find ossa mea sicut cremium aruerunt over and over - the correct version as far as the church is concerned. That's why if I stepped into a Latin chatroom talking about my frixorium sueuicum utillimum quod nuper emi nobody would have the slightest clue what I'm on about.

What a waste of time. You know what, do as you please. Just don't make messes that someone else has to clean up. Nicodene (talk) 20:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

If you'd like an introduction to the Psalms that will take you beyond what quick Google searches turn up, Wikipedia has pretty good articles on the Psalms and on the various Latin Psalters. The latter, in particular, will help you understand the background on the wide variety of translations that existed.

You are right that not every Latin translation of Psalm 101 has the word frixorium, but the Psalterium Romanum does. It contains the phrase "ossa mea sicut in frixorio confrixa sunt." The phrase is translated in different ways in the different versions due to the obscurity of the text. If you were to study that Psalm seriously, by which I mean taking the various interpretations into account, you would certainly encounter the word. That is why I included that citation.

If you objected to the formatting of the quote, which I copied from another entry, you ought to have changed the format rather than deleting the content. And of course the pronunciation guide should have been left. 3charles3 (talk) 11:17, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Intentionally lying or simply misremembering, I wonder?

The quote exists nowhere else on the site, so no, you didn't copy it from another entry. And no, I didn't delete your quote- I fixed it, dated it, and cited it. You're welcome by the way. Nicodene (talk) 19:57, 22 March 2024 (UTC)

Lying? I'm not sure what you mean. The formatting is what I copied, obviously, not the quote itself, which is from the Psalterium Romanum, as indicated. 3charles3 (talk) 12:25, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

By the way, I hope you took a moment to read about the Latin Psalters, particularly the Psalterium Romanum and its historical significance. 3charles3 (talk) 12:35, 23 March 2024 (UTC)