| Revision as of 21:47, 26 October 2006 editFuhghettaboutit (talk | contribs)85,115 edits Comment← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:33, 27 October 2006 edit undo151.204.105.10 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| :::Personally, I do believe that Latin, the Roman language, would fall within the category of ''Roman''ce languages. While I am a supporter of Misplaced Pages and all that it stands for, I would not trust an encyclopedia such as this for such precise semantics as is found in the aforementioned article on Romance languages. Therefore, from my viewpoint, the Vulgate would be the first true translation of the Hebrew Bible into a Roman language; though there are numerous ] (generally from Greek to Latin) that should also be considered. --20:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)] | :::Personally, I do believe that Latin, the Roman language, would fall within the category of ''Roman''ce languages. While I am a supporter of Misplaced Pages and all that it stands for, I would not trust an encyclopedia such as this for such precise semantics as is found in the aforementioned article on Romance languages. Therefore, from my viewpoint, the Vulgate would be the first true translation of the Hebrew Bible into a Roman language; though there are numerous ] (generally from Greek to Latin) that should also be considered. --20:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)] | ||
| ::::I relied on the Spanish language article for that information. If it isn't true it isn't true and should be removed, which seems to be the case.--] 21:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC) | :::::I relied on the Spanish language article for that information. If it isn't true it isn't true and should be removed, which seems to be the case.--] 21:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::::If you truly believe that "Latin, the Roman language, would fall within the category of ''Roman''ce languages", then you should take that up at the ] for the ], not here. However, since WP is ], you will need to ] to show that the "Romance language" category ''as actually used by linguists, scholars, and the general public'' does include both (Vulgar) Latin and its descendants. ] 20:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:33, 27 October 2006
|
An entry from Alba Bible appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the Did you know? column on October 26, 2006. |  |
The mainpage says this is the 'first translation of the Old Testament into a Romance language'. What about the Vulgate? Latin is a Roman(ce) language!
- I have reported this at Misplaced Pages:Main Page/Errors. We'll see what happens. Thanks! --Keeves 14:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- The article on Romance languages states "The Romance languages, a major branch of the Indo-European language family, comprise all languages that descended from Latin, the language of the Roman Empire. " By this definition, Latin is not a Romance language, since it does not descend from itself. 71.249.235.23 16:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- Personally, I do believe that Latin, the Roman language, would fall within the category of Romance languages. While I am a supporter of Misplaced Pages and all that it stands for, I would not trust an encyclopedia such as this for such precise semantics as is found in the aforementioned article on Romance languages. Therefore, from my viewpoint, the Vulgate would be the first true translation of the Hebrew Bible into a Roman language; though there are numerous ] (generally from Greek to Latin) that should also be considered. --20:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)Thisisbossi
- I relied on the Spanish language article for that information. If it isn't true it isn't true and should be removed, which seems to be the case.--Fuhghettaboutit 21:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
- If you truly believe that "Latin, the Roman language, would fall within the category of Romance languages", then you should take that up at the talk page for the Romance language article, not here. However, since WP is not about personal beliefs, you will need to provide sources to show that the "Romance language" category as actually used by linguists, scholars, and the general public does include both (Vulgar) Latin and its descendants. 151.204.105.10 20:33, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
- Personally, I do believe that Latin, the Roman language, would fall within the category of Romance languages. While I am a supporter of Misplaced Pages and all that it stands for, I would not trust an encyclopedia such as this for such precise semantics as is found in the aforementioned article on Romance languages. Therefore, from my viewpoint, the Vulgate would be the first true translation of the Hebrew Bible into a Roman language; though there are numerous ] (generally from Greek to Latin) that should also be considered. --20:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)Thisisbossi