Disputatio:Calendarium republicanum Francicum

Décade

Now that we know that it can't stay the way it is (or was): What should it be? Decemduum seems to be minimally attested, so maybe this: ...unusquisque mensis tria decemdua (vulgo décades, id est 3 × 10 dies) habebat. Sigur (disputatio) 23:02, 19 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have wanted a word for "period of ten days" before, and not found one. A possibility (to be superseded by something better) is to take "decas" in its basic Greek sense a grouping of ten and to make it explicit, "decas dierum". Those who have been using "decas" to mean grouping of ten years have actually been doing the same thing, perhaps without bothering to add "annorum". NB: I have not checked existing uses of "decas" in Latin texts to see how exactly the word has been used. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:12, 20 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll put that for the time being. And now I see it in the plural, it looks quite nice. In fact, decas must have been where Fabre d'Églantine has taken his décade from in the first place. Sigur (disputatio) 10:48, 20 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That use existed at least in medieval Latin; see the DMLBS: "decas [LL < δεκάς], decade, group of ten. b period of ten years. c period of ten days [...] c Pentecostes ‥ festum ‥ quod post v ~ades Pasche celebratur, unde et vocabulum sumpsit Ord. Ebor. II 330." Lesgles (disputatio) 13:11, 20 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hence I suppose we could use "Decas" alone, but it might be confusing unless "... dierum" is added or unless the context makes it clear that days must be intended. In the passage cited by Lesgles, it is fairly clear, especially if one knows the origin of "Pentecostum". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:15, 23 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, for the first mention at least, adding dierum seems best. Lesgles (disputatio) 16:44, 23 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, well, I liked decemduum better, but it would clearly have been a neologism while I have now found a contemporary source for decas (I've added it). While I have you people here: I have another doubt about a dative, under "Nomina dierum": "Hebdomas decadi permutata est." Could you have a look at it? I wrote it purely on intuition and I'm absolutely not sure about it. Sigur (disputatio) 17:56, 23 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)[reply]

'To change into' can be convertere in + acc. Or intransitively (passively): verti in + acc. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 18:24, 23 Aprilis 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Names of the months

This being the pagina cottidiana (flattering, flattering...) has kickstarted my curiosity again, and I actually found another - almost contemporary - source (here) for the following months (all in the genitive, which is why I hadn't found them earlier):
Frimarius
Vendemiarius
Nivosus
Florealis
Germinalis
Brumarius
Messidorus
Fructidorus
and finally three versions for thermidor: Termidorus, Thermidorus, Thermedorus

This means that we now have a good reason to use the suffix -dorus for the summer months, and I'm tempted to change them, because the suffix is closer to the French original and has also been kept in Spanish and Italian (mentioning the versions with -fer only in the footnotes).

What do you think? Sigur (disputatio) 20:12, 2 Maii 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great finds. Yes, I would agree that the forms in -dorus are preferable, now that they are sourced. It's hard to see why the forms in -fer were invented, unless perhaps because -dorus, familiar as it is, is a Greek loan. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:55, 2 Maii 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In botany (according to Stearn), fer is a suffix meaning 'carrying'; hence (says Stearn) "caulis florifer, flower-bearing stem; panicula fructifera, fruit-bearing panicle." IacobusAmor (disputatio) 21:28, 2 Maii 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which explains why the forms with -fer make sense, but that doesn't mean that those with -dorus shouldn't be preferred. Sigur (disputatio) 17:10, 3 Maii 2019 (UTC)[reply]