Disputatio:Granitum (lapis)

Is saxum or lapis the correct word for 'rock' in geology? I'll try to check; I just used saxum because I thought it sounded right.

Granatum is the correct name here (it is from the adjective) but all mineral names in '-ite' are -ita (masculine) in Latin. This suffix comes from Greek -ites. The CIL index is no help; its classicising requires 'lapis ...' which is too cumbersome for scientific use. Strangely, they have 'lapis basanites' and I'm not sure why you could put together two nouns in the nominative there. Pantocrator 11:47, 30 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many of these names come from Greek, and the -ites termination (the same that is optionally Latinised as -ita) is, I think, originally adjectival in Greek. At any rate it's used for both adjectives and nouns. So Lapis basanites is a calque or loan-translation of Greek βασανίτης λίθος, ~~and can be taken as noun + agreeing adjective.~~ [Changed my mind here, but the following sentence explains the construction in Greek and Latin anyway:] Noun + noun "in apposition", both in the same case, is quite OK if one of them serves to identify the class into which the other falls: "Urbs Roma" is a well-known example. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:17, 30 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I've been warned more than once about putting together nouns in the nominative, but I see what you mean here. Pantocrator 13:34, 31 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's it -- the reason for the warning is that chaining nouns together is a very common thing to do in English, far less common in Latin: but it works here. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 14:02, 31 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On your other question, I believe lapis is the better word. I think saxum is more likely to mean an individual bit of rock. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 12:13, 30 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll move it then, but I'd still like to see a good geology text in Latin to settle all these questions. Pantocrator 13:34, 31 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomen granatum

Your source for the name, The CIL index, has lapis granatus, not granatum, so what source do you have for the latter form? Besides, your source is wrong! Lapis granatus [1] is what in English is called garnet, not granite, which in neo-Latin is called lapis granites [2]. --Fabullus 14:20, 31 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, exactly. And granatum means 'pomegranate'. --Neander 15:12, 31 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know that 'granatum' is a fruit; that's why I added the parenthetical disambiguation. Pantocrator 04:55, 1 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't use any source for the name, but knowing the etymology of 'granite' [3], which can only correspond to the Latin 'granatum'. The CIL page does say 'granite' and not 'garnet'.

In any case, I suppose we must use 'granites' if that is the accepted Latin name, although is is totally absurd historically, as 'granite' does not contain the suffix '-ite' (as the English pronunciation proves). Pantocrator 04:55, 1 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You were right, of course, that "pomegranate" and "granite" have a cognate origin: they both "consist of grains". You're also right that neo-Latin granites seems to be an analogical form, derived from the name in modern languages and converting to the typical -ites termination unhistorically: that's how I read the evidence, anyway. But, finally, you're also right that since it exists, we had probably better use it ... even if the CIL is right in its translation of "lapis granatus". I don't know enough geology to comment on that, but it seems unwise anyway to choose "lapis granatus" in the sense "granite" if it is better known in the sense "garnet". Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:02, 1 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe they do mean 'granite'; note the synonym given lapis syenites, which could not mean 'garnet'. Anyway, garnet also comes from the same Latin root, it is thought from the color of the fruit. Pantocrator 12:55, 2 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, the etymon of 'granite' couldn't possibly correspond to the Latin 'granatum' — that'd be a third- or fourth-conjugation verb having a participle of the first conjugation. Littré gives the etymology of the French cognate granit through bas-latin granitum (which does get some ghits). —Mucius Tever 03:11, 2 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My source was the Oxford dictionary of English etymology, which is staid but (nearly always) reliable. It takes granite back to Italian granito; it doesn't mention the late-Latin (whether because the compiler thought the Latin to be borrowed from the Italian, or for some other reason, I don't know). It also specifically says that both words (granite and pomegranate) are cognate historically with English grain. My assumption, given this information, was that the Italian granito was formed without sufficient reference to classical conjugations! But there may well be some other explanation inaccessible to me. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:18, 2 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it seems to have somehow gotten to the fourth conjugation in Italian; hence the modern forms. Pantocrator 12:55, 2 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Several sources mention a mediaeval Latin expression "marmor granitum", sometimes abbreviated to simple "granitum", which would be at the root of Italian "granito" and hence of English "granite". Sticking close to Pantocrator's original suggestion, we might call the article Granitum (lapis), with a redirect at Lapis granites. Granatum (lapis) should then be converted into an article about the garnet. --Fabullus 08:56, 2 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Hermann Hirt, Etymologie der neuhochdeutschen Sprache, München 1921, p.201, derives German Granit from mediaeval Latin "granitum marmor" and Jan de Vries, Nederlands etymologisch woordenboek, Leiden 1971, 1997⁴, p.217, derives Dutch graniet through French granit from mediaeval Latin "marmor granitum". Also interesting is John Pinkerton, Petralogy: a Treatise on Rocks, vol. 1, London 1811, pp.189-190, who provides several early sources for both "granitum" and "granites". --Fabullus 10:02, 2 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it seems that you're right; even though the derivation seems irregular, granitum is the form we need, with the others mentioned. I would though enter this of the discretiva for granatum still. But I must mention that your suggestion to use this name for the garnet seems to say that we should use lapis for both rocks and minerals; that is actually why I chose saxum here initially. Perhaps granatum (minerale) for garnet? Pantocrator 12:55, 2 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My dictionary gives fossile for rock, metallum for mineral, and mineralia (n pl) for both. Not of much help, I know ... --Gabriel Svoboda 13:17, 2 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]