Disputatio:Sveinbiörn Egilssonius

A declension problem

The following is written in Scripta historica Islandorum: de rebus gestis:

Pars prior.
Opera et studio.
Sveinbjörnis Egilssonii
Collegae scholae Bessastadensis
in Islandia.

I would like to know how Sveinbjörn's name is in the nominative (to use for the page), as well as the place Bessastaðir (Bessastadensis). In Icelandic the name Bessastaðir is in plural (places of Bessi; Bessi's places- I it sounds weird in Icelandic too, so..), ergo it might also be in plural in latin? Please help. --BiT 16:32, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about the placename. Plenty of Latin towns are plural: Athenae, Thebae, and Tres Tabernae come immediately to mind. IacobusAmor 16:57, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but what about Sveinbjörn Egilsson's name? What should I write in the article? --BiT 16:59, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's tough. This Egilssonius business has got to go, unless that's attested. And for now, Sveinbjörnis has to go too... I'm not quite sure how to render that Latine, but we can't just go third declensioning everything that ends with an n. How is this pronounced (my icelandic is 0)? s+VAIN+byoern? Is this like German ö? If so, this is generally rendered oe in Latin, cf Moebii taenia. Like before, this j will have to be an i. But I wonder if there is a similar name in another language, that already has an attestation...--Ioshus ^(disp) 17:46, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But isn't the text given above an attestation? My assumption would be nominative Sveinbjörn Egilssonius -- by our normal rules the article should actually be at Sveinbiorn, but whether or not we enforce it here, I would argue that it's OK to start the article with "Sveinbjörn Egilssonius, blablabla." As for Besstadensis, again we have an adjective. --Iustinus 17:56, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm retarded, man... I guess I actually have to read the thread before responding.......--Ioshus ^(disp) 17:58, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you are :] But isn't there any way to figure out the noun form from the adjective? --BiT 18:41, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not reliably. We can maybe guess. A lot of place names containing that Germanic -stad- root were latinized as -stadium (thinking of the Greco-Latin word, of course), but unfortunately if that were the case here, we would expect Bessastadiensis with an i. --Iustinus 19:12, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He appears not to have been a consistent Latinizer: the accusative form in the footnote "Sveinbjörnum Egilsson" would want a nominative "Sveinbiörnus Egilsson". But no reason to prefer this over the form you have actually chosen for the title. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:12, 2 Februarii 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nomina patria Islandica

Pantocrator has moved Sveinbiorn Egilssonius ad Sveinbjörnus Egil filius, and I agree with him. Of course, we will not translate most surnames of patronymical origin: an Englishman called Johnson will not be called Ioannis filius in Latin, because it would be unsystematic: one Englishman who has such patronymical surname corresponds to dozens of other Englismen who don't. In Iceland, however, by law nearly everybody has a patronymic, while actual surnames are very rare. And since we already translate Russian patronymics (Demetrius Anatolii filius Medvedev, Vladimirus Vladimiri filius Putin, Boris Nicolai filius Jel'cin), why not translate Sveinbjörnus Egil filius, Leivus Erici filius, Thorvaldus Erici filius (which we already have) and also Olaus Ragnar Grímur filius, Iohanna Sigridis filia, Þorsteinn Pauli filius etc.? --Gabriel Svoboda 05:10, 31 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The man himself was not consistent over the Latin form of his name. Yes, it's true that a pattern like this could be applied to nearly all Icelanders and so we have a reason to prefer it. I'm in favour. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:29, 31 Martii 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We would not translate a name like 'Johnson' anyway, because he is not likely the son of John. If it were to be Latinised at all, it would be with 'de': Bob Johnson = Robertus de Ioanne; that is how I think I would treat my own surname in Latin were it a patronymic.

Because he did use 'Egilssonius' in Latin, we can't omit that form entirely, yet of course most Icelanders haven't; have we dealt with the question of people from other European countries that didn't have a surname? I should like to use a surname any time one is available, but here it is not. Pantocrator 05:07, 1 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In modern times Iceland is unique among European countries in this. In earlier times the problem hardly arises because notable people were usually recorded in Latin documents, so the choice of name is often settled for us by the documents. This man, too, appears in Latin documents, but inconsistently. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:53, 1 Aprilis 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Egilssonius

Licetne hanc rem iterum movere ad "Sveinbjörn Egilssonius"? Vel fortasse ad "Sveinbiorn Egilssonius", littera j et duobus punctis supra ö omissis? Petrus Tectander (disputatio) 19:20, 18 Iulii 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hem... miror nullius interesse videri hunc scriptorem semper nomine Latino "Egilssonius" usum esse nec umquam formam *Egil filius pro Egilli filius fuisse. Ceterum duo tantum auctores de Egilssonio scribentes formam compositam "Egilli filius" adhibuerunt; forma simplex "Egilssonius" in fontibus, quos invenire potui, praevalet. Fuerunt et alii Islandi, qui in Latine scribendo simplicioribus nominum formis uti maluerunt, veluti Arngrimus Ionas, Gudbrandus Thorlacius, Hallgrimus Petraeus, Thormodus Torfaeus, Finnus Iohannaeus... Petrus Tectander (disputatio) 12:51, 30 Iulii 2022 (UTC)[reply]

E fontibus agere debemus. Si formam Latinam, qua ipse usus est, eligere vis, certe movere licet: hoc casu necesse erit citationem post lemma subiungere. Si duabus formis Latinis ipse usus est (id quod ego supra iam diu dixi ... sed hodie de fontibus incertus sum!) tibi licet fontes amborum nominum aut hic aut in prima sententia citare et selectionem proponere. Si formas Latinas ab ipso usitatas reicere, formamque ab alio quodam usitatam eligere vis, tibi licet id proponere, fontibus citatis, ratione explicata!

Maiores nostri, inter quos ego iuvenis(!), de hac re supra disputavimus, fontibus non verbatim citatis. His diebus multo facilius nexus plures ad fontes praebere possumus. Usque adhuc fons solus, in pagina ipsa citatus sed sine nexu, "Sveinbjörnum Egilsson, Dr. Theol., nunc scholae Reykjavicanae in Islandia rectorem" dicit. Ex hoc fonte "Sveinbiörnus Egilsson" aut "Sveinbiörnus Egilli filius" nobis scribere licet. Inde incipiamus! Andrew Dalby (disputatio)

Gratias, Andrea, pro responso tuo. Ecce formae:

casus	nomen Islandicum	simplex forma Latina	composita forma Latina
nominativus	Sveinbjörn Egilsson "sveinbjörn+egilsson" (105) Cf. veterem formam "Sveinbiorn" (19)	[S.] Egilssonius (10) Sveinbiörnus^[sic] (forma non ab ipso usitata) Egilssonius (1) frequentia: 11 "egilssonius"	Sveinbiörnus^[sic] Egilli filius (1) (forma non ab ipso usitata) frequentia: 5 "egilli+filius" quattuor ex his non ad ipsum Egilssonium spectant
genetivus	Sveinbjarnar Egilssonar "sveinbjarnar%20egilssonar" (74)	Sveinbjörnis Egilssonii (14) [S. / Sv. / Svb.] Egilssonii (9) frequentia: 23 Egilssonii	*Egilli filii (3) "egilli+filii" hae tres formae non ad ipsum Egilssonium spectant
dativus	Sveinbirni Egilssyni "sveinbirni%20egilssyni" (21)	(non invenitur)	(non invenitur)
accusativus	Sveinbjörn Egilsson "sveinbjörn%20egilsson" (25)	Sveinbjörnem Egilssonium (1) Sveinbjörnum Egilsson (1)	*Egilli filium (1) "egilli+filium" ea forma non ipsum Egilssonium spectat
ablativus		[Sveinbjörno] Egilssonio (4) frequentia: 4 "egilssonio"	*Egilli filio (1) "egilli+filio" ea forma non ad ipsum Egilssonium spectat

Difficultas igitur, ut bene videre potes, non est in nomine "Egilssonius" (quo nomine ipse semper usus est in Latine scribendo), sed potius in praenomine "Sveinbjörn": sunt enim formae tum tertiae declinationis (gen.: "Sveinbjörnis" [14], acc.: "Sveinbjörnem" [1]) tum primae declinationis (nom.: "Sveinbiörnus"^(sic) [2], acc.: "Sveinbjörnum" [1], abl.: "Sveinbjörno" [1]). Formae tertiae declinationis ab ipso oriri videntur, cum appareant in editionibus Eddae Snorronis ab Egilssonio incohatis: "… opera et studio Sveinbjörnis Egilssonii". Praenominis formae tertiae declinationis sunt maiore numero (15), si eas confers cum illis primae declinationis (4). His adde, quod secundum morem Vicipaedianum in aliis quoque nominibus litteras j in i et ö in o mutare solemus et insuper vetus forma Islandica "Sveinbiorn" in fontibus exstat. Neque enim scribimus "Arngrimus Jonas", sed "Ionas", nec "Fjördum" vel "Fiördum", sed "Fiordum". Itaque suadeo, ut haec res iterum moveatur ad "Sveinbiorn Egilssonius", ubi iam ante 12 annos fuit. Petrus Tectander (disputatio) 14:02, 30 Iulii 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: Forma "Egil filius", quae nunc legitur, nusquam invenitur. Sed animum induxi tres formas (praeter nomen Islandicum) enumerare, fontibus certe adhibitis: "Sveinbiorn Egilssonius", "Sveinbiornus Egilli filius" et "Sveinbiornus Egilsson". Petrus Tectander (disputatio) 14:10, 30 Iulii 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Illam bibliothecam nunquam visitavi, neque corporaliter neque virtualiter! Gratias tibi ago. Res pellucida est, mea mente. In titulis Latinis librorum ab eo editorum formas Sveinbjörnem -is -e Egilssonium -i -o aut ille aut editor fere semper selegit. Nobis ergo, -j- in -i- mutato, certe Sveinbiörn Egilssonius scribere licet. An re vera -ö- in -o- talibus casibus mutavimus? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 19:28, 30 Iulii 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliotheca Nationalis Islandiae (Landsbókasafn Íslands) praebet optimum investigandi instrumentum, cum libros, in quibus nomina aliaque verba pervestigantur, non multipliciter commemoret, ut fieri solet apud Google Libros. Recte mones: Egilssonius ipse praenomen suum aut abbreviavit ("S.") aut cum litteris j et ö excudendum curavit. Quod ad me attinet, optime vivere possum cum littera ö, quamvis quodammodo aliena sit ordini litterarum Latino ;-)) Tamen constat et alios Islandos Latine scribentes, praesertim Arngrimum Ionam et Thormodum Torfaeum, eam litteram saepiuscule ac simpliciter per o transcripsisse, qua de causa formam Latiniorem "Sveinbiorn" proposui.

Iam mutavimus. Inspice v.g. rem Hvalfiordum, ubi nomen Latinum litteris j et ö carens invenies (ex fontibus Thormodi Torfaei ita redditum). Sed auctoritate huius aut illius scriptoris superbire nolo, cum ex editionibus ab Egilssonio curatis satis superque appareat eum eiusque successores unam atque eandem nominis formam observasse. Ergo assentior tibi: forma Sveinbiörn Egilssonius optime se habet, si scribere licet. Nec obliviscamur huius perpulchrae sententiae: Variatio delectat, nonne? :-)) Petrus Tectander (disputatio) 20:28, 30 Iulii 2022 (UTC)[reply]

N.B.: Nihilominus censeo (ut iam scripsi) formas Sveinbiörnus Egilli filius et Sveinbiörnus Egilsson in prima paragrapho non esse tacendas. Petrus Tectander (disputatio) 20:39, 30 Iulii 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Omnino consentimus aut accordamus (Latinitate mediaevali -- cf. Nous sommes d'accord) ut mihi videtur. Nisi alius quis disputare velit, paginam moveamus. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 09:23, 31 Iulii 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dictum, factum. Rem movi, fontes inserui, textum aliquantulum retractavi. Petrus Tectander (disputatio) 10:00, 31 Iulii 2022 (UTC)[reply]