Disputatio:Ursula de Leyen
Grammar
[fontem recensere]Maybe I should not ask it here but the word order here: 'est femina in rebus publicis versat' not rather 'femina in rebus publicis versat EST'? Thanks. Kapeter77 (disputatio) 15:21, 1 Decembris 2019 (UTC)
- This question was first raised here a decade or more ago. Study of Cicero's prose suggested that the canonical form in independent clauses (as in Vicipaedia's definitions) should be "A est B," with a form of sum tending to go at the ends only of dependent clauses ("quod C est"). IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:31, 1 Decembris 2019 (UTC)
- That said, "est femina in rebus publicis versata" seems wordy; maybe "est politica" would suffice. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:37, 1 Decembris 2019 (UTC)
- Gratia :-)
- That said, "est femina in rebus publicis versata" seems wordy; maybe "est politica" would suffice. IacobusAmor (disputatio) 15:37, 1 Decembris 2019 (UTC)
De particulo
[fontem recensere]Vide Disputatio:Wernherus von Braun. Hic "de Leyen" scribimus quia fons rite citatus ita iam scripserat. Fontes Latinitatis vivae (etsi fidelitatis dubiae) nobis placent. Inter omnes inconsequentias encyclopaediae nostrae, hanc pondere minimo aestimo :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:49, 30 Martii 2020 (UTC)