From: Delirium <delirium(a)hackish.org>
Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
To: wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Request for classical Chinese
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2005 18:57:52 -0500
Adam Bishop wrote:
On the Latin Wikipedia I think we try to be as
classical as
possible - the style of Cicero, or Caesar, or Vergil, or that sort
of era (1st century BC - 1st century AD). It's not always
possible; for example if we want to write about modern people or
places, we may have to use a neo-Latin construction, or
ecclesiastical Latin to write about a religious topic.
(Personally, I admit that I let a few medieval Latin constructions
slip through once in awhile, as horrible as that may be to the
purest classicists :))
As compared to historical Latin works, the Latin Wikipedia seems to
use *much* simpler sentence structures and grammatical constructions
and so on, which to some extent also minimizes the differences
between different eras of Latin. Is that on purpose? If so, is
that something that'd be applicable to a classical-Chinese
Wikipedia?
-Mark
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
It's not on purpose in the sense that we are consciously making a "simple
Latin" wikipedia, but everyone writes according to their own level of
comprehension - there are many excellent Latinists there (I am not one of
them!), but of course there are no native Latin speakers, either to write in
more complicated Latin or to correct what we write.
Adam
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org