Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word
Template talk:la-categoryTOC. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
Template talk:la-categoryTOC, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
Template talk:la-categoryTOC in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
Template talk:la-categoryTOC you have here. The definition of the word
Template talk:la-categoryTOC will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
Template talk:la-categoryTOC, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
This template doesn't make any sense as it is now: the pair Jj was removed, indicating that it was designed for Classical Latin, but in this case there shouldn't be also any distincion between U and V! Instead of the pairs Uu Vv, should be used Vu (V was the upper case of u in Classical times). But I've seen in the dictionary many words starting with j and v, so the best to do is forget the Classical Latin alphabet and include Jj. Capmo 18:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
- Mr. EncycloPetey, may I know why you reverted my proper edit to this template? Can you please explain me how is someone supposed to find the word jocus in the category:Latin nouns, or the word japonicus in category:Latin adjectives, or yet the word jam in category:Latin adverbs without the pair Jj in the template??
It seems you simply reverted my edit without even reading what I had written above. Please reconsider. Capmo 05:38, 27 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
- I did read what you wrote. The fact that I do not agree with you is not indication that I did not read it. Apparently you did not read the reply Atelaes left for you when you posted this same question on my User talk page. Your edit was not a proper one, since it goes against our current Latin policies. --EncycloPetey 02:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
- Oh, in fact I hadn't seen his reply yet. I read the policy page he suggested and still don't agree with this specific point; it also didn't give any answers to the questions I posed above. Capmo 02:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply
- Which current English-Latin dictionaries have you looked at for comparison? Oxford follows the same convention we have adopted, as does Feyerabend's dictionary. Most modern Latin textbooks do the same, as does the Latin Wiktionary. Why should we adopt a different standard from everyone else? --EncycloPetey 05:15, 5 February 2009 (UTC)Reply