[YG Conlang Archives] > [romconlang group] > messages [Date Index] [Thread Index] >
--- In romconlang@yahoogroups.com, Benct Philip Jonsson <melroch@m...> wrote: > Isaac Penzev wrote: > > Very instructive. Doesn't seem derogatory at all. > > <RANT ALERT> > > Of course not. *Words* are not by themselves derogatory, > only the uses and opinions we attatch to them.(1) It is interesting > to see how the Romans apparently valued things differently from > what is common now, so that Catullus could use _scortillum_ as a > term of endearment, and an _irrumator_ was "worse" than a > _pedicator_, contrary to most modern sentiments. > > FYAI my own opinion is that as long as it is consenting adults > doing things I don't mind (with the possible exception of killing > and maiming). > > What really pisses me off is when dictionaries out of prudishness > give vague or outright incorrect translations, as my Latin-German > dictionary which translates all of _cinaedus, pedicator, pathicus_ > as "Unnatürlicher Wohllusting". Wolluestling, rather (Wollluestling by the new orthography rules). It's probably informative enough for most school purposes. ;-) > _Futuere_ is "Beschlafen", which is also a bit vague, but then my > Latin-Swedish and Latin-English dictionaries don't even contain > these words. That sounds just like my ancient Langenscheidt. Is it dark blue and printed in Fraktur in the German half? ;-) -- Christian Thalmann