Live Latin Chat / Latin IRC channel - split aka locus secretus

[Bitmap]

But it rather seems than instead of being constructive you've decided to troll here a bit, haven't ya, Bitmap...

I'm not trolling, I'm dead serious. Granted, I make fun of people every now and then (though never with the intention of spoiling a thread), but I don't do that here. I frankly don't even understand what you're talking about. If the method you described worked the way you described it, it wouldn't come up with a phrase like 'quomodo te habes?' when there is ample evidence of 'quid agis' or 'ut vales' in actual Latin texts, and it would not coin a new word for 'toilet' (that is not even based on the way any Romance language would circumsccribe a 'toilet') when there is enough actual Latin evidence to choose from.

I also think that in your defence of such phrases (and of the method by which you arrive at the justification thereof), you contradict yourself in your earlier statement in which you warned about the delusions 'chat Latin' (or whatever you may call it) might bring about in the attempt to get a grasp of genuine Latin.

 

[Bitmap]

Anyway, I would ask everybody to ... continue this topic in a different thread. It is my fault that I started to write about everything possible, but now I think it was enough.

We could ask a moderator to move all of this discussion into a new thread. I don't think that would be a problem.

 

[Bestiola]

It's been split.

 

[rothbard]

The other thing is that everyone from the Academia refers to toilets as 'locum secrētum' rather than 'lātrīna'. I don't see why it's such a offensive word as to merit a neologism; do they simply ban all words that might possibly be construed as rude in that place?

Are you sure they don't use "locus secessus"? That would make more sense.

 

[Pacifica]

Are you sure they don't use "locus secessus"? That would make more sense.

It actually seems an even more unlikely phrase to me. I mean it makes some sense literally if you take secessus as a noun* ("a place of retirement") but, dunno, it just doesn't sound very likely.

*It can't be taken as a passive participle since secedo is intransitive.

 

[Pacifica]

Looks like secessus alone (not coupled with locus) can mean toilet, though. I'd seen that before but had forgotten.

C. A place of retirement, privy, drain (late Lat.), Vulg. Matt. 15, 17; id. Marc. 7, 19.

 

[rothbard]

Looks like secessus alone (not coupled with locus) can mean toilet, though. I'd seen that before but had forgotten.

I came across "secessus" alone (without locus) when reading Petronius' Satyricon. I'm pretty sure the Italian word "cesso" (slang, and considered very vulgar) derives from it.

 

[rothbard]

I would have linked the passage from Satyricon, however right now I am typing on my mobile with a baby asleep on my chest

 

[Pacifica]

I can do a word search myself.

 

[Pacifica]

This? It's the only occurrence of secessus I can find in the Satyricon.

Interim ego, qui privatum habebam secessum, in multas cogitationes diductus sum, quare aper pilleatus intrasset.

It seems far from certain that privatum habebam secessum means "I was in the toilet", though. Couldn't it just mean that he was sitting apart from the others?

 

[rothbard]

This? It's the only occurrence of secessus I can find in the Satyricon.

Interim ego, qui privatum habebam secessum, in multas cogitationes diductus sum, quare aper pilleatus intrasset.

It seems far from certain that privatum habebam secessum means "I was in the toilet", though. Couldn't it just mean that he was sitting apart from the others?

Sorry, my mistake, it wasn't Satyricon, it was this piece:

Surge, eamus. Hinc vis per porticum, propter lumen? Numquid vis venire ad secessum? Bene me admonuisti, venter me cogit. eamus iam.

 

[Laurentius]

I always considered Latin a very tolerant language that would be fine with most expressions as long as they make grammatical sense. This one in particular wasn't even invented by Luigi Miraglia & co. but appears to be various centuries old, so I don't understand all the sarcasm.

 

[Pacifica]

This one in particular wasn't even invented by Luigi Miraglia & co. but appears to be various centuries old, so I don't understand all the sarcasm.

Locus secretus? Do you know its origin or at least some older attestation of it?

 

[Laurentius]

Locus secretus? Do you know its origin or at least some older attestation of it?

Sorry I mean quomodo te habes, about locus secretus I am not sure.

 

[Laurentius]

From a quick search it appears locus secretus dates back to Luther at the very least.

 

[Pacifica]

From a quick search it appears locus secretus dates back to Luther at the very least.

Do you have the reference of where it appears in Luther?

 

[Laurentius]

Do you have the reference of where it appears in Luther?

There's a passage and I see that many interpret it as restroom or some kind of sauna.

Sed cum semel in hac turri (in qua secretus locus erat monachorum) specularer de istis vocabulis

 

[Iáson]

Oh, I'm not suggesting that locus secrētus was Miraglia's invention (though I think his institution's choice to use it may be significant); if I remember right, it was used in Medieval times for 'toilet'. But to me, that doesn't matter: I don't honestly think that some 16th century German speaker (or the monks who originally came up with the expression) has any better right to authority over what counts as Latin than Miraglia. But of course this depends on one's philosophical opinions, I guess.

 

[Laurentius]

Oh, I'm not suggesting that locus secrētus was Miraglia's invention (though I think his institution's choice to use it may be significant); if I remember right, it was used in Medieval times for 'toilet'. But to me, that doesn't matter: I don't honestly think that some 16th century German speaker (or the monks who originally came up with the expression) has any better right to authority over what counts as Latin than Miraglia. But of course this depends on one's philosophical opinions, I guess.

As a matter of fact no, it doesn't depend on opinion. I doubt Miraglia would claim to be using first century BC Latin and that's what matters in the end, I don't even think they ever denied having consideration for later Latin, if anything I often heard him mention Humanism and Erasmus.

 

[Iáson]

Sure, but I mean rather that many moderns might see Latin usage in the Medieval or Renaissance periods as authoritative in a way that 21st century composers (of Latin) are not; for my part, I would not agree.