quōmodo nāvis in aliīs linguīs appellātur/dīcitur?

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

I'm writing a dictionary entry for the word 'nāvis' in Latin and need to clarify some Latin phrases I should use after the paradigm.

This is what I have written:

sententiae cum verbō 'nāvis':

֍ nāvis est vehiculum aquāticum ֍

trānslātiōnēs (quōmodo nāvis in aliīs linguīs appellātur):

anglice: ship

russice: кора́бль


Or should it be "quōmodo nāvis in aliīs linguīs dīcitur" instead of "appellātur"? Please let me know if there are other mistakes.

 

[Issacus Divus]

"Quōmodo nāvis in aliīs linguīs dīcitur" sounds better, I think.

 

[Bitmap]

Both words work, but it should be dicatur or appelletur since it is an indirect question.

 

[Tlepolemus]

Armenian: նավ [nɑv] — similar to Latin
Ancient Greek: ναῦς [nâu̯s] — also, not much different

 

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

Thank you all for your responses!

 

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

Both words work, but it should be dicatur or appelletur since it is an indirect question.

But there isn't main clause in the sentence, so why would it be indirect question?
And will adding a question mark at the end of the sentence fix the issue? --> "Quōmodo nāvis in aliīs linguīs dīcitur?"

 

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

Armenian: նավ [nɑv] — similar to Latin
Ancient Greek: ναῦς [nâu̯s] — also, not much different

Thank you! I will add translations to other languages a bit later. Right now I am working on getting the overall template done right.

 

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

Also, I want to ask if in the sentence "Quōmodo nāvis in aliīs linguīs dīcitur?" the preposition 'in' is necessary or not.
Can I say/write, "Quōmodo nāvis aliīs linguīs dīcitur?"

 

[Bitmap]

But there isn't main clause in the sentence, so why would it be indirect question?

Yes, but a main clause is implied here (something like <ea verba quae sequuntur demonstrant> quomodo ...)
You find a similar phenomenon in Latin book or story titles. They always have something like 'te narrabo' implied and are either formulated with de + ablative or as an indirect question.

And will adding a question mark at the end of the sentence fix the issue? --> "Quōmodo nāvis in aliīs linguīs dīcitur?"

Yes, that would turn it into a direct question. That would make a bit less sense to me, though, because I took the phrase as an explanation to 'translationes'.

It's essentially the same difference as in English:
translations (what 'navis' is called in other languages) --> indirect question
translations (what is 'navis' called in other languages?) --> direct question

Also, I want to ask if in the sentence "Quōmodo nāvis in aliīs linguīs dīcitur?" the preposition 'in' is necessary or not.
Can I say/write, "Quōmodo nāvis aliīs linguīs dīcitur?"

Good thing you mentioned that. You actually need to leave out the in.

 

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

Thank you for your explanations, Bitmap!!

Yes, that would turn it into a direct question. That would make a bit less sense to me, though, because I took the phrase as an explanation to 'translationes'.

It's essentially the same difference as in English:
translations (what 'navis' is called in other languages) --> indirect question
translations (what is 'navis' called in other languages?) --> direct question

Yes, it is explanation to trānslātiōnēs, but I am making a dictionary for beginners/intermediate-level students, and I want to limit the use of the subjunctive.

PS. To be honest, I didn't even think about the indirect/direct question issue when I wrote the phrase. For me, the question mark was implied. But I really appreciate your clarifications.

 

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

I have another question:

What if the word I am translating is a person's name? For example:

trānslātiōnēs (quōmodo Iācōbus aliīs linguīs appellātur?):

anglice: James

russice: Я́ков

Is 'appellātur' or 'dīcitur' preferred in this case? Or there is no difference from the case of common nouns?

 

[Bitmap]

I would prefer appellare in any case

 

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

I would prefer appellare in any case

Grātiās maximās tibi agō!

 

[Godmy]

Czech: loď

ď (you have in Russian too) is articulated on the same place in the mouth as "j" (as in "yes") but you articulate it as a stop, putting the tongue on that upper place of the mouth completely, building up the air, then releasing (normally, this is a voiced consonant, but it gets devoiced at the end of the word typically... then it sounds identical to ť ).

"koráb" is not impossible ("á" means a long vowel) but it's rather poetic...

 

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

A follow-up question:
For parts of speech other than noun, how should I phrase the question? For example:

Quōmodo caecus aliīs linguīs appellātur?
Quōmodo ambulāre aliīs linguīs appellātur?
Quōmodo repente aliīs linguīs appellātur?
Quōmodo dum aliīs linguīs appellātur?

Would using 'dīcitur'

Quōmodo caecus aliīs linguīs dīcitur?
Quōmodo ambulāre aliīs linguīs dīcitur?
Quōmodo repente aliīs linguīs dīcitur?
Quōmodo dum aliīs linguīs dīcitur?

be a better option?

 

[Godmy]

It all should be technically correct, because when you ask for some word, it is "it" (third person singular, neuter). In modern times, I would use some kind of quotation marks, e.g. 'caecus' ...