On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 6:46 PM, Cato <catoinnyc@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Cato Corneliae Aeterniae sal.
>
> It's much simpler than that, but thank you for asking.
>

Aeternia: You are welcome and thank you for keeping civil, it's refreshing
trust me :-)

>
> If a citizen is not comfortable enough using English but can express
> themselves in another language, why should they not be free to speak? The
> Constitution guarantees them access to our public fora *without*
> restriction (with the one very specific exception), and a praetorial edict
> is subject to the legal authority of the Constitution.
>
SCJA: Okay this I can understand. However a few points to consider. A:.
English is the official language of Nova Roma, and the ML is our official
forum of communication is it not? B: Also there are two sides to this
coin, how do people feel whose language is solely English and they see
posts in a language they cannot understand? C: How do we find neutral
ground? D: How often are languages used outside of Latin (that is the only
exception I can see) I don't recall seeing former civis Agricola post in
Japanese, I have never seen one L. Cornelius Cicero post in solely
Afrikaans, I have never posted in just German, how often does this actually
happen? E: Are you suggesting the Praetura have a series of interpreters
for every language, just in case someone decides to not post in English,
the Praetura would have scribes just idly hanging around accruing Century
points when they are not doing any real work. I'm not saying this to be
mean at all, for as I stated I have extreme high regard for you, I am
simply giving other options to consider, so you can maybe see where the
Praetors are coming from. I'm trying to be the neutral one and give
vice-versa situations.

>
> Whether or not it would be "instructive" to post both English and Latin is
> of no consequence whatsoever. How the consul feels about
> cutting-and-pasting Latin quotations is of even less importance.
>

SCJA: It's not instructive to learn Latin in a place called Nova Roma?

>
> What is important is that the rights of the citizens, guaranteed by the
> Constitution, be upheld, *even if* they are slightly more cumbersome for
> the magistrates involved. I have *always* said this, and I will always say
> it.
>

SCJA: You know I'm a firm believer in following the Law..

>
> If the praetors decide to issue an edict in which posting in a foreign
> (non-English, sorry) language presents a clear and imminent danger to the
> Respublica, then they can proceed to act as if it is. Until such time,
> acting as if it does already violates the letter and the spirit of the
> Constitution.
>

SCJA: Promoting clear channels of communication is not a violation of the
Constitution, this Edict does not stop anyone from posting as normal. You
know both myself and Dexter are extremely fair people.

Vale bene,
Aeternia


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 7:51 PM, Cato <catoinnyc@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Cato Corneliae Aeterniae sal.
>
> I'll try to respond in order.
>
> For the lettered (A-E) concerns, I'll sum up by saying that we may be
> talking
> about two different things.
>
> The official business language of the *government* of Nova Roma is
> English. Not
> the citizens. The citizens are not required, by any law, to speak any
> particular language. They are not required, by any law, to write in any
> particular language. They are simply guaranteed fre access to all the
> public
> fora of the Respublica.
>

SCJA: The content is protected, not the language it is written in. Freedom
to access to access all public fora is still intact, we are simply
requesting if you are posting in a language other than English to provide a
translation. We are establishing guidelines, Lists groups such as this
have guidelines, basic tenements, sometimes lists have special requests, it
is not abnormal. Nothing else has changed, surely you must see that.

>
> The Constitution says that the *only* thing that can restrict a private
> citizen's right to full access to the public fora of the Respublica is if
> they
> present an imminent and clear danger. Nothing else. Period.
>

SCJA: We are not restricting in any capacity, but a request to provide a
simple translation, that is all.

>
> Since "imminent and clear danger" has not been defined *anywhere in our
> law*,
> then posting in a non-English language without translation cannot be
> considered
> an imminent and clear danger to the Respublica.
>
SCJA: I don't think that was the message my colleague was trying to relay
with this Edict.

>
> Since posting in a non-English language without a translation is not an
> imminent
> and clear danger to the Respublica, it cannot be made into a moderate-able
> offense, since it cannot be considered grounds for restricting a citizen's
> right
> to speak.
>

SCJA: *deep sigh* This edict took many elements from the Edict issued by
our predecessor Cn. Iulius Caesar, we have tried to keep to it, his
certainly did not restrict anyone's freedom of speech and I saw not one
complaint from you regarding it. I agree this Edict may need some slight
revisioning, but no way are we trying to restrict someone's right to
free-speech.

>
> I will say again that the value of instruction in Latin has *nothing to do
> with
> this at all in any way shape or form* and is in no way shape or form a
> part of
> this argument.
>

SCJA: You mentioned Latin instruction first, I was just pointing out the
obvious, why we would kinda need it considering what this organization was
founded on.

>
> That Peronius Dexter mentions Latin in particular is, although very
> curious, it is not important in and of itself. It could apply to any
> language and be equally in violation of the Constitution's letter and
> spirit.
>

SCJA: Eeek I almost called you Dexter... Cato then give me something
tangible, so we can make steps towards efforts of revision, so that this
Edict is satisfactory to all parties.


Vale bene,
Aeternia


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> A. Tullia Scholastica Statiae Corneliae Aeterniae quiritibus bonae voluntatis
> S.P.D.
>
>
>
>
> Sta. Cornelia Aeternia L. Cornelio Sullae Omnibusque S.P.D.
>
> Sulla enough please. I don't think Scholastica's moral outlook is actually
> relevant to this thread, although could be my opinion only albeit.
>
> ATS: No, it isn¹t, not to mention that Queen Vickie would probably think
> that I am horribly liberal.
>
> I am sure in the future the Magistra will most happily comply and will
> include English translations in her posts when there is Latin spruced in
> her posts, it would be teaching exercise if nothing more.
>
> ATS: Well, you may be wrong there, for it is pedagogically unsound to
> attach translations. These act as a crutch, which those who are trying to
> learn a language use instead of trying to make sense of the language in
> question. Note that this applies to all languages. I might add that it is
> silly to translate terms such as et cetera, alea jacta est, and any number of
> Latin derived words and phrases which for most of us are part of the English
> language. Shall we translate el niño and la niña for those who don¹t know to
> what these refer? Zeitgeist and howdah and guru? These didn¹t arrive with
> the Anglo-Saxons, but they became part of the universal recipient language,
> English.
>
> Seriously there have been some excellent points brought out in this
> discussion by many individuals. I will try to keep this brief as possible.
>
> This is to me also considered "a tempest in the teacup" (this phrase is
> getting used quite a bit here) however I do thank Metellus for pointing out
> this small oversight and posting his concerns. And we as Praetors should
> not overlook that, because if this was brought up once it can most
> certainly be brought up again, and I do not know the feelings on my
> colleague about this, but spending the next 357 days on hashing out one
> Moderation Edict to me is why not we were elected.
>
> Perhaps we should seriously consider a small revision to the Edict my
> fellow colleague, so that if nothing more, this issue is not brought up
> again, it will also demonstrate that we as Praetors do take the concerns of
> the people seriously no matter how small a teacup it may appear to be.
>
> Plus this may have started out as a small "tea cup" but looks like the size
> of the mug is getting bigger.
>
> ATS: Methinks it is big enough to hold several kegs of whatever...
>
> Inasmuch as I am busy correcting examinations, I shall try to cover points
> made by others as I cannot respond to all whose messages should be answered.
> As for dangers to the RP, I feel rather certain that if someone wanted to
> express anything of the sort in any non-English language, he or she might not
> translate the original text accurately, so that point is far off base.
> However, I am not a candidate for working for the TSA; I lack the relevant
> paranoia. In any case, the praetorian cohortes should have scribae with
> expertise in several languages, or several scribae with expertise in at least
> one language above and beyond English. That is what was done in the past
> here, when in fact we did have posts in several different languages and all
> newcomers were moderated. The edictum pointed out which languages were
> understood by the cohors members, and noted that those using others might
> expect a delay in approval of their posts.
>
> Yes, imposing a translation requirement does restrict freedom of speech,
> especially for those who can read, but not write, in English. That was the
> case with the citizen on another list who may have been able to read English,
> but not write in it, so used the universal language...Latin. We teachers know
> that reading skill is much easier to acquire than writing or speaking skill in
> any non-native language, particularly those whose vocabularies must be
> expanded to include items their original speakers never dreamt of. In case
> you are wondering, gestabile or mobile is Latin for cell phone; computator,
> computatrix, ordinatrum, et al. = computer, interrete is often used for
> internet, and many other non-original-Roman things have very Latin names.
>
> Caesar, while I hate to upset your apple cart / teacup / whatever, it
> takes far longer to write in Latin (or any language not native to the writer)
> than it does to translate Latin (or any other language) into English or the
> native tongue of the writer. Latin is more difficult simply because words for
> things the Romans did not have must be hunted down or invented by certain
> recognized processes for neologism creation, but even the most fluent
> Latinists must spend far more time on writing in Latin than in translating it.
> Any laziness (really, lack of time) comes into play when NOT writing in Latin,
> not in failing to translate it.
>
> Perhaps Fabius or some others in his area might like to attend the
> Conventiculum formerly in Seattle / Wenatchee, which for this year at least is
> moving to...L.A. There he (and any others) would get plenty of practice in
> speaking Latin under the supervision of highly competent Latinists. I have
> posted the relevant information (in Latin, as I received it) to several lists,
> including those of some of my classes. Early July will bring the Latinists to
> L.A. Be afraid, be very afraid...
>
> Back to exam correction of my Spanish-only students, whose corrections
> must be made in Latin even though the students are not ready for that yet.
>
>
> Vale Optime,
> Statia Cornelia Aeternia
> Praetrix
>
> Vale, et valete optime.
>
>
>
> "*Feri pastorem, et oves se dispergent*"
>
> [
>
>

> **
>
>
> > A. Tullia Scholastica Statiae Corneliae Aeterniae quiritibus bonae
> voluntatis
> > S.P.D.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Sta. Cornelia Aeternia L. Cornelio Sullae Omnibusque S.P.D.
> >
> > Sulla enough please. I don't think Scholastica's moral outlook is
> actually
> > relevant to this thread, although could be my opinion only albeit.
> >
> > ATS: No, it isn¹t, not to mention that Queen Vickie would probably think
> > that I am horribly liberal.
>

> >
> > I am sure in the future the Magistra will most happily comply and will
> > include English translations in her posts when there is Latin spruced in
> > her posts, it would be teaching exercise if nothing more.
> >
> > ATS: Well, you may be wrong there, for it is pedagogically unsound to
> > attach translations. These act as a crutch, which those who are trying to
> > learn a language use instead of trying to make sense of the language in
> > question. Note that this applies to all languages. I might add that it is
> > silly to translate terms such as et cetera, alea jacta est, and any
> number of
> > Latin derived words and phrases which for most of us are part of the
> English
> > language. Shall we translate el niño and la niña for those who don¹t
> know to
> > what these refer? Zeitgeist and howdah and guru? These didn¹t arrive with
> > the Anglo-Saxons, but they became part of the universal recipient
> language,
> > English.
>

> >
> > Seriously there have been some excellent points brought out in this
> > discussion by many individuals. I will try to keep this brief as
> possible.
> >
> > This is to me also considered "a tempest in the teacup" (this phrase is
> > getting used quite a bit here) however I do thank Metellus for pointing
> out
> > this small oversight and posting his concerns. And we as Praetors should
> > not overlook that, because if this was brought up once it can most
> > certainly be brought up again, and I do not know the feelings on my
> > colleague about this, but spending the next 357 days on hashing out one
> > Moderation Edict to me is why not we were elected.
> >
> > Perhaps we should seriously consider a small revision to the Edict my
> > fellow colleague, so that if nothing more, this issue is not brought up
> > again, it will also demonstrate that we as Praetors do take the concerns
> of
> > the people seriously no matter how small a teacup it may appear to be.
> >
> > Plus this may have started out as a small "tea cup" but looks like the
> size
> > of the mug is getting bigger.
> >
> > ATS: Methinks it is big enough to hold several kegs of whatever...
>

> >
> > Inasmuch as I am busy correcting examinations, I shall try to cover
> points
> > made by others as I cannot respond to all whose messages should be
> answered.
> > As for dangers to the RP, I feel rather certain that if someone wanted to
> > express anything of the sort in any non-English language, he or she
> might not
> > translate the original text accurately, so that point is far off base.
> > However, I am not a candidate for working for the TSA; I lack the
> relevant
> > paranoia. In any case, the praetorian cohortes should have scribae with
> > expertise in several languages, or several scribae with expertise in at
> least
> > one language above and beyond English. That is what was done in the past
> > here, when in fact we did have posts in several different languages and
> all
> > newcomers were moderated. The edictum pointed out which languages were
> > understood by the cohors members, and noted that those using others might
> > expect a delay in approval of their posts.
>

>
> > Yes, imposing a translation requirement does restrict freedom of speech,
> > especially for those who can read, but not write, in English. That was
> the
> > case with the citizen on another list who may have been able to read
> English,
> > but not write in it, so used the universal language...Latin. We teachers
> know
> > that reading skill is much easier to acquire than writing or speaking
> skill in
> > any non-native language, particularly those whose vocabularies must be
> > expanded to include items their original speakers never dreamt of. In
> case
> > you are wondering, gestabile or mobile is Latin for cell phone;
> computator,
> > computatrix, ordinatrum, et al. = computer, interrete is often used for
> > internet, and many other non-original-Roman things have very Latin names.
>

> >
> > Caesar, while I hate to upset your apple cart / teacup / whatever, it
> > takes far longer to write in Latin (or any language not native to the
> writer)
> > than it does to translate Latin (or any other language) into English or
> the
> > native tongue of the writer. Latin is more difficult simply because
> words for
> > things the Romans did not have must be hunted down or invented by certain
> > recognized processes for neologism creation, but even the most fluent
> > Latinists must spend far more time on writing in Latin than in
> translating it.
> > Any laziness (really, lack of time) comes into play when NOT writing in
> Latin,
> > not in failing to translate it.
> >
> > Perhaps Fabius or some others in his area might like to attend the
> > Conventiculum formerly in Seattle / Wenatchee, which for this year at
> least is
> > moving to...L.A. There he (and any others) would get plenty of practice
> in
> > speaking Latin under the supervision of highly competent Latinists. I
> have
> > posted the relevant information (in Latin, as I received it) to several
> lists,
> > including those of some of my classes. Early July will bring the
> Latinists to
> > L.A. Be afraid, be very afraid...
> >
> > Back to exam correction of my Spanish-only students, whose corrections
> > must be made in Latin even though the students are not ready for that
> yet.
>

> A. Tullia Scholastica Statiae Corneliae Aeterniae quiritibus bonae voluntatis
> S.P.D.
>
>
> Caesar, while I hate to upset your apple cart / teacup / whatever, it
> takes far longer to write in Latin (or any language not native to the writer)
> than it does to translate Latin (or any other language) into English or the
> native tongue of the writer. Latin is more difficult simply because words for
> things the Romans did not have must be hunted down or invented by certain
> recognized processes for neologism creation, but even the most fluent
> Latinists must spend far more time on writing in Latin than in translating it.
> Any laziness (really, lack of time) comes into play when NOT writing in Latin,
> not in failing to translate it.
>

> Your edicts are subject to the Constitution. It *does* *not* *matter* what is "easier" for a cohors.

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "petronius_dexter" <jfarnoud94@...> wrote:
>
> C. Petronius C. Catoni s.p.d.,
>
> > Your edicts are subject to the Constitution. It *does* *not* *matter* what is "easier" for a cohors.
>
> The Constitution does not speak about the languages. The law Cornelia states English business official language of Nova Roma and Latin her religious one. The custom in the ML is to use English, and English translations, when the post is in foreign language. The good sense want that we use English as a common language to have discusses and debates.

CATO: up to this point, I agree entirely. It is indeed a custom (and good sense) to use English generally in the day-to-day life of the Respublica among her citizens. But it is not *required* as it is in our law for official or ceremonial business - at least not until now, specifically in regards to Latin.



Safety's praetors with the Yahoo ToS beg a quite comprehension of what it is posted, it seems more fair to request English translations than French, by this edict English translations are requested. That does not deny the free speech and not contradict the Constitution.

CATO: and here's the challenging part. You are not "request[ing]" a translation by this edict. You are making it mandatory, with the possibility of moderation if it is not obeyed. If the edict made it a request, it would be perfectly acceptable.

Vale bene,

Cato


>
> Optime vale.
>
> C. Petronius Dexter
> Arcoiali scribebat
> a. d. IV Idus Ianuarias Cn. Caesare C. Tullio coss.
>

>>> I focused on the Latin, because I am interested to make the Latin more present in the ML posts. Then, if we want to use Latin more often on the ML, it is deserving to translate it into English. <<<

>>> I focused on the Latin, because I am interested to make the Latin more present in the ML posts. Then, if we want to use Latin more often on the ML, it is deserving to translate it into English. <<<

> > Salvete, omnes!
> >
> > Let me, as a beginner plebeian
> > tribune, a novice user of English communication in our NR express their
> > views on Praetors Edict:
> >
> > 6. Except for the openings and closings, all Latin text
> > posted on the ML must be accompanied by an English translation so that those
> > less familiar with Latin will be able to understand it.
> >
> > I invite comments on paragraph 6:
> >
> > formulating it as follows:
> >
> > Used in the body posts, except for the opening and closing phrases and sentences in a language other than English are posted on
> >
> > ML should be accompanied by a translation into English so that those who are less
> >
> > familiar with the language other than English were able to figure it out.
> >
> > In this form, modified the edict would not call
> > my objections and
> > I would (if
> > the discussion among my colleagues Tribunes) requested to support
> > just such a reformulation.
> >

> **
>
>
> Salve Priscus;
>
> As one who knows the "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune"
> himself, welcome home.
>
> Vale - Venator
>
>

> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Caupo Sullae omnibusque S.P.D.
>
> As I have tried to point out before, Cicero and the others that you
> mention,
> Sulla, did not shout out their sarcasm and disparaging remarks in the
> middle
> of the Forum where everyone was forced to listen. The held their debates in
> the Senate or in other buildings where people purposely went to listen to
> them.
>

>
> Many of us do not care for the negativity and do not want to sour our days
> by constantly being forced to listen to it, yet we have no way to turn away
> from it other than leaving Nova Roma. If one avoids the Main Forum, most of
> the activities in Nova Roma pass you by.
>

>
> So I will request again, respectfully, as I did when you were running for
> Consul, Sir, that you help us make the Main Forum ('ML') a place where
> ordinary citizens such as myself actually WANT to spend time. There is no
> need to curtail your free speech. That is not what I'm asking. Say what you
> want to say, but simply try to cut out the sarcasm and disparaging remarks.
> We would all appreciate it, and be encouraged to join in.
>

>
> Thank you all for listening.
>
> Vale et Valete,
>
> L.LVCRETIVS.CAVPO
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "aulusliburniushadrianus" <reenbru@...> wrote:
>
>
> I, Aulus Liburnius Hadrianus, Tribune of Nova Roma, pronounce
> intercessio against the "PRAETORIAL EDICT CPD StCVIA 65-01: MODERATION
> OF THE FORUM NOVAE ROMAE (AKA MAIN LIST OR ML)" promulgated by praetor
> Gaius Petronius Dexter and praetrix Statia Cornelia Valeriana Iuliana
> Aeternia.
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "aulusliburniushadrianus" <reenbru@...> wrote:
>
>
> I, Aulus Liburnius Hadrianus, Tribune of Nova Roma, pronounce
> intercessio against the "PRAETORIAL EDICT CPD StCVIA 65-01: MODERATION
> OF THE FORUM NOVAE ROMAE (AKA MAIN LIST OR ML)" promulgated by praetor
> Gaius Petronius Dexter and praetrix Statia Cornelia Valeriana Iuliana
> Aeternia.
>





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "luciaiuliaaquila" <luciaiuliaaquila@...> wrote:
>
> Iulia. Liburnio Trib. s.p.d
>
> According to the Tribune handbook:
> 1. When a Tribunus Plebis issues an intercessio, it must include the following elements in a reasoned exposition in which the Tribunus shall note whether the auxilium was requested or ex-officio:
>
> a. The official name(s) of the citizen(s) who has requested the Tribunus Plebis to issue the intercessio, or the official name(s) of the citizen(s) on whose behalf the Tribunus has provided auxilium ex officio.
>
> b. The official name and office of the magistrate(s) against whose act or acts the intercessio or auxilium has been interposed.
>
> c. The article(s) of the Constitution or the leges violated by the magistrate's act(s).
>
> 2. If the intercessio of a Tribunus Plebis does not include these three elements, the intercessio shall be invalid. The time constraints of the Lex Labiena de Intercessione shall continue to hold such that, if a new intercessio is not issued before the seventy-two hour limit, counted from the act(s) which occasioned the original intercessio, the Tribunus Plebis shall issue no new intercessio pertaining to that act or those acts.
>
> Vale bene
>
> Julia
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "aulusliburniushadrianus" <reenbru@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I, Aulus Liburnius Hadrianus, Tribune of Nova Roma, pronounce
> > intercessio against the "PRAETORIAL EDICT CPD StCVIA 65-01: MODERATION
> > OF THE FORUM NOVAE ROMAE (AKA MAIN LIST OR ML)" promulgated by praetor
> > Gaius Petronius Dexter and praetrix Statia Cornelia Valeriana Iuliana
> > Aeternia.
> >
>

>
> A. Tullia Scholastica Cn. Cornelio Lentulo C. Petronio Dextro quiritibus
> bonae voluntatis S.P.D.
>
>
>
> Cn. Lentulus C Petronio praetori suo s. p. d.
>  
>  
>>>> >>> I focused on the Latin, because I am interested to make the Latin more
>>>> present in the ML posts. Then, if we want to use Latin more often on the
>>>> ML, it is deserving to translate it into English. <<<
>  
>  
> I know, I'm sure you had the best of intentions, and your noble goal with this
> edict, praetor amplissime, was to promote the use of Latin. I applaud you for
> your Roman mind. But, unfortunately, contrarily to your Latin friendly
> intention, such a regulation will have the opposite effect, and it is very
> simple why.
>  
> First, because when we want to communicate, we usually don't have the luxury
> of writing our sentences or entire messages twice, it is double time, double
> energy, and what's the worse, it really kills the spirit, the joy of
> what writing an own Latin phrase would have caused to the writer, especially
> in Nova Roma.
>  
> Second, because people usually write spontaneous messages, comments, which
> means that they are normally writing in a short time. The result will be that,
> if translations are required, people will rather skip all Latin from the mail
> that they originally wanted to include so that they don't have to do extra
> work for sending out a simple email.
>
> ATS: Here I would disagree with you; writing Latin is far harder for most
> of us than writing a translation. Now you have an intervening issue as a
> native speaker of a totally unrelated language, but we English speakers do not
> face that. It is writing the Latin, not translating it, that is difficult.
> The question is: should it be translated? I say no. Should translation be
> required: No again, and more forcefully. Why should those competent in
> Latin be told to shut up because some cannot read it? What makes them think
> that every part of every post has to be read by every subscriber to a list?
>  
> And third, because providing translations does NOT promote the study and
> learning of a language, on the contrary, it supports people's comformity of
> remaining in the same "Latin unlearned" status, because everything is
> translated, so why to bother with the original. 
>
> ATS: This is the main reason why any teacher should object to mandatory
> translation of any language. Lentulus and I are well aware of this.
> Translations IMPEDE learning, not facilitate it. Another, however, is that it
> is highly insulting to say that someone¹s native language or common universal
> language isn¹t good enough because some people are unwilling to learn any
> non-native language. The Ugly American is still with us, sad to say. He was
> there when a new citizen¹s Latin post reaching out to other Latin speakers was
> trampled on, and the reply deleted. He is there every time one of these
> individuals yelps when someone utters a common phrase adopted from a language
> other than English. He is there when they screech that someone wrote in Latin
> / Greek / French / Spanish... (take your pick).
>
> I know it from myself, when sometimes Latinists in this forum write a Latin
> message and they add an English translation, I read only the English, although
> I'm a relatively advanced Latin speaker.
>
> ATS: We shall have to work on you, young man! You are MORE than a
> relatively advanced Latin speaker! Off to LA and Conventiculum for you!
> Dickinson College beckons! They even have these in Europe! Hie thee to
> Avitus in London!
>
>
> I'm now more fluent in English, thanks to Nova Roma. It's funny that when I
> joined NR it was the opposite: I was more fluent in Latin than English. Nova
> Roma is a great English teacher, to the point that I think it should deserve
> an alternative honorary name: Nova Anglia.
>
> ATS: Well, I¹m not sure if we can co-opt that name, but I did notice some
> improvement in your English by dint of assimilation among the monolingual
> Phoenicians. ;-) Now maybe if we always wrote everything in Latin, even the
> most recalcitrant might learn it. Oerberg is calling...
>  
> It must be noted, however, that there are specifc circumstances, under which
> tranlations CAN help learners: when they want to check if they understand
> something correctly or not. But it is only those people who are determinedly
> usig the text for studying, self-checking and self-correcting. However, it is
> not encouraging the study of Latin for the majority of the interested people,
> who would have thinked on the meaning of the Latin text if there would not
> have been there a translation provided which a quicker, easier and more
> convenient way to read, than to bother with the original.
>
> ATS: Yes. Translations do have their role in teaching, but it is not at
> the beginning stages, and should not be provided for more or less private
> communications on mailing lists. These messages are intended for a subset of
> the members, perhaps members unknown, who can read the target language. There
> is no crime in using a language that not everyone knows so long as it is well
> known and commonly taught; Latin, French, Spanish, Italian, and German all
> fulfill those conditions. They are not quite as obscure as Cree or Inuit or
> Cherokee or even Swahili...or Finnish or Swedish or Hungarian, for that
> matter.
>  
> In conclusion; if English translations are required, I personally will avoid
> using Latin in this forum in the future, because I can not guarantee that I
> will always remember to add translations to any expressions (like above: with
> "praetor amplissime"), I can not guarantee that I will always have the time or
> energy to translate, especially for longer texts, and what's the most
> important, I can not guarantee that I will always want to see everything
> translated, because in many instances translations kill the spirit, or the
> feeling, or the spontaneity of something we write.
>
> ATS: Absolutely. Methinks that that is the idea. Kill any possibility
> of having anyone use any language but English because a handful of individuals
> cannot or will not learn any other. These persons cannot understand that they
> are silencing those who can read English, but not write in it; they cannot
> understand that many people have Latin as the only common language among
> speakers of many, many languages. They cannot understand that Latin is not a
> fossilized language like ancient Egyptian, a language no one uses for
> communication today; to them, Latin is a relic. They cannot see beyond their
> noses and their solipsistic approach to such matters; they see only that they
> don¹t know how to read Latin (or anything else), and condemn those who can do
> so as elitist. Well, maybe we need some more of what they wrongly call
> elitists around here to gain some points in academia. Might bring in some
> citizens if we were more welcoming to intelligent people, to classicists, to
> Latineloquentes. NR has already cost itself a world-class Latinist by such
> benighted approaches to this topic, and with him perhaps a hundred more whom
> he knows. Ah, but they don¹t want THOSE in NR; they might write in Latin,
> which some vociferous folk, noted bullies among them, would find unsettling.
> Too bad. Disce aut discede, as a sign on a quondam colleague¹s door said.
>
>
> Quarum rerum ergo ["For these reasons", Latin] I think it's best to avoid
> using Latin in New Rome whenever it's possible.
>
> ATS: Sadly, you may be right. Perhaps the intercessio will stand, and
> these provisions at least be removed. There is no compelling reason why the
> many Latineloquentes in NR should be shot down and not allowed to communicate
> with others because some here don¹t seem to have enough circuits chez Broca
> and Wernicke. No one has to read all posts on any list; no one has to fear
> sedition from those who speak Latin. Now I would worry about those speaking
> some other tongues native to the Muddle East, but their speakers probably have
> no interest in NR...
>
> There is absolutely no reason why a universal language should be forcibly
> translated and its users shut up because some object to Latin. There is no
> reason why speakers of major languages should be treated similarly. This is
> insulting and idiotic all at once. A summary of long passages might be
> acceptable, but any summary or translation of short passages or translations
> of long ones is not acceptable. NR as Ugly American is not a place many
> people want to be, especially if they happen to be intelligent. Dummkopf Roma
> is a lot less appealing to many.
>  
> Cura, ut valeas optimé!
>  
> Lentulus
>
> Vale, et valete!
>
>
> --- Lun 9/1/12, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
> <mailto:jfarnoud94%40yahoo.fr> > ha scritto:
>
> Da: petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@... <mailto:jfarnoud94%40yahoo.fr> >
> Oggetto: [Nova-Roma] Re: De Latina lingua
> A: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Nova-Roma%40yahoogroups.com>
> Data: Lunedì 9 gennaio 2012, 19:44
>
>  
>
> C. Petr
>

> **
>
>
> I, Aulus Liburnius Hadrianus, Tribune of Nova Roma, pronounce
> intercessio against the "PRAETORIAL EDICT CPD StCVIA 65-01: MODERATION
> OF THE FORUM NOVAE ROMAE (AKA MAIN LIST OR ML)" promulgated by praetor
> Gaius Petronius Dexter and praetrix Statia Cornelia Valeriana Iuliana
> Aeternia as this Edict violates articles IV and VI of the Lex Cornelia de
> linguis publicis.
>
>
>

> **
>
>
> Liburnius Juliae sd
>
> I reposted the intercessio, for your request, with a short explanation of
> my reasons, eventhough I am not required to do so.
> What matters is the the fact that an intercessio was pronounced.
>
> Vale
> ALH
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "luciaiuliaaquila" <luciaiuliaaquila@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Iulia. Liburnio Trib. s.p.d
> >
> > According to the Tribune handbook:
> > 1. When a Tribunus Plebis issues an intercessio, it must include the
> following elements in a reasoned exposition in which the Tribunus shall
> note whether the auxilium was requested or ex-officio:
> >
> > a. The official name(s) of the citizen(s) who has requested the Tribunus
> Plebis to issue the intercessio, or the official name(s) of the citizen(s)
> on whose behalf the Tribunus has provided auxilium ex officio.
> >
> > b. The official name and office of the magistrate(s) against whose act
> or acts the intercessio or auxilium has been interposed.
> >
> > c. The article(s) of the Constitution or the leges violated by the
> magistrate's act(s).
> >
> > 2. If the intercessio of a Tribunus Plebis does not include these three
> elements, the intercessio shall be invalid. The time constraints of the Lex
> Labiena de Intercessione shall continue to hold such that, if a new
> intercessio is not issued before the seventy-two hour limit, counted from
> the act(s) which occasioned the original intercessio, the Tribunus Plebis
> shall issue no new intercessio pertaining to that act or those acts.
> >
> > Vale bene
> >
> > Julia
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "aulusliburniushadrianus" <reenbru@>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I, Aulus Liburnius Hadrianus, Tribune of Nova Roma, pronounce
> > > intercessio against the "PRAETORIAL EDICT CPD StCVIA 65-01: MODERATION
> > > OF THE FORUM NOVAE ROMAE (AKA MAIN LIST OR ML)" promulgated by praetor
> > > Gaius Petronius Dexter and praetrix Statia Cornelia Valeriana Iuliana
> > > Aeternia.
> > >
> >
>
>
>

> **
>
>
> I, Aulus Liburnius Hadrianus, Tribune of Nova Roma, acting on behalf of
> citizen L.Lucretius Caupo, pronounce intercessio against the "PRAETORIAL
> EDICT CPD StCVIA 65-01: MODERATION OF THE FORUM NOVAE ROMAE (AKA MAIN LIST
> OR ML)" promulgated by praetor Gaius Petronius Dexter and praetrix Statia
> Cornelia Valeriana Iuliana Aeternia as this Edict violates articles IV and
> VI of the Lex Cornelia de linguis publicis.
>
>
>

> "Minime Praetor! Non inébriábar, sed loquor linguá latiná."
> ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
>
> Volli Maccus
> (Volli the Clown)
> aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.

> C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > "Minime Praetor! Non inébriábar, sed loquor linguá latiná."
> > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
> >
> > Volli Maccus
> > (Volli the Clown)
> > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
>
> Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
>

> Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it in "I was not
> drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
>

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, V. Valerius Volusus <volvsvs@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
> >wrote:
>
>
> > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > "Minime Praetor! Non in�bri�bar, sed loquor lingu� latin�."
> > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
> > >
> > > Volli Maccus
> > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> >
> > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> >
>
> It is when you've had a skin full :D
>
>
> > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it in "I was
> not
> > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> >
>
> Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the time. ;)
>
> Vale bene,
>
> Volli.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> Ave,
>
> But the 64 dollar question is are you drunk now? hehehe
>

>
> Vale,
>
> Sulla
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, V. Valerius Volusus <volvsvs@...
> >wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
> > >wrote:
> >
> >
> > > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > > "Minime Praetor! Non inébriábar, sed loquor linguá latiná."
> > > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
> > > >
> > > > Volli Maccus
> > > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> > >
> > > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> > >
> >
> > It is when you've had a skin full :D
> >
> >
> > > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it in "I was
> > not
> > > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> > >
> >
> > Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the time. ;)
> >
> > Vale bene,
> >
> > Volli.
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, V. Valerius Volusus <volvsvs@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
> >wrote:
>
>
> > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > "Minime Praetor! Non in�bri�bar, sed loquor lingu� latin�."
> > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
> > >
> > > Volli Maccus
> > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> >
> > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> >
>
> It is when you've had a skin full :D
>
>
> > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it in "I was
> not
> > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> >
>
> Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the time. ;)
>
> Vale bene,
>
> Volli.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
"*Feri pastorem, et oves se dispergent*"


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> **
>
>
> Cn. Iulius Caesar consul sal.
>
> EX OFFICIO
>
> The Lex Didia Gemina de potestate tribunici regulates the issuance of an
> intercessio. As was noted earlier in the Forum the Lex Didia requires:
>
> --------------
> a.. a. The official name(s) of the citizen(s) who has requested the
> Tribunus Plebis to issue the intercessio, or the official name(s) of the
> citizen(s) on whose behalf the Tribunus has provided auxilium ex officio.
> b.. b. The official name and office of the magistrate(s) against whose act
> or acts the intercessio or auxilium has been interposed.
> c.. c. The article(s) of the Constitution or the leges violated by the
> magistrate's act(s).
> ---------------
>
> What is missing is a reasoned exposition. An explanation. The Tribunes
> have to demonstrate how the act subject of the intercession violates a lex
> or the Constitution. That requirement comes at:
>
> ----------------
> II. IVS AUXILI FERENDI (The Right of Bringing Assistance)
>
> A. Since the Ius Auxili Ferendi is a fundamental prerogative of a Tribunus
> Plebis as set forth in IV. 7. A of our Constitution, in order for an act of
> intercessio to be valid the following procedure must be followed whether it
> is requested by a citizen or performed in his official capacity.
>
> 1. When a Tribunus Plebis issues an intercessio, it must include the
> following elements in a reasoned exposition in which the Tribunus shall
> note whether the auxilium was requested or ex-officio:
> ----------------
>
> Note, it says at II.A. that �in order for an act of intercessio to be
> valid the following procedure must be followed� and then at II.A.1 states
> the three elements have to be INCLUDED in a REASONED EXPOSITION. That is
> the legal requirement for an explanation. Therefore the lex Didia requires
> the three points AND an explanation of how the Lex Cornelia has been
> violated. This is the practice that has always been followed in Nova Roma,
> according to the law. Obviously the tribune shave to demonstrate the way a
> violation has occurred, otherwise the power of intercessio would be open to
> flagrant abuse.
>
> I see no reasoned exposition. The Lex Didia has not been followed.
> Therefore logically, as per the Lex Didia, the intercessio is not valid.
> The law itself strikes down the intercessio.
>
> Therefore as a consequence, the praetorial edict survives and remains in
> force.
>
> Note also, the 72 hours to oppose the edict have elapsed. It can no longer
> be subject to another intercessio.
>
> So I find.
>
> Optime valete.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

> Therefore as a consequence, the praetorial edict survives and remains in force.

> Note also, the 72 hours to oppose the edict have elapsed. It can no longer be subject to another intercessio.

> Sta. Cornelia Aeternia V. Valerio Voluso C. Petronio Dextro S.P.D.
>
> Volli dearest, *looks at Tribune badge* drinking on the clock eh?
>
> As much as I want to take away the skin, I'd be taking away your right to
> free speech.
>
> <shrugs> Not too much chaos por favor (please).
>
> Vale bene,
> Aeternia
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, V. Valerius Volusus <volvsvs@...
> >wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
> > >wrote:
> >
> >
> > > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > > "Minime Praetor! Non inébriábar, sed loquor linguá latiná."
> > > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
> > > >
> > > > Volli Maccus
> > > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> > >
> > > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> > >
> >
> > It is when you've had a skin full :D
> >
> >
> > > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it in "I was
> > not
> > > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> > >
> >
> > Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the time. ;)
> >
> > Vale bene,
> >
> > Volli.
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> "*Feri pastorem, et oves se dispergent*"
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

> **
>
>
> Sta. Cornelia Aeternia L. Cornelio Sullae sal:
>
> This now a moot issue, we have seen the errors that have been displayed our
> Senior Consul has spoken. Lets move onward to productivity or we can
> simply watch Volli.
>
> Either way the Praetura will be moving forward in a positive direction.
>
> Vale bene,
> Statia Cornelia Aeternia
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:43 AM, C. Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> C. Maria Caeca Sta. Corneliae Aeterniae Praetrici sal!
>
> Um ...wouldn't taking away the Tribune's wine skin be ...restricting free
> wine consumption, especially if you ...sampled same, just to ensure it
> *is*
> wine, of course, and all in your duty, of course! Now ...you'd have to let
> your scribes do the same, so that you could, um, obtain a unanimous
> opinion
> ...right?
>
> Valete bene!
> CMC
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> **
>
>
> Salve,
>
> Ahem, Senator remember my Roman name is Aeternia, Cornelia Aeternia if you
> have to we'll have to have you practice using my actual roman name.
>
> Not that I plan on abandoning my nicknamed moniker (never ever) but lets
> try using my Roman name please?
>
> I have no other further comments what you have stated below, not touching
> it :-).
>
> Vale,
> Cornelia Aeternia
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

> wrote:

> Ave!
>
> LOL its habit calling you Tink...considering I do it every day in the
> house. At least I am not calling you by the other nickname. ;) If I am
> going to address you in your office I will do so by using Praetor...ok?
> ;) And, You never address me as Senator...doing so now just highlights how
> rare it is ever done. Can we please keep the formalities to when they
> should actually be used and not in everyday conversation?
>
> Vale,
>
> Sulla
>
>
>

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:52 AM, C. Maria Caeca <c.mariacaeca@...>wrote:

> **
>
>
> Ave Senator!
>
> Um ...which is the crime, restricting the right to free wine consumption,
> or
> ...confiscating the evidence and ...testing ...same?
>
> Caeca
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> **
>
>
> Salve,
>
> Ahem, remember I got it latinized "Tinka" but no I see what you are
> saying. You can call me Praetor if thats the compromise, okay I can go
> with that. I'm trying to dispel those naysayers who think wow our Praetor
> has the nickname of the variation of something non-Roman. You're right
> much better than the other which shall not be uttered. We can skip the
> formalities but lets try to practice Sulla. (see I said your name lol).
>
> Vale,
> Aeternia
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Robert Woolwine <
> robert.woolwine@...
> > wrote:
>
> > Ave!
> >
> > LOL its habit calling you Tink...considering I do it every day in the
> > house. At least I am not calling you by the other nickname. ;) If I am
> > going to address you in your office I will do so by using Praetor...ok?
> > ;) And, You never address me as Senator...doing so now just highlights
> how
> > rare it is ever done. Can we please keep the formalities to when they
> > should actually be used and not in everyday conversation?
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Sulla
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

> **
>
>
> Salve Senator,
>
> No I am not suggesting that, I'm at looking at this from the perspective of
> three times was not the charm. The issue is moot and we move forward.
>
> Although I do seriously feel that the Tribunes should be fully debriefed on
> the Lex Didia Gemina de potestate tribuncia, perhaps by former Tribunes, if
> nothing more than none other than my current colleague, who was exemplary
> when he held the office.
>
> Vale bene,
>
> Aeternia
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "petronius_dexter" <jfarnoud94@...> wrote:
>
> C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
>
> > "Minime Praetor! Non inébriábar, sed loquor linguá latiná."
> > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
> >
> > Volli Maccus
> > (Volli the Clown)
> > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
>
> Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
>
> Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it in "I was not drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
>
> Vale Volli!
>
> C. Petronius Dexter
> Arcoiali scribebat
> a. d. III Idus Ianuarias Cn. Caesare C. Tullio coss.
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, "V. Valerius Volusus" <volvsvs@...> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...>wrote:
>
> > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > "Minime Praetor! Non inébriábar, sed loquor linguá latiná."
> > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
> > >
> > > Volli Maccus
> > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> >
> > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> >
>
> It is when you've had a skin full :D
>
>
> > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it in "I was not
> > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> >
>
> Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the time. ;)
>
> Vale bene,
>
> Volli.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

--- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...> wrote:
>
> Ave!
>
> Tink....drinking is almost required when one is working on Nova Roma
> business and time! By the end of your term in office you should buy stock
> in your favorite drink of choice....Boones farm...LOL
> because...well....lets just say...because! ;)
>
> Vale,
>
> Sulla
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Belle Morte Statia <
> syrenslullaby@...> wrote:
>
> > Sta. Cornelia Aeternia V. Valerio Voluso C. Petronio Dextro S.P.D.
> >
> > Volli dearest, *looks at Tribune badge* drinking on the clock eh?
> >
> > As much as I want to take away the skin, I'd be taking away your right to
> > free speech.
> >
> > <shrugs> Not too much chaos por favor (please).
> >
> > Vale bene,
> > Aeternia
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, V. Valerius Volusus <volvsvs@...
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > **
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > > > "Minime Praetor! Non inébriábar, sed loquor linguá latiná."
> > > > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
> > > > >
> > > > > Volli Maccus
> > > > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> > > >
> > > > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> > > >
> > >
> > > It is when you've had a skin full :D
> > >
> > >
> > > > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it in "I was
> > > not
> > > > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> > > >
> > >
> > > Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the time. ;)
> > >
> > > Vale bene,
> > >
> > > Volli.
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > "*Feri pastorem, et oves se dispergent*"
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

> **
>
>
> Ave Sulla!
>
> Warning, I am taking notes for the parody! *laughs*
>
> Of course than you never disappoint!;)
>
> Vale bene
>
> Julia
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine <robert.woolwine@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Ave!
> >
> > Tink....drinking is almost required when one is working on Nova Roma
> > business and time! By the end of your term in office you should buy stock
> > in your favorite drink of choice....Boones farm...LOL
> > because...well....lets just say...because! ;)
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Sulla
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Belle Morte Statia <
> > syrenslullaby@...> wrote:
> >
> > > Sta. Cornelia Aeternia V. Valerio Voluso C. Petronio Dextro S.P.D.
> > >
> > > Volli dearest, *looks at Tribune badge* drinking on the clock eh?
> > >
> > > As much as I want to take away the skin, I'd be taking away your right
> to
> > > free speech.
> > >
> > > <shrugs> Not too much chaos por favor (please).
> > >
> > > Vale bene,
> > > Aeternia
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, V. Valerius Volusus <volvsvs@...
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
>
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > > > > "Minime Praetor! Non in�bri�bar, sed loquor lingu� latin�."
> > > > > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in Latin."]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Volli Maccus
> > > > > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > > > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> > > > >
> > > > > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It is when you've had a skin full :D
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it in "I
> was
> > > > not
> > > > > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the time. ;)
> > > >
> > > > Vale bene,
> > > >
> > > > Volli.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > "*Feri pastorem, et oves se dispergent*"
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>

> **
>
>
> Ave Sulla!
>
> Warning, I am taking notes for the parody! *laughs*
>
> Of course than you never disappoint!;)
>
> Vale bene
>
> Julia
>
>
> --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine
> <robert.woolwine@...>
> wrote:
> >
> > Ave!
> >
> > Tink....drinking is almost required when one is working on Nova Roma
> > business and time! By the end of your term in office you should buy
> > stock in your favorite drink of choice....Boones farm...LOL
> > because...well....lets just say...because! ;)
> >
> > Vale,
> >
> > Sulla
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Belle Morte Statia <
> > syrenslullaby@...> wrote:
> >
> > > Sta. Cornelia Aeternia V. Valerio Voluso C. Petronio Dextro S.P.D.
> > >
> > > Volli dearest, *looks at Tribune badge* drinking on the clock eh?
> > >
> > > As much as I want to take away the skin, I'd be taking away your
> > > right
> to
> > > free speech.
> > >
> > > <shrugs> Not too much chaos por favor (please).
> > >
> > > Vale bene,
> > > Aeternia
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, V. Valerius Volusus <volvsvs@...
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > > **
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
>
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > > > > "Minime Praetor! Non inébriábar, sed loquor linguá latiná."
> > > > > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in
> > > > > > Latin."]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Volli Maccus
> > > > > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > > > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> > > > >
> > > > > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It is when you've had a skin full :D
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it
> > > > > in "I
> was
> > > > not
> > > > > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the
> > > > time. ;)
> > > >
> > > > Vale bene,
> > > >
> > > > Volli.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > "*Feri pastorem, et oves se dispergent*"
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lyn Dowling <ldowling@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Salve,
>
> Ye gods, first Boone's Farm and now Johnnie Walker? What are you, some sort
> of populares? Somebody show these people to a good bottle of Margaux and
> some single malt, as befits their high estate.
>
> Vale,
> L. Aemilia Mamerca
> (some things just make it worth emerging from lurkdom)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf
> Of Robert Woolwine
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 3:02 PM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: On a lighter note: Cirque de Nova Roma
> presents...
>
> Ave!
>
> Well, when you think of my drink of choice....Just remember this:
>
>
> http://after12.failblog.org/2011/12/14/party-fails-christina-hendricks-epic-
> prow-johnnie-walker-scotch/
>
> LOL couldn't resist.
>
> Vale,
>
> Sulla
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 12:54 PM, luciaiuliaaquila <
> luciaiuliaaquila@...> wrote:
>
> > **
>
> >
> >
> > Ave Sulla!
> >
> > Warning, I am taking notes for the parody! *laughs*
> >
> > Of course than you never disappoint!;)
> >
> > Vale bene
> >
> > Julia
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine
> > <robert.woolwine@...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Ave!
> > >
> > > Tink....drinking is almost required when one is working on Nova Roma
> > > business and time! By the end of your term in office you should buy
> > > stock in your favorite drink of choice....Boones farm...LOL
> > > because...well....lets just say...because! ;)
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Sulla
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Belle Morte Statia <
> > > syrenslullaby@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sta. Cornelia Aeternia V. Valerio Voluso C. Petronio Dextro S.P.D.
> > > >
> > > > Volli dearest, *looks at Tribune badge* drinking on the clock eh?
> > > >
> > > > As much as I want to take away the skin, I'd be taking away your
> > > > right
> > to
> > > > free speech.
> > > >
> > > > <shrugs> Not too much chaos por favor (please).
> > > >
> > > > Vale bene,
> > > > Aeternia
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, V. Valerius Volusus <volvsvs@...
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > **
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
> >
> > > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > > > > > "Minime Praetor! Non in�bri�bar, sed loquor lingu� latin�."
> > > > > > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in
> > > > > > > Latin."]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Volli Maccus
> > > > > > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > > > > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It is when you've had a skin full :D
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it
> > > > > > in "I
> > was
> > > > > not
> > > > > > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the
> > > > > time. ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale bene,
> > > > >
> > > > > Volli.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > "*Feri pastorem, et oves se dispergent*"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lyn Dowling <ldowling@...> wrote:

> **
>
>
> Salve,
>
> Ye gods, first Boone's Farm and now Johnnie Walker? What are you, some
> sort of populares? Somebody show these people to a good bottle of
> Margaux and some single malt, as befits their high estate.
>
> Vale,
> L. Aemilia Mamerca
> (some things just make it worth emerging from lurkdom)
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Robert Woolwine
> Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2012 3:02 PM
> To: Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Nova-Roma] Re: On a lighter note: Cirque de Nova Roma
> presents...
>
> Ave!
>
> Well, when you think of my drink of choice....Just remember this:
>
>
> http://after12.failblog.org/2011/12/14/party-fails-christina-hendricks
> -epic-
> prow-johnnie-walker-scotch/
>
> LOL couldn't resist.
>
> Vale,
>
> Sulla
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 12:54 PM, luciaiuliaaquila <
> luciaiuliaaquila@...> wrote:
>
> > **
>
> >
> >
> > Ave Sulla!
> >
> > Warning, I am taking notes for the parody! *laughs*
> >
> > Of course than you never disappoint!;)
> >
> > Vale bene
> >
> > Julia
> >
> >
> > --- In Nova-Roma@yahoogroups.com, Robert Woolwine
> > <robert.woolwine@...>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Ave!
> > >
> > > Tink....drinking is almost required when one is working on Nova
> > > Roma business and time! By the end of your term in office you
> > > should buy stock in your favorite drink of choice....Boones
> > > farm...LOL because...well....lets just say...because! ;)
> > >
> > > Vale,
> > >
> > > Sulla
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Belle Morte Statia <
> > > syrenslullaby@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sta. Cornelia Aeternia V. Valerio Voluso C. Petronio Dextro S.P.D.
> > > >
> > > > Volli dearest, *looks at Tribune badge* drinking on the clock eh?
> > > >
> > > > As much as I want to take away the skin, I'd be taking away your
> > > > right
> > to
> > > > free speech.
> > > >
> > > > <shrugs> Not too much chaos por favor (please).
> > > >
> > > > Vale bene,
> > > > Aeternia
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 11:07 AM, V. Valerius Volusus <volvsvs@...
> > > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > **
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 12:54 AM, petronius_dexter <jfarnoud94@...
> >
> > > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > C. Petronius Valerio Voluso s.p.d.,
> > > > > > > "Minime Praetor! Non inébriábar, sed loquor linguá latiná."
> > > > > > > ["Not at all Officer. I'm not drunk, just speaking in
> > > > > > > Latin."]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Volli Maccus
> > > > > > > (Volli the Clown)
> > > > > > > aka - Valerius Volusus tribunus plebis.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Was it so difficult to translate your Latin words in English?
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > It is when you've had a skin full :D
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Non inebriabar is imperfect time, so you had to translate it
> > > > > > in "I
> > was
> > > > > not
> > > > > > drunk", "I am not drunk" is "Non inebrior".
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Pray forgive my bad translation Officer, I was drunk at the
> > > > > time. ;)
> > > > >
> > > > > Vale bene,
> > > > >
> > > > > Volli.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > "*Feri pastorem, et oves se dispergent*"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links