This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Celt (tool) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
In a discussion on our forum, this topic was quoted to allow the misuse of the term "Celt" for (alledged !) Thai artefacts.
In the article, it is clearly stated why the use of this term is wrong.. why is it a lemma ? The pictures are confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodies ( talk • contribs) 14:12, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Can it please be deleted, renamed, or integrated in a more general topic, e.g. about "misunderstandings about naming objects in 19th century archeology" ?
Many thanks,
Goodies (muntenbodemvondsten forum, The Netherlands) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodies ( talk • contribs) 14:10, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Old version:The term "celt" came about from a misreading of Job 19:24 in the Sixto-Clementine edition of the Latin Vulgate Bible: Stylo ferreo, et plumbi lamina, vel certe sculpantur in silice (It is indeed carved with an iron pen on a plate of lead or in stone). The certe ("indeed") was misread as celte, which would have to be the ablative of a non-existent third declension noun celt or celtis, the ablative case giving the sense "with/by a celt".
- this is not a "misreading" (like Moses and "cornu" - is it? - & various other well-known Vulgate mistakes) but a typo in the particular edition, it seems to me. I shall amend accordingly. Johnbod ( talk) 15:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC) - in fact rejigged as was initiallyt a MS error. Johnbod ( talk) 15:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I wonder if "celt" even could be a word of third declension. I don't think those usually end in -t, and neither do I know of any Latin words whatsoever that end in -lt; I don't think that's phonologically possible in Latin. "celtis" might be more plausible of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.116.224.210 ( talk) 07:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
It is an obscure species of Lotus. See here. Rwflammang ( talk) 15:42, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
"It is likely that these "tools" had a strictly ritual function"
Tools I think, given that they're almost identical in form to the nephrite adzes of the Māori. - Snori ( talk) 07:44, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
This article really needs to actually describe what a celt is, with better pictures (i.e. with a handle?).
Instead, it's almost entirely a treatise on the etymology of the word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.161.95 ( talk) 04:28, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Celt (tool). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:30, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
"...stone or bronze tool similar to an adze, hoe, or axe." - this is one of the most precise definitions I've ever read! congrats! HilmarHansWerner ( talk) 14:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Celt (tool) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
In a discussion on our forum, this topic was quoted to allow the misuse of the term "Celt" for (alledged !) Thai artefacts.
In the article, it is clearly stated why the use of this term is wrong.. why is it a lemma ? The pictures are confusing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodies ( talk • contribs) 14:12, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Can it please be deleted, renamed, or integrated in a more general topic, e.g. about "misunderstandings about naming objects in 19th century archeology" ?
Many thanks,
Goodies (muntenbodemvondsten forum, The Netherlands) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodies ( talk • contribs) 14:10, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Old version:The term "celt" came about from a misreading of Job 19:24 in the Sixto-Clementine edition of the Latin Vulgate Bible: Stylo ferreo, et plumbi lamina, vel certe sculpantur in silice (It is indeed carved with an iron pen on a plate of lead or in stone). The certe ("indeed") was misread as celte, which would have to be the ablative of a non-existent third declension noun celt or celtis, the ablative case giving the sense "with/by a celt".
- this is not a "misreading" (like Moses and "cornu" - is it? - & various other well-known Vulgate mistakes) but a typo in the particular edition, it seems to me. I shall amend accordingly. Johnbod ( talk) 15:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC) - in fact rejigged as was initiallyt a MS error. Johnbod ( talk) 15:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I wonder if "celt" even could be a word of third declension. I don't think those usually end in -t, and neither do I know of any Latin words whatsoever that end in -lt; I don't think that's phonologically possible in Latin. "celtis" might be more plausible of course. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.116.224.210 ( talk) 07:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
It is an obscure species of Lotus. See here. Rwflammang ( talk) 15:42, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
"It is likely that these "tools" had a strictly ritual function"
Tools I think, given that they're almost identical in form to the nephrite adzes of the Māori. - Snori ( talk) 07:44, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
This article really needs to actually describe what a celt is, with better pictures (i.e. with a handle?).
Instead, it's almost entirely a treatise on the etymology of the word. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.161.95 ( talk) 04:28, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Celt (tool). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:30, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
"...stone or bronze tool similar to an adze, hoe, or axe." - this is one of the most precise definitions I've ever read! congrats! HilmarHansWerner ( talk) 14:48, 14 August 2021 (UTC)