This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Israel the Grammarian 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 page is not a forum for general discussion about Israel the Grammarian. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Israel the Grammarian at the Reference desk. |
Israel the Grammarian is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 29, 2015. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've just changed "Gospel Dice" to "Game of the Gospels"...
I notice that Lapidge does indeed translate the game "Gospel Dice", so I have just added a {{ sic}} to what I take to be a direct quote from this source (although if Lapidge is just supplying the Latin, and we are providing the English translation, I recommend updating this also to "Game of the Gospels"). However, there is really no chance that the meaning of this translation is correct. HJR Murray (1952: 61) notes that the ms. "contains a curious attempt to give a scriptural meaning to hnefatafl which is here named alea." (Hnefataft is a board game that does not incorporate dice.) Parlett (1999: 202) correctly translates the name as "Gospel Game". I have used "Game of the Gospels" simply because that's what we have in Alea evangelii. It is true that alea = dice. However, over time the meaning morphed from dice to board game played with dice (≈Backgammon) ... and evidently this later morphed into board game (even without the use of dice). Cheers. Phil wink ( talk) 20:29, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
<blockquote>...</blockquote>
rather than just using the ":". But again, an explanation which asserts merely that "alea means dice" is, to me, factually incorrect. If Schädler:82 and Parlett:72 are not persuasive to you, I believe I can find something similar in R. G. Austin (shockingly, I was unable to find such a statement in Murray, son of the first editor of the Oxford English Dictionary). If I were to suggest an amendment to your note (4) above, it would be something along the lines of "Lapidge translates "Alea Evangelii" as "gospel dice", but dice are not used in the game, and Parlett notes that while "alea previously meant lots in general, whether dice or astragals" the word later attached itself to a Roman board game,[ref] hence his translation "Gospel Game"."1. I think you misunderstand the intention of my wording. What I was attempting to convey was that Lapidge as a Latin expert reasonably translated alea as dice, but not being a games expert he did not realise that it was an incorrect translation in the context. My wording was: "Alea" means lots or dice, and Lapidge translates "Alea Evangelii" as "gospel dice", but dice are not used in the game, and Parlett prefers "gospel game". However "Alea can mean lots or dice" would be better.
2. I do not have access to Schädler, but I do now have Parlett, and he say does not say on p. 72 that the change was to proto-backgammon, but that it was the name in early medieval literary texts for the dice game commonly known as tabula. As I see it Lapidge not being a games expert did not realise that Alea Evangelii was not a dice game. As you say, dice is one correct translation. Parlett silently corrected what was - according to his account - the literal translation to one which is not strictly correct but more reasonable in the context.
3. I did order Lapidge but the library gave me the wrong volume. I will phone them tomorrow and ask them to check the quote.
4. I am happy to change Harold to H J R. Maybe you should move the Wikipedia page to his usual name?
I think the differences between us are minor and I trust we can find a wording we are both happy with. Dudley Miles ( talk) 20:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I think this article just might be too short to be considered comprehensive enough for an FA-class article. I think it might fall into the category of GA-worth articles where there isn't enough information on the subject to take it to FA, if it is considered worthy of GA status. Other major issues I have with this article are its lack of exploration on the legacy of Israel or basically any meaningful exploration of who he was outside of a few quotes about what a shiny beetle (re: rare person) he was for his time. After reading this article I still feel I have no idea who Isreal was or why he's all that important. I suspect, seeing how it hasn't been meaningfully edited since 2015, it's just one of those articles written when WP had a much lower standard for FA. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 23:24, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Israel the Grammarian 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 page is not a forum for general discussion about Israel the Grammarian. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Israel the Grammarian at the Reference desk. |
Israel the Grammarian is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on November 29, 2015. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've just changed "Gospel Dice" to "Game of the Gospels"...
I notice that Lapidge does indeed translate the game "Gospel Dice", so I have just added a {{ sic}} to what I take to be a direct quote from this source (although if Lapidge is just supplying the Latin, and we are providing the English translation, I recommend updating this also to "Game of the Gospels"). However, there is really no chance that the meaning of this translation is correct. HJR Murray (1952: 61) notes that the ms. "contains a curious attempt to give a scriptural meaning to hnefatafl which is here named alea." (Hnefataft is a board game that does not incorporate dice.) Parlett (1999: 202) correctly translates the name as "Gospel Game". I have used "Game of the Gospels" simply because that's what we have in Alea evangelii. It is true that alea = dice. However, over time the meaning morphed from dice to board game played with dice (≈Backgammon) ... and evidently this later morphed into board game (even without the use of dice). Cheers. Phil wink ( talk) 20:29, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
<blockquote>...</blockquote>
rather than just using the ":". But again, an explanation which asserts merely that "alea means dice" is, to me, factually incorrect. If Schädler:82 and Parlett:72 are not persuasive to you, I believe I can find something similar in R. G. Austin (shockingly, I was unable to find such a statement in Murray, son of the first editor of the Oxford English Dictionary). If I were to suggest an amendment to your note (4) above, it would be something along the lines of "Lapidge translates "Alea Evangelii" as "gospel dice", but dice are not used in the game, and Parlett notes that while "alea previously meant lots in general, whether dice or astragals" the word later attached itself to a Roman board game,[ref] hence his translation "Gospel Game"."1. I think you misunderstand the intention of my wording. What I was attempting to convey was that Lapidge as a Latin expert reasonably translated alea as dice, but not being a games expert he did not realise that it was an incorrect translation in the context. My wording was: "Alea" means lots or dice, and Lapidge translates "Alea Evangelii" as "gospel dice", but dice are not used in the game, and Parlett prefers "gospel game". However "Alea can mean lots or dice" would be better.
2. I do not have access to Schädler, but I do now have Parlett, and he say does not say on p. 72 that the change was to proto-backgammon, but that it was the name in early medieval literary texts for the dice game commonly known as tabula. As I see it Lapidge not being a games expert did not realise that Alea Evangelii was not a dice game. As you say, dice is one correct translation. Parlett silently corrected what was - according to his account - the literal translation to one which is not strictly correct but more reasonable in the context.
3. I did order Lapidge but the library gave me the wrong volume. I will phone them tomorrow and ask them to check the quote.
4. I am happy to change Harold to H J R. Maybe you should move the Wikipedia page to his usual name?
I think the differences between us are minor and I trust we can find a wording we are both happy with. Dudley Miles ( talk) 20:30, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I think this article just might be too short to be considered comprehensive enough for an FA-class article. I think it might fall into the category of GA-worth articles where there isn't enough information on the subject to take it to FA, if it is considered worthy of GA status. Other major issues I have with this article are its lack of exploration on the legacy of Israel or basically any meaningful exploration of who he was outside of a few quotes about what a shiny beetle (re: rare person) he was for his time. After reading this article I still feel I have no idea who Isreal was or why he's all that important. I suspect, seeing how it hasn't been meaningfully edited since 2015, it's just one of those articles written when WP had a much lower standard for FA. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 23:24, 17 December 2021 (UTC)