Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Manchu wrote:

 Kroothawk wrote:
Everytime the English GW webstore uses "Sisters of Battle", the German version uses "Adeptus Sororitas", even in the tag for the army. So in Germany, it is still the official name (and not Adepta!). Call it a bad translation, but Adepta Sororitas is one as well (Adepta Sororitatis at least follows Latin grammar, meaning "a (single) female pupil of the sisterhood").

No no no. "Adepta Sororitas" is not Latin. It is the fictional name of a fictional band of fictional female fanatics of a fictional religion. Don't forget that the name is also written in a fictional language. The Germans writing "Adeptus Sororitas" everywhere is like writing "Spece Marines" or "Dahk Eldar" everywhere. It's Engrish by proxy, sorry German Dakkanauts.

Actually it is latin, as in the language. They've got the grammar wrong though. The nominative singular should be adeptus sororitas. If they mean it to be plural, it would be adeptus sororitates.

Sorry, 6 years of latin.

 Lynata wrote:
They probably took it to make the name sound feminine, but the way I'm justifying it in my headcanon is:

Adept - an individual member of an Adeptus
Adepts - plural of Adept
Adeptus - an organisation of Adepts
Adepta - plural of Adeptus

At least this way it kind of works out with how these terms are used by the writers.

agnosto wrote:Actually it is latin, as in the language. They've got the grammar wrong though.

Manchu's point was that it is "bastardises latin" because it's a Space Language used in a sci-fi setting set many thousands of years in the future. It's not "false latin" because it evolved/mutated.

Kind of makes sense when you consider how an already dead language could morph over the intervening thousands of years; changed by people with no real understanding of the language itself or the history. Oddly fits the setting quite well.

 Manchu wrote:

 agnosto wrote:
Actually it is latin, as in the language.

No, it's High Gothic, as in the fictional language.

 Lynata wrote:
Manchu's point was, I think, that it is "bastardised latin" because it's a Space Language used in a sci-fi setting set many thousands of years in the future. It's not "grammatically false latin" because it evolved/mutated, quite similar to various languages of today - such as the Italian language that evolved out of vulgar latin, for example.

Spot on.

 agnosto wrote:
Kind of makes sense when you consider how an already dead language could morph over the intervening thousands of years; changed by people with no real understanding of the language itself or the history. Oddly fits the setting quite well.

Most of our Latin comes from Caesar and Cicero. Imagine, their idiosyncratic styles have formed our understanding of how everyone spoke the language. Who knows what bizarre game of telephone this has engendered over thousands of years much less tens of thousands.

lol. I had to go back and look it up and Sororitas would be Renaissance Latin, so yeah, I was off. The root for sister though has always been soror (sororis) which is a 3rd declension noun. So yes, it did change a bit in the middle ages and become sororitas to better describe nuns (I suppose).

I'll differ with you on the last point church latin, which is what most people ever have exposure to, yes Cicero had a huge influence on what most people consider latin. Personally, I prefer Pliny the Elder's writing style to Cicero's; the phrase "Fortune favors the bold" (he actually said 'brave') came from him but letters and books have survived the test of time from writers other than Cicero and are available to the general public and provide a much deeper (and sometimes seedier) insight into Roman life, culture and language. The problem with aristocrats is that the Roman Equestrian class spoke and wrote in Greek more than latin which colored their use of the language.

I think I've drug this far enough off topic; I apologize for butting in.