Reconstruction talk:Latin/auca

3charles3 (talk) 19:13, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * While I can't comment on the other possibilities below, auca is attested, not a reconstruction. Please see the long listing in the DMLBS.

Possible additions:

Ligurian: öca

http://www.zeneize.net/itze/parole.asp?Parola=OCA

Piedmontese: òca

https://www.piemonteis.com/dizionario-italiano-piemontese.php?parola=oca

Romagnol: oca

https://archive.org/stream/vocabolarioromag00ercouoft#page/280/mode/2up/search/oca

Sadinian: Campidanese: accoca, coca Logudorese: coca, oca, oga Nuorese: oca

Greenismean2016 (talk) 04:41, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

RFD discussion: March 2022
Attested (see the DMLBS); moved to by Brutal Russian on 4 November 2020‎ (edit summary: “attested Latin moved from Vulgar Latin”). 3charles3 added the Dictionnaire illustré Latin-Français and the DMLBS as references and removed, then wrote on the talk page “While I can't comment on the other possibilities below, auca is attested, not a reconstruction. Please see the long listing in the DMLBS.” Also pinging (who worked on Latin reconstructions). J3133 (talk) 19:50, 8 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, no need at all for a reconstruction page. Should be either deleted entirely or replaced with a redirect to . Nicodene (talk) 20:00, 8 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Deleted because yes, if it's attested there's no need to also reconstruct it. The following content was present in the reconstruction page but not the entry auca: at the start of the etymology "From earlier ", in the references section "Dictionary of Medieval Latin in British Sources". The descendants were also presented in a different order (grouped by linguistic relationship in the reconstruction page). - -sche (discuss) 18:40, 15 March 2022 (UTC)