Talk:lacio

The perfect active and supine forms are not præsent in Dvoretsky's dictionary. Are they really attested? The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 15:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Ack. I wish I had put in my reference for this entry when I created it.  I can't remember where I got the inflection information now.  The verb isn't listed at all in my usual verb references, and Lewis & Short identify it as "only in inscriptions or the grammarians" (i.e. it is very rare or shows up in the Classical period merely as a "mention" rather than a "use").  The Facciolati lexicon gives a conjugation with no third or fourth principal parts, just as Dvoretsky, but that could be the result of Facciolati being a principal source for many of the later dictionaries (in all languages). --EncycloPetey 04:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I created the entry on Fr.Wikt, I am surprised to see the verb with full declensions (created after, , etc.), all right but WRONG, lacio has a frequentative, , supine should be (lactum) as facio, factum, facto; and derivatives in -ficio...
 * But it should be clearly stated that the verb is unused in Latin except by Festus Grammaticus to explain its derivatives (see quotes on fr:lacio --Diligent 08:45, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Agree with Diligent. Unattested forms should not be mentioned. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 08:53, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The page for German "locken" asserts that this word does have cognates in other languages. J&#39;odore (talk)