Talk:odos

odor
Odos probably is an older form of odor, so the entry should reflect that, but I don't know enough to say if this is true and if so, when each form is found. The entry for 'odor' may also need macrons judging from the headword line at 'odos'. 18:43, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Better now? —Angr 20:30, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Angr, when you fix macron usage at a lemma page, you need to remember to fix it for all the inflected forms as well (or else they will never get noticed). I've fixed them this time. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, sorry. I thought a bot did that. As for the age of odos, Lewis & Short give a quote from Sallust's Jugurthine War, which isn't old enough to qualify as Old Latin, though of course it may be attested even earlier. —Angr 20:56, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No, they're bot-created but not bot-upkept. I think it could be called nonstandard by the Augustan age, but a lot of 'Old Latin' forms survived in literature and poetry for at least a good century after the scholars' delimitation for Old Latin. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:10, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * And I don't think it's known for sure when he wrote it - if he wrote it when he was nine, it might qualify :) --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm reluctant to use labels like for Latin, and even more so to use, , and . —Angr 23:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Obsolete and dated don't make any sense, but I think archaic would work, right? Even in a dead language, something can be archaic relative to the rest of the language. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:25, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Rather than "archaic", couldn't we just specify the time period it was used in, either with a name or a range of dates? E.g. or whatever dates it was used during. - -sche (discuss) 07:39, 18 August 2012 (UTC)