Talk:pollus

RFV discussion: March 2017–October 2020
As mentioned in the Tea room, this seems to be a dead end: it's said to be an adjective, and to be an alternative form of. The only problem is that there's no adjective sense at, nor can I find a likely candidate in Lewis & Short at Perseus. There is, but that's an alternative form of , a diminutive of. We thus have an entry and a complete set of inflected forms, but no definition and no examples of usage. Is this a complete figment of User:SemperBlotto's imagination, or is there a real word out there somewhere?

By the way, I tried searching for this, but there are scannos that mistake just about any letter with a vertical stroke for one or more ls. If it helps any, SB was apparently working on taxonomic names from User:Pengo/Latin/Most wanted at the time he created this. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:01, 6 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Probably a cockup. If nobody can dind anything, I'll delete it all. SemperBlotto (talk) 18:19, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Thus pollus could be an alt form of pullus instead of polus. Alternatively the POS of pollus could be wrong and then it could be an alt form of a noun. -84.161.43.111 08:46, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It is said that DMBLS, "The Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources", contains "pollus v. 1 pola, 3 polus, 3 pullus". So it might be a British Mediaeval Latin spelling. -84.161.4.231 21:02, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * An Eighth-Century Latin–Anglo-Saxon Glossary has "polla, fusca" (possibly a mentioning) where "polla" could be ML for pulla (from pullus).
 * RFV failed. There existed four irrelevant references on the form polla; two were about a personal name, I don't know what the other two were about.__Gamren (talk) 16:30, 16 October 2020 (UTC)