Talk:qui custodiet ipsos custodes

RFV discussion: April 2018–March 2019
Appears in English and other non-Latin texts, but is it also Latin? GBS for ""qui custodiet ipsos custodes" sunt" (the alleged proverb + the word for "(they) are") brings up no result; ""qui custodiet ipsos custodes" est" (the alleged proverb + the word for "(he/she/it) is") brings up an Italian misquotation of Juvenal's satire and some English and French stuff which is not sufficient for attesting a Latin term. -84.161.40.203 07:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * This could only be a relative clause, not a question, in Latin. —Mahāgaja (formerly Angr) · talk 12:32, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, Georges states that there is a substantivally used interrogative pronoun qui. Additionally, he mentions a difference in meaning between qui (substantival pronoun) and quis (substantival pronoun), but that would not necessarily be a problem in this case. L&S seems to mention the same although not so directly. Pons still mentions a substantivally used qui but doesn't give the difference in meaning. It instead mentions a difference in usage.
 * Georges: "quī, quae, quod, I) Pron. interrog. [...] (eig. adjektivisch, öfter aber auch substantivisch, jedoch so, daß qui nach Stand u. Charakter einer Person fragt, quis nach dem Namen)".
 * L&S: "qui, quae, quod [...] pron. I Interrog. [...] (adjectively; while quis, quid is used substantively; qui, [substantivally?] of persons, asks for the character, quis usu. [= usually] for the name)"
 * Pons: "quī, quae, quod [...] b. subst., selten u. fast nur im indir. Frages." [substantivally, rare and almost only in the indirect interrogative sentence]
 * But possible correctness is irrelevant for existence. -84.161.48.142 03:21, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * RFV failed, quis custodiet ipsos custodes is the correct form. (Its idiomacity is another matter for another place.) — Mnemosientje (t · c) 11:55, 14 March 2019 (UTC)