Talk:satin

RFM discussion: December 2014–March 2017
Lewis and Short do not have this. They have satin'. If you think this should be RfVed, I would not object. DCDuring TALK 19:29, 26 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I doubt an RFV will be helpful here. The original manuscripts will definitely not have an apostrophe on this word; modern editions may or may not depending on the editor's preference. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:30, 26 December 2014 (UTC)


 * See, for example, these two, which both omit the apostrophe. The trouble is, AFAICT, this contraction only occurs in the works of T. Maccius Plautus, which makes it (itc-ola), as opposed to  (la). Still, the form with the apostrophe and the form without are  with regard to that issue, I suppose. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 00:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Left where it is per Angr's comment that the original manuscripts are unlikely to have the apostrophe. If the term is not Latin la but rather Old Latin, please update the language header. There is a hard redirect at satin'; I don't mind any anyone updates it to a soft redirect ( or a similar template). - -sche (discuss) 17:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)