Talk:Homo Homini Lupis

This article needs to be moved to "Homo Homini Lupus". After all, lupus is latin for wolf, but what is a "lupis"? Indeed, the title of the episode is likely quoting Thomas Hobbes who said (in Latin) that man is a wolf to his fellow man (echoing a line from Plautus: lupus est homo homini) --165.123.138.170 05:11, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

While I suppose that the Latin can be argued, the episode title is unquestionably "Homo Homini Lupis". The article needs to remain where it is. Perhaps the Latin usage could be explained under the "Trivia" section of the article, however. -Digresser 20:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean the Latin can be argued? There's no question that the title is meaningless as it is. It is actually more likely that there's simply a typo in title on the official website --165.123.138.170 06:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

The official title is "Homo Homini Lupus". I have the DVD collection right in front of me as I type, and I've checked a few other sources. The page has to stay as is, regardless of any errors on the part of the person in charge of titling episodes.-Digresser 07:20, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I assume you mean that the official title is "Homo Homini Lupis", otherwise, the page should indeed not stay where it is. Well, then, this is oficially an episode with a meaningless title. --165.123.138.170 20:58, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Lupis does indeed have a meaning in Latin. It is the word lupus declined in the plural either in the dative or ablative. In the case of this title it I don't see how the dative could be an option since homini is clearly already dative and since the verb (est is implied) requires no dative. This leaves the ablative, probably ablative of accompaniment since no other use makes much sense. This would lead to translation of "To man, man is with wolves." I believe this should be changed in the article at least insofar as it should be corrected to indicate that lupis is a real word.Bettis211 03:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

While I admit the Latin IS pretty bizarre (read: bad), we would go to great lengths to justify its form had Catullus written the exact same thing. If the official title is in fact "homo homini lupis," then we should indeed leave it where it is, and on that I yield to the authority of those who have written above. I thought the explanation under "fact" was quite good. I've rearranged it and added a few possible interpretations of the sentence as is (all three of which have analogous precedent in Classical sources) Avraham (talk) 23:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)