This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LiteratureWikipedia:WikiProject LiteratureTemplate:WikiProject LiteratureLiterature articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology articles
Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
"and reserved the funeral oration exclusively for the dead"
Isn't this statement tautological? Who but the dead would receive a funeral oration? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.137.138.246 (talk • contribs) 12:49, 24 October 2011
I think it means "and reserved the funeral oration alone for the dead". But I agree, it's (at best) ambiguous as it stands. Perhaps it could be recast as "the panegyric was reserved for the living, while the dead would have only a funeral oration". Thoughts, anyone?
That statement is taken directly from the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica. What might help here is finding a second source which makes the distinction clearer to contemporary readers. It could also be that they were using "funeral" as an adjective as opposed to a noun, using the meaning "funereal", i.e., sad and serious. This would contrast with the panegyric which, per the Britannica, was meant to be rousing. But I agree, the difference is not at all clear as it is currently written. --GentlemanGhost(converse)19:51, 15 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
I agree with Alex Brady. Tbat a dated, substandard encyclopedia has been used a source cannot be reasons for not rewording the passage so as to make sense. No second source is required for this. Str1977(talk)22:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)Reply