Talk:Sator Square

Arepo [mis]interpretations

The first sentence in this section says "The word AREPO is a hapax legomenon (i.e. it appears nowhere else in Latin literature)." Nothing wrong with that.

Further down it says "French historian Jerome Carcopino interpreted AREPO as the Greek ἅπαξ, and believed that it came from the Gaulish word for a 'plough'". This looks confused to me, since "ἅπαξ" literally is the word "hapax", meaning "once", and "hapax legomenon" is the transliteration of the original Greek phrase "ἅπαξ λεγόμενον", meaning "said once". I sincerely doubt that Jerome Carcopino interpreted AREPO as the Greek word ἅπαξ, but I'll leave that for someone else to check.

At any rate it looks to me like it should just read "French historian Jerome Carcopino believed that AREPO came from the Gaulish word for a 'plough'" and leave the Greek out of it. Chuck Entz (talk) 09:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense to me; the current sentence is just a repeat of the concept of a hapax without realizing that it has already been introduced (and thus confusion to re-state under its Greek name). I have made the change you suggested. thanks for that. Aszx5000 (talk) 19:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

It is not an acrostic

This is a two-dimensional, or super-, palindrome. Please verify the corresponding definitions in any of the commonly accepted reference resources and make appropriate changes to the article. Thank you. Idy58 (talk) 06:46, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

There are plenty of quality references that call it "acrostic" - it that your issue? Do you have quality references for what you are proposing? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 09:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll explain. Every 2D palindrome is also an acrostic. However not (by far!) every acrostic is a 2D palindrome, specifically most acrostics do not read the same in four directions. So by calling this word square an acrostic we are missing the definitive features that make it so special and thus misleading an uninformed reader. Idy58 (talk) 10:24, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

So you are not disputing that it is a 2D acrostic palindrome only that being a 2D palindrome, it is already acrostic? Have I got that right? Given a lot of references refer to its 'acrostic' nature, I would still prefer to clarify that it is acrostic anyway? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 11:11, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't explain the situation with more clarity than in my previous response. But here's analogy that illustrates my position, perhaps it will be helpful. You would not want to call an entry on herring "fish", you are talking about a specific type of fish and want to provide a name of that type. A 2D palindrome is an extremely specific (and rare, at least in European languages) type of an acrostic. So much so that calling it an acrostic is similar to calling herring not even a fish but a lifeform. Idy58 (talk) 11:29, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

You would not want to call an entry on herring "fish": our article on herring starts Herring are forage fish; taking a random fish FA as an example, Cutthroat trout begins The cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii) is a fish species. Per MOS:FIRST, we should start the article by stating the blindingly obvious (that page gives the example of The Spanish–American War (April 21 – August 13, 1898) was an armed conflict...) and then go into more detail as appropriate. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 18:23, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Whatever. I'm not gonna waist any more time trying to prove the obvious. Good bye. Idy58 (talk) 18:57, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Icthus means fish

The article states "Written above the square is the word "ICHTHUS", which directly translates as a term for Christ." While it is a direct reference to Christ, this is poorly worded as it is literally the Greek word for fish. 103.240.228.211 (talk) 12:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)