Talk:Girolamo Maiorica

First
Thanks for your corrections in this edit. But I'm a bit baffled by the first change: "one of the first authors composing in Nôm prose" is awkward, and I don't agree that the previous wording said he was one of the first to write in Nôm in general. The word "prose" is key: a Nôm poet would be a composer of Nôm verse, not an author of Nôm prose. – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 06:12, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Basically, I agree with you. I also totally get it about the "prose" and "verse" stuff. Yet I just wanted to be more specific by "composing". You know, "to translate" (phiên dịch), "to adapt" (phóng tác), and "to compose" (sáng tác) are 3 different things. The Lại Nguyên Ân's book cited in the Nguyễn Hai Tính's source shows that they found 4 pieces of work in Nôm prose dated before Maiorica's time (namely three Buddhist texts translated from Chinese and one letter composed by Trịnh Kiểm). But never mind, we all agree with the statement from Võ Long Tê's source anyway. Sorry for my bad English. Regards. Greenknight dv (talk) 07:38, 15 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I see; it does make sense to differentiate between those three degrees of authorship. The problem is that, in English, the word "compose" is primarily associated with song or verse. How about "one of the first authors of original Nôm prose"? (Or leave it the way it was, since we're saying "one of"?) Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 18:33, 16 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the clarification. I think it would be better to remain the current version, though your more specific expression is a great idea. Greenknight dv (talk) 01:12, 17 September 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅ – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 03:28, 19 September 2016 (UTC)