Talk:Jan z Jani

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 16:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Jan de Jani → Jan z Jani – As discussed here, no evidence has been found that "Jan de Jani" is not even more popular name, but that it is used at all by any reliable sources. Per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:V, this article should be moved to Jan z Jani. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:20, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support - zero Google Books hits for current title. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support - the de preposition only derives from the 18th-19th century obsession in Central/Eastern Europe with all things French and has no place in a 15th century Polish name. --ColonelHenry (talk) 22:00, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support - either "Jan z Jani" (which is found in Polish sources) or possibly "Jan of Jani" which makes sense in English, although I have not been able to locate a source to support the latter. Volunteer Marek 22:25, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support In the old days, European aristos used to use French as the lingua franca. That ceased to be common practice some time ago, and our naming ought to reflect this. I suspect that the latter is a declined from the former, so that it would be 'Jan of Jan' – or 'John of John' ;-) – if it were in proper English anyway. --  Ohconfucius  ping / poke 02:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Just nit picking here. "Jani" here is not a patronymic ("son of Jan" or "son of John") but a place, "Jani" or "Jane" (though perhaps this place was named after a "Jan" or a "John" or something similar at some point) so "John of John" would not make sense. But yes, the "de" does not make sense here. Volunteer Marek 03:45, 4 March 2013 (UTC)


 * First, it is totally incorrect to refer Jan de Jani as french spelling! It should be quite obviouse that it is latin language it refere to. Secondly, just because You cannot find Jan de Jani on Google, it does not mean that this spelling was not used. this spelling is to be found in german and polish documents from medieval time. Also, I refere to Severyn Uruski that in most correct way wrote Jan von der Jane in his publication that I refered to, this because it is a dutch family. Using latin de Jani clearly refere to property of Janie so if You wish to translate the name to english it would be Jan of Janie. Furtheremore, if You look at spelling Stibor of Stiboricz of the same clan (pl:Scibor ze Sciborzyc), this spelling is natural because it is noted in several publications although this spelling is not correct because in all mediaval publications from that time it was clearly written de Stiboricz since it was in latin. Obviously, we have same case with Jan z Jani that should be tranlated to either Jan of Janie or Jan de Jani or Jan von der Jane, although there is no publication that refer to Jan of Jani. camdan (talk) 03:27, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * More about correct spelling of polish names. If the family would later spell their name after the protety of Janie or Jani, they would clearly change to Janski but instead they call themselves Swierczynski after their property of Swierczyn. Now, using de Janski would refere to the time of french influence or what you call "obsession" and it is of course totally wrong. Instead, if this family would change into Janski (and not Swierczynski) the most correct official spelling as of Polish Nobility Association and by all the rules would be Jan de Janie Janski where de Janie refere to old latin correct spelling of family nest. But spelling is only used by families that hold family nests in medieval times and do not refer to all nobility in Poland. So if Jan z Jani was living in XVI or XVII century, then correct spelling would be Jan z Jani but since we are talking about year 1400-1461 it have to be Jan de Jani - You will not find any medieval source that pronounce this name as Jan z Jani - this pronouncing came much later. In the end, this is not only about modern sources and how the name is spelled but also about correct spelling of the name and in this case - Jan de Jani. camdan (talk) 04:05, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I include the explenation as reference to the spelling of Jan de Jani in the art. camdan (talk) 19:10, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If You do not agree about Jan de Jani, then it is much better to change to Jan of Janie than Jan z Jani. Note then Janie and not Jani. camdan (talk) 21:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Comment on French/Latin/English forms
Jan de Jani is 19th century french usage as I described above. Joannes de Janie is Medieval Latin but a Frenchified-Vulgar Latin form. Medieval and Renaissance Latin became rather Macaronic by the influence of vernacular tongues, i.e. French, and the de preposition which is not in classical Latin, appears only because of the influence of French and Spanish hegemony during the Late Medieval/Renaissance era. It is not Latin in its classical sense and I have changed this to reflect "Medieval Latin" in the lede. Camdan's continue changing of this is improper. I discussed this at WP:DRN at more length.--ColonelHenry (talk) 17:42, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Definition Medieval Latin is correct so there is no need to change anything here. I changed french spelling of the name since I do not see any relevance of such spelling in medieval polish name. Earlier You stated as following ColonelHenry on writing names with "de" - the de preposition only derives from the 18th-19th century obsession in Central/Eastern Europe with all things French and has no place in a 15th century Polish name. Im glad that You finally understood that we are talking about medieval times and not 19th century. You might concider that around year 1400 all names was spelled in latin or if You wish, Medieval Latin to be more correct and from that we have de preposition. Im talking about what is written in medieval documents and this should be enough for anyone to understand. I read all that You posted and I see You writing same over and over again so if You have nothing more to say, I would suggest that You help anyone else with Your brilliant conclusions and knowledge. Thank You for Your contribution ColonelHenry, it was most kind of You. camdan (talk) 19:41, 19 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The 19th century french usage is different, it would be de Nowina, de Heymowski, de Grabowski. That is 19th century french spelling. However, when writing de Grabowo it is spelling we see in original medieval documents and it is of course latin or like ColonelHenry correctly pointed it out, medieval latin since it differ from classic latin. Im not into defending spelling names with de, instead and to avoid such discussions, I would rather spell it Jan of Janie that would be correct english translation - like in: Spytek of Melsztyn, Spytek of Tarnów and Jarosław, Stibor of Stiboricz, Mikołaj of Kutno, Piotr of Grudziądz, Wojciech of Bogoria and Żminogród, or Sędziwój of Czechel and so on. However, I second Piotrus that it is necessary to include references or write explanation to such spelling. camdan (talk) 20:00, 19 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The Medieval/Renaissance Latin documents you're reading are heavily inflected by vernacular French and Spanish influences...de does not appear because of Latin, it appears because of that vernacular influence. Latin was debauched at the time. When you understand that, I'll take you seriously. The form Jan de Jani you were insisting upon in the requested move is a later French-influenced form inspired by the French influence of the 19th century so please for the sake of appearing foolish by misquotation, stop quoting statements without their original context.  And "de" doesn't just appear in 19th century Polish names, it's in Russian, Hungarian, Serb, names of th period s well.  The name Jan of Janie which you think is English...doesn't appear in any English language sources, which a quick search of Polish histories on google books, archive.org, and other websites shows. So quite frankly, the burden of proof is on you to establish why the English usage should be retitled to something that apparently by very keen search is not in English usage (per WP:COMMONNAME, WP:MOSPOL--and I know you hated my citation of policy, but after all, Wikipedia has policies for a reason and much to your chagrin, they are relevant). Czy rozumiesz teraz, półgłówek?--ColonelHenry (talk) 01:28, 20 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Translating półgłówek would be "halfbrain" or something similar insulting. I have no intension to answer this. I really don't care about question of spelling in 19th century but what is written in medieval documents. Except your input on Medieval Latin, there is simply nothing of academic value in what you write. camdan (talk) 13:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I suspect that there's just a bit too much frustration on both sides because they are talking cross purposes because someone either simply doesn't understand, or is thick, or simply wants to have their own way. Egos are unhelpful here – they started getting in the way, escalating this to insults and slurs. Back to the subject at hand, I admit to being tired of the incessant talking cross-purposes. It doesn't take much linguistic skill to realise 'de' is, as CH says, from Spanish or French vulgarisation. It is not and cannot be from Latin or Polish. Slavonic tongues' grammatical structure evolved from latin, and they simply decline verbs and nouns and enerally eschew propositions. CH is also correct in saying 'Jan of Janie' is not a recognised English form of the name in any academic text of note. --  Ohconfucius  ping / poke 07:10, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Discussion about prepositon de is closed, I don' se any point of discussig it further, all agruments have benn presented and spelling with de rejected by majority and I simply respect arguments that where stronger than mine. Thats all. Cross talking yes. Discussion about preposition of could be interesting one but I need time to present the arguments for that otherwise it is pointess. camdan (talk) 03:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)