Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2012 August 15

= August 15 =

"Adepti...Regna Celestia potiti"
Latin inscription on a gravestone "Adepti...Regna Celestia potiti". The general sense is clear (something about having attained the kingdom of heaven) but I'm not sure I have it quite right. Can someone confidently give a good translation? - Jmabel &#124; Talk 05:22, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd go for "gained possession of/obtained the kingdom of heaven", but that is far from confident. Lectonar (talk) 13:19, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I assume this is the Pantheon of Asturian Kings, which says the rest of the inscription is illegible. Unless we knew what the rest of it said, it's hard to make any more sense of it than that. It probably said something like "here lie the kings of Asturias, who have won and obtained the kingdom of heaven". Adam Bishop (talk) 14:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I would render regna celestia as "heavenly realms" - it's neuter plural (unless there's a late feminine singular regna, which I'm not aware of, but wouldn't surprise me). --ColinFine (talk) 16:27, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I thought it would be referring to the concept of "kingdom of heaven". If that's the object of "potiti" then it should be in the ablative...but then the Visigoths aren't really known for the high quality Latin. Adam Bishop (talk) 20:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The weird thing is that adepti and potiti both seem to mean obtained. I would agree with Lectonar and say "apparently" before any offered translation.  There probably is an accepted translation, although the Spanish article doesn't seem to give it.  If further advice is needed we could ask them. μηδείς (talk) 02:52, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is for Pantheon of Asturian Kings. Based on discussion here, I've ended up writing 'It is impossible to know exactly what the inscription may have originally said, but Regna Celestia is "the Kingdom of Heaven" and adepti and potiti both mean "obtained" or "attained",' which seems safe enough. In my experience, the Spanish-language Wikipedia usually leaves Latin inscriptions untranslated, which I guess is a half-reasonable policy for a Romance language, but is clearly inappropriate for English, where many of our readers will have little or no Latin. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 05:44, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Heh, if you want to have some fun, address an unlettered Spanish speaker in Latin. They will be totally flummoxed, since it will sound like Spanish but not make any sense, kind of like Durwood Fincher or Prisencolinensinainciusol. μηδείς (talk) 21:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)

Double posted
I was watching a documentary about the Zodiac Killer. In the film, it mentions how the killer mailed letters to various newspaper editors. The film states that the letters were "double posted". What exactly does that mean? And why would that detail be significant enough to mention in the documentary? I could be wrong, but I am assuming that the phrase "double posted" means that the envelope had not one – but two – stamps on it. If I am correct, I don't see how or why that detail is worth mentioning. Who would care about that? What am I missing? Or does the phrase have some other meaning? Here is a link to the documentary on You Tube: Cold Case Files - The Zodiac Killer. The use of the phrase in question occurs at about the 6:56 time mark in the film. Thank you. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * One meaning of 'post' is "send via the postal system", thus 'double posted' means two copies of the same letter were sent. This may be because the sender wanted to make sure the message arrived or to indicate the urgency of its contents. - Lindert (talk) 21:53, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Hmmmmmm ... I never thought of that. Did you watch that section of the film, however?  The video portion – in conjunction with the audio narration – seems to imply that the envelope had two stamps instead of one.  But, I am not really sure.  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * No, I haven't watched the film, so I can't comment on that, sorry. Just watched the section. I can understand the timing of the narration to seem to have significance with regards to the stamps, but shortly after that, a picture of a different letter is shown (both are addressed to 'S.F. Chronicle, San Francisco Calif.', so I do think they did mean to say that two letters were sent. - Lindert (talk) 22:01, 15 August 2012 (UTC)


 * In either case, little oddities like these are exactly what can get the perp caught. Let's say they knew the Zodiac Killer always put double postage on each letter, "just in case".  Then, once they had a suspect, if they found he did that with all the letters he sent, that would be fairly strong circumstantial evidence, as very few people do that. StuRat (talk) 02:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I haven't watched the film, but perhaps what was said was "double postage" (i.e., twice the normal amount of postage) rather than "double posted". — Cheers, Jack Lee  –talk– 06:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * No, the voiceover clearly says "The missive is double posted". Moreover, he says these words at the exact same time the camera is focussing on the two 6-cent stamps in the upper right corner of the letter.  I'm guessing the normal postage rate in the US in 1968 was 6 cents, not 12 cents.  If someone could confirm this, it would make perfect sense.  It's very uncommon for people to spend more than they need for postage, particularly 100% more.  The minutest detail is taken into consideration in criminal investigations, and this is a very obvious candidate for taking notice of.  Sorry, Lindert, but I cannot share your interpretation.  There may have been later letters, but the words "double posted" were clearly referring only to the one at 6:56. --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  08:33, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right, according to History of United States postage rates, the rate for a simple letter was 0.06 in 1968; so apparently, this was the intended meaning. However, I just am not aware of this usage of the verb 'to post', and neither can I find it in any dictionary. - Lindert (talk) 11:20, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Going by the video, 'double-posted' seems to mean 'having two stamps on it', presumably twice the amount required to send a single piece of paper. I can only guess as to what would be the purpose of doing this. But it strikes me it might be a way of 'signing' the letter, i.e. making it apparent that Zodiac indeed sent it. (If he 'double-posted' all his letters concerning his murders, it would mean that potential copy-cat notes could be identified, depending on how much info on the note was divulged in media, as copy-cat notes would lack certain traits, such as being 'double-posted'.) V85 (talk) 12:25, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * (ec) I'm assuming it's a made-up-on-the-spot back-formation from "double postage", where "postage" refers not to the submission of a letter for transmission, but to the affixing of stamps of an appropriate value to a letter. Mail is sometimes returned to sender, or withheld from the recipient, because the sender forgot to put stamps on, or put on stamps of an inadequate value.  The intended recipient gets the letter as soon as the postage is paid.  --  ♬  Jack of Oz  ♬  [your turn]  12:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Thanks. So we all seem to agree that the term "double posted" means "the envelope has two stamps, not just one".  But, why is this so significant that they would mention it and highlight it in the narration?  A criminal investigation goes through a lot of minutiae and many details.  But, why is this detail emphasized so strongly?  Particularly in a TV show that is merely intended for general audiences, not for detectives working the case?  Any thoughts?  As to why this is important enough that the documentary producers emphasized it so strongly?  And, as to why the killer did this?  Thanks.  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 14:18, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I guess it's just a detail that they could elaborate on, even if its meaning remains unclear. However, they don't spend that much time discussing it, compared to the amount of time used to discuss the code inside the letter, or the crossed out circle. I think it would've been the same if he had used pink envelopes. That the envelope is pink doesn't change the content of the letter, or how it's delivered, but it is still something that would make a letter stand out, and something 'people' would find interesting, even if we don't know the motive. V85 (talk) 15:38, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Also, by the way ... what happens when a letter has no postage (or insufficient postage), but contains no return address? Does it still get forwarded to the intended recipient?  Is the intended recipient "forced" to pay the postage?  Or does the letter simply get "thrown away" or "filed away" somewhere (since it cannot be returned to the sender, without a return address)?  Thanks.  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 14:23, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I have received mail in the past that had no return address and insufficient postage, and the post office made me pay for it. Just as with registered mail I received a pick-up notice in the mailbox, with the message 'insufficient postage', and I had to pick it up at my local post office and pay the missing postage + fee.) My guess would be that it's similar also in other countries, but I guess that it might vary. In the end, the post office make money from delivering mail, if the sender doesn't pay up, why not try to coax it out of someone else? If the receiver doesn't show either, I guess it might get 'filed' or simply binned. V85 (talk) 15:38, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Article is postage due... AnonMoos (talk) 15:41, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

The term to post a stamp is common. To post can mean to affix as in a billboard or a WANTED sign, which is the likely sense. (It can also mean to pay, as in post bail. OED, ) The fact that they are called post offices (from their origin as relay posts where horses traded messages to be delivered) and the use of the term to post a stamp may just be coincidence or possibly semantic contamination. μηδείς (talk) 18:11, 16 August 2012 (UTC)


 * In response to the question of why someone would put twice the postage on the letter, it may be that the sender wasn't sure if they were over the weight limit for a letter and therefore put on twice the postage just to make sure it got there. I've done this myself when sending several sheets of paper and I don't want to go to the bother of going to the post office to have it weighed.  It's simpler just put put on another stamp and drop it in my own mailbox for the mailman to pick up.  Also, a serial killer wouldn't want to have the possibility of being identified by the post office staff when they get the letter weighed.  Dismas |(talk) 03:01, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes, I thought of that. But I think that, in this case, the letters were only one or perhaps two pages.  Nothing that would trigger a concern for extra postage.  As far as I can remember about the case, that is.  Thanks.  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:06, 20 August 2012 (UTC)