Real unit names?

[AqD]

Hi all!

I found that many units in RTR-PE don't have correct names - the names called by people at that time, whether by themselves or by others (romans & greeks)

For instance, barbarian names like "XXX warband" or "XXX swordsmen" are certainly incorrect - they didn't use english at that time. Names like germans' "Semnone Sachsaz" are much better and give a more *realistic* feel.

I wonder if RTR 7 will fix that? Or anyone has a patch for *realistic* names? (not necessary to be real )
________
Sexy_Cutie cam

[khshayathiya]

The whole concept of separating detachments according to strict divisions of weaponry is used abusively in RTW and, consequently, in the mods, including RTR. Sure, there were cultures that favoured uniformity of equipment and divided their troops accordingly (Like Rome separating the triarii from the principes and hastati), but that is not a generalised feature. So names like "barbarian swordsmen" are, indeed, abusive. But not as abusive as masquerading to have super-human knowledge and impose some odd-sounding word and pretend that's how the ancients called these troops.

For example, Latin does not have (to my limited knowledge) a word to properly translate as "spearman". The closest thing to that is "hastatus" ("wielder of hasta") and we all know what the hastati used in battle, don't we? Certainly not the spear.

So to my mind, when we do not possess proper ancient terminology (and that happens with most of the units that are outside of Roman or Greek influence), we should stick, in a gesture of decency and humility, to English terms.

[QuintusSertorius]

For example, Latin does not have (to my limited knowledge) a word to properly translate as "spearman". The closest thing to that is "hastatus" ("wielder of hasta") and we all know what the hastati used in battle, don't we? Certainly not the spear.

Well, later hastati didn't, but earlier ones did.

[florin80]

For instance, barbarian names like "XXX warband" or "XXX swordsmen" are certainly incorrect - they didn't use english at that time. Names like germans' "Semnone Sachsaz" are much better and give a more *realistic* feel.

You know doubt have come across the hidden geto-dacian alphabet and mostly lost language. So you`re in the position to translate them.
Sure, the greeks and latin names are ok. And I`d use those for other cultures where we know those units were called like that by latins/greeks at least. It adds some flavor. But for the rest of the units(that just between you and me, are more of creations to suit the game`s engine) I`d rater have english than invent an "ancient" word and claim that as the true only to impress the players with no or mediocre skills in the field. It`s basically "realism" vs. being honest about it.

PS: This is not to say I`m against an add-on that wants to translate any possible name and make big compromises as long as it says what it is. An attempt to rename the units using whatever could be found or created, even if not really true. I`m just against calling it a step forward in the realism field.

[AqD]

You know doubt have come across the hidden geto-dacian alphabet and mostly lost language. So you`re in the position to translate them.
Sure, the greeks and latin names are ok. And I`d use those for other cultures where we know those units were called like that by latins/greeks at least. It adds some flavor. But for the rest of the units(that just between you and me, are more of creations to suit the game`s engine) I`d rater have english than invent an "ancient" word and claim that as the true only to impress the players with no or mediocre skills in the field. It`s basically "realism" vs. being honest about it.

Well, being more *realistic* than being honest is exactly what I meant. It feels better
________
Problems From Avandia

[Tiberius Nero]

Well, being more *realistic* than being honest is exactly what I meant. It feels better

The team's concept of "realism" is the accurate representation of reality to the best of our knowledge. What you are talking about is feel-good fantasy, the kind of realism you get when you have Klingons in Star-Trek babble incoherently and pass it as Klingon language.

[AqD]

But but... what about the names used in EB?
________
Medical marijuana

[Tiberius Nero]

But but... what about the names used in EB?

The Greek and Roman are ok, the Germanic look like knowledgable reconstructions (but that doesn't mean they are historical, i.e. a Germanic speaker of the times would have no idea what you were talking about), the Sarmatian, Armenian and Punic names are really from modern languages of the regions. Can't say about the rest, but I know, we have sketchy knowledge of the related languages to say the least, if any.

[beatoangelico]

The Greek and Roman are ok, the Germanic look like knowledgable reconstructions (but that doesn't mean they are historical, i.e. a Germanic speaker of the times would have no idea what you were talking about), the Sarmatian, Armenian and Punic names are really from modern languages of the regions. Can't say about the rest, but I know, we have sketchy knowledge of the related languages to say the least, if any.

there's a punic language still spoken today? I didn't know

[Brusilov]

the Sarmatian, Armenian and Punic names are really from modern languages of the regions. Can't say about the rest, but I know, we have sketchy knowledge of the related languages to say the least, if any.

there's a punic language still spoken today? I didn't know

What Tiberius Nero posted was that the "Sarmation, Armenian and Punic names are really from modern languages of the regions."

So, to me that means whatever language that is used there now was used. Not that the ancient languages (including Punic) are still spoken there.

[armen]

The Greek and Roman are ok, the Germanic look like knowledgable reconstructions (but that doesn't mean they are historical, i.e. a Germanic speaker of the times would have no idea what you were talking about), the Sarmatian, Armenian and Punic names are really from modern languages of the regions. Can't say about the rest, but I know, we have sketchy knowledge of the related languages to say the least, if any.

Armenian is Armenian no matter what time period we are talking about. Now in that time period Classical Armenian would have been spoken, but it is still Armenian.

[Tiberius Nero]

Armenian is Armenian no matter what time period we are talking about. Now in that time period Classical Armenian would have been spoken, but it is still Armenian.

And the fact that the 3rd century BC Armenian, apart from being almost completely unknown, would probably have looked little like what it looks today doesn't daunt you? Ok, can't argue with that, this is exactly the kind of approach I have noted earlier, and which we will not be taking.

[armen]

And the fact that the 3rd century BC Armenian, apart from being almost completely unknown, would probably have looked little like what it looks today doesn't daunt you? Ok, can't argue with that, this is exactly the kind of approach I have noted earlier, and which we will not be taking.

I know what you are saying. What I was saying is that the language is still Armenian. The earlist form of Armenian that is still used today dates from the 4th century AD. The church language is classical Armenian which dates to the 4th century AD.

Now using modern Armenian for translations, could be looked at in this fashion. For example the Armenian used during 3rd century BC would be the common language of Armenians at that time. Just like modern Armenian is today. So in essence if one lived during that time frame and spoke Armenian they wont consider it "classical armenian" it would be just regular Armenian. So translating in modern Armenian gives a sense of what the language would have been like for Armenians in the 3rd century BC. it would have been just regular modern Armenian.

I am not arguing with you. I also understand your argument. I am just giving a diffrent point of how one can look at the translations

[Clearchus of Sparta]

Have you tried to find any of these unit names yourself? If you can provide sources or references, we will gladly take a look at them.

[khshayathiya]

Where did he say that?

[florin80]

Nowhere, obviously.

[beatoangelico]

the Sarmatian, Armenian and Punic names are really from modern languages of the regions

"obviously?"
or he said that the punic names in EB are taken from modern languages in Tunisia and Lebanon? And the sarmatians in today Russia spoke an Iranian language now extinct too. Those names are taken fron modern Russian or Persian, do they?

[florin80]

What he meant as far as I can see is that the names were taken from modern languages that are related to the extinct ones. Like modern osettian for sarmatians. In fact read here:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showp...5&postcount=21
As you can see, noone was bashing anything or making things up. It was a discussion on different approaches of the matter.

or he said that the punic names in EB are taken from modern languages in Tunisia and Lebanon?

He didn`t say that either. Please, use your youthfull enthusiasm on something else than trolling. Nobody wants that here.

[khshayathiya]

Although this is none of our business (the names of EB units are entirely at their discretion and if they decided to call a unit Mickey Mouse or Donald the Duck we would have no right to question their decision), I think the Sarmatian units are called in Ossetian and the Punic in Hebrew. Now, the historical expansion of the Scythians did cover the Caucasus (at least according to Herodotos). As for the Punic names, I think (but I am by no means sure) that the names are in Hebrew which, in its modern incarnation, is heavily influenced from the point of view of the vocabulary by Arabic, language also spoken - among other places - in Tunisia. That is - in many more, but unnecessary words - what Tiberius Nero said.

[Tiberius Nero]

That is - in many more, but unnecessary words - what Tiberius Nero said.

Obviously not that unnecessary after all...