English translation of "adlectio"?

[D B Campbell]

specialist usage does not make it 'correct'

Of course, the fact that Anglophone Classicists have been using the word "adlected" to translate the Latin term adlectus since at least 1913 (G.L. Cheesman, JRS vol. 3) does not necessarily make it "right". But it's jolly handy for Roman specialists.
Edit: Actually, given the way that language develops, sustained usage over a period of a century probably does make it right!

As I said before, I'm sure nobody would quibble if Jona used "enrolled" on his web site as an alternative. The Germans appear to render the concept of adlectio by using the verb "aufnehmen" (e.g. W. Eck, Die Statthalter der germanischen Provinzen: "Wahrscheinlich wurde Statianus von Hadrian in der Senatorenstand aufgenommen", p. 59).

'prosopography' is not in the Oxford dictionary either, ...

I don't know what edition you're using, but mine says:

Prosopography, n.
A study or description of an individual's life, career, etc.; esp. a collection of such studies focusing on the public careers and relationships of a group in a particular place and period; a collective biography. As a mass noun: the study of such descriptions, esp. as an aspect of classical history; such studies or histories as a genre.

Incidentally, it also has "descriptivist" and "prescriptivist"!

[Paullus Scipio]

Alas, mine, like its owner is getting a little long in the tooth ! It is the 1975 edition......so somewhat dated !! oops:

However I can't justify the expense of 'updating' it, merely to incorporate mostly specialist and ultra-modern terms ( such as 'googled' and other I.T. words), and especially not at todays prices !! ( mine cost me £25-00 for the set, then ! ) :roll: :evil:

And of course, even if such rarefied and specialist words are now 'officially' sanctioned, it does not alter the fact that they are not widely known, even to native English speakers. Plain English is best !

[egfroth]

You can do this in English too, though it is rarely used nowadays ! Here is a famous military example by the Duke of Wellington at Waterloo in a scribbled order, written under fire, yet perfectly grammatically correct: "..when the roof will have fallen in, you must...." - a description of a future event in past tense! (future perfect tense)

Grammatically correct, but a bit clumsy. Nowadays we'd just say "When the roof has fallen in, you must . . ." and lose almost none of the sense - the future is "understood".

One thing that gets me is the "American conditional" - for example "If I would have gone to the shop. . ." Just sounds wrong.

Here in Oz, we'd either say "If I'd gone to the shop . . ." or if we were being pedantic "Had I gone to the shop . . ."