Re: other questions

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 2/16/03 9:12:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
smithjb@levee.wustl.edu writes:

<< According to Peter himself (this conversation was a while ago, 
 however), he was thinking of the Lammers family as an entity (what is that, 
 a collective singular?) rather than as a plural group.  I am, I am sure, 
 killing this in a linguistic sense with respect to terminology, but 
 hopefully the gist is clear.  Peter is pretty well schooled in Latin, and 
 from what he has told me regarding this issue, I think I recall him saying 
 he consciously choose _lammersi_ because of the way he was viewing the name 
 Lammers. >>

I would deny this, because in the very first conversation I had with Peter 
about this, he made no such assertion. He simply said some thing like, "Oh 
oh." Only later did he think up the singular noun business. As I noted 
elsewhere, had he used "lammersorum" to begin with, nobody would have tried 
to emend it to "lammersi" on the basis that "Lammers family" is a singulat 
entity!