Talk:Salve Regina

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Saints Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saints, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christian liturgical calendars on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SaintsWikipedia:WikiProject SaintsTemplate:WikiProject SaintsSaints articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Catholicism Mid‑importance Salve Regina is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Catholicism task list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles Songs This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles

Calling all Latinists! Should we use the forms "Jesum" or "Iesum" and "Ea" or "Eja"? Thanks!! ~ Dpr 02:55, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My vote is "Jesum", "eia", and "alleluja". PaulGS 22:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll compromise. 'Jesum' and 'Jesse' and thus for proper nouns - it's not unusual to see a capital J for proper nouns. On the other hand, 'eia', 'cuius' and 'alleluia' are far more common than 'eja', 'cuius' and 'alleluja'. While I can live with a J at the beginning of words, it does seem odd to use J in medial position for consonantal I - particularly in the case of genitive 'eius' and 'cuius', as this sets up an inconsistency with the datives 'ei' and 'cui'. InfernoXV 03:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on the books you use. Mine have "cujus" and "alleluja", although the 1962 Missal and Breviary, as well as the books for the post-Vatican II rite use "i" exclusively. I don't mind "alleluia", since that's also the usual English spelling, but I find "eius" odd. There should probably be a policy on this, perhaps something similar to the one on British vs. American spelling. Personally, I'd prefer to use "i" for classical texts and "j" for Ecclesiastical Latin, and "v" everywhere unless there's a really good reason for using "u". PaulGS 05:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't dispute the use of"v" at all - it's a useful distinction, and all the church books I've seen have it. On the other hand, most of my liturgical books have "eius" and "cuius". My Liber has "ejus" and "alleluia", for what it's worth. The use of J for consonantal I in medial positions is nowhere universal even among texts from the post classical period. Also, Latin wikipedia has I in all medial positions. I don't really mind J in initial positions, but if we're going to talk about what we subjectively find odd, "ejus" and "cujus" is extremely odd to me.InfernoXV 10:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it depends on which books you're used to. The ones I use most often use "alleluja" and "ejus", although my 1911 Breviary (before the reforms of St. Pius X) has "alleluia", but "j" everywhere else. But if you're used to more recent books, then you'll find "i". PaulGS 02:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brush up your Aramaic, anyone? ;\) LeadSongDog (talk) 20:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My authority is as a student of mediaeval and renaissance latin at the Warburg Institute. Although you are of course welcome to use whatever floats your boat in an adorative context, strictly speaking the J only arrived in common usage in the 16th century, after a short period in use in numerals. A case can be made for its derivation from earlier Germanic phonemes, but the real responsibility for its adoption lies with Queen Elizabeth I, who spent her years of house arrest at Hatfield under her sister Queen Mary I studying Latin poetry. Deriving a number of conclusions about the phonetic structure of classical Latin, distinctly from the contemporary Language, she also removed it from the Protestant liturgy,and so created a phonetic peculiarity which persists to this day by comparison with European Catholicism, most noticeably in the European "w" sound versus (or wersus!) the English "v". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.41.133.218 (talk) 07:56, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Why does English Wikipedia need Polish and Aremnian translations of Salve Regina? Are they not really only suited to Polish and Armenian versions? When will this stop? Will there be Swedish, Japenese, Hungarian, French, Korean, Turkish and 20 different translations on this page?

Unless there are good arguments otherwise, I will delete all others except Latin and English. Please clarify why these others make sense at all. Thanks History2007 (talk) 13:14, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the page is well-formatted, I don't see a problem with keeping additional translations: Some English readers might find other translations worth perusing, and I doubt the additional text would be a burden on Wikipedia's servers. (By well-formatted, I mean that I don't see why there would be a problem with putting additional translations at the end of the article -- then there could be a translation for every language on the planet.) If the extraneous information -- but perhaps interesting to someone -- is at the end of the article, what problem is there? -- Newagelink (talk) 13:00, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If a user wants the French/Polish/X version, all they need to do is to click on the French/Polish/X menu on the left and it will lead them to French Wikipedia immediately where they can read the French version. Is English Wikipedia going to provide/duplicate French text throughout just because the servers can handle it? I am sure that is not the case. History2007 (talk) 13:09, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That audio file is horrid. The latin sounds like some lost Cockney asking for directions in the Via Appia. I mean seriously, it's bad to the point of embarrassment. Can't we get someone with a smidgen of Vulgar latin prowess to record it? §FreeRangeFrog 23:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem to me some of the external links meet the criteria specified in

. Specifically, the ones linking to performances and prayers "that may include the Salve Regina".

Any thoughts? — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 19:55, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a very deep through: Aaaaaaaaaaaaah! This is just not this page, Wikipedia is the new Craigslist. Everyone adds links and unless there are auto-block filters, they will overrun the system. I did not even bother deleting those - but just do it. History2007 (talk) 20:00, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Basilica of Notre Dame at Avioth, in North Eastern France, claims to be the site of the Bernardine claim, during a journey to nearby Orval, possibly in 1132. This is the foundation of its promotion to the rank of Basilica in 1993, so it would seem to be safe to update the original Catholic Encyclopaedia version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.41.133.218 (talk) 09:05, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Legends attributed it either to St. Anselm of Lucca (d. 1080) or St. Bernard." Besides its words being taken verbatim, this sentence is a misinterpretation of a statement in https://www.ewtn.com/library/MARY/07168A.HTM. Just remove?

Also, please compare the following section to its source at Catholic Encyclopedia, http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13409a.htm.

"One legend relates that, while the saint was acting as legate Apostolic in Germany, he entered (Christmas Eve, 1146) the cathedral to the processional chanting of the anthem, and, as the words "O clemens, O pia, O dulcis Virgo Maria" were being sung, genuflected thrice.^[1]

"However, the authorship is now generally ascribed to Hermann of Reichenau. Durandus, in his "Rationale", ascribed it to Petrus of Monsoro (d. about 1000), Bishop of Compostela. It has also been attributed to Adhémar, Bishop of Podium (Puy-en-Velay), whence it has been styled "Antiphona de Podio" (Anthem of Le Puy). Adhémar was the first to ask permission to go on the crusade, and the first to receive the cross from Pope Urban II. "Before his departure, towards the end of October, 1096, he composed the war-song of the crusade, in which he asked the intercession of the Queen of Heaven, the Salve Regina". He is said to have asked the monks of Cluny to admit it into their office, but no trace of its use in Cluny is known before the time of Peter the Venerable, who decreed (about 1135) that the anthem should be sung processionally on certain feasts.^[1]" Fishlandia (talk) 20:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please note, the Catholic Encyclopedia is public domain.

talk) 05:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Didn't the film feature a setting of this?109.145.59.143 (talk) 23:54, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The prayer said Jesum, but there are not 'J's in Latin, except for that one time that St. John Paul II said there is when he signed his name in Latin. :D But seriously though, there aren't 'J's in Latin so I fixed it to 'Iesum.' 2600:4040:A194:7000:DD4C:C1F2:5DBF:5383 (talk) 22:03, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]