Talk:Attero Dominatus

Untitled

It doesn't mean "Attack, Dominate" -- if it did, both words would be in the imperative form. This would require replacing "Dominatus" with a verb, as well: i.e, "Atterate Dominate" or "Attere Domine". Even if the words were simply put down together (i.e. "Attack Dominate") then they would at least match cases -- the -o ending of "Attero" and the -us ending of "Dominatus" do not match. Thus, it is a phrase, even if it can't be simplified to stupidity like you feel the need to. My best guess as to the meaning is that "Dominatus" (meaning tyranny, as said) is metonymic for the 3rd Reich and "Attero" to attacking or destroying.

Perhaps Sabaton put a bit more thought into this than simply stapling words together, eh? 68.253.136.127 22:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Probably not, since "Attero" ; "Dominatus" is just what you'd get if you took the first word out of an English-Latin dictionary for 'destroy' (or some similar word) and then 'absolute power, tyranny'- Attero is the first principle part and thus first dictionary cited form of Atterere, and Dominatus is also the cited dictionary form. If you were translating word for word from a dictionary from english to latin without understanding latin grammar, that's what would result for 'Destroy Tyranny' 75.102.128.131 (talk) 01:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

I removed this because it seems like original research and way too in depth for an album title. and anyway I assumed it was just "Attack, Dominate" rather than a sentence.

"Attero Dominatus" is a phrase in Latin which can be roughly translated as "I wear down the tyranny"; Attero meaning "rub, rub against; grind; chafe; wear out/down/away; diminish, impair; waste" and Dominatus most likely meaning "rule, mastery, domain; tyranny". This is assuming 'dominatus' is a noun; if it is taken as a perfect passive participle, it could mean either "I wear down the tyrannized" or "I, tyrannized, wear down" (the discrepency here is due to the 4th declension nature of dominatus: the 4th declension ending for singular nominative is the same as the plural accusative ending).130.88.181.150 18:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

I tend to agree. Considering the title track is in reference to the Battle of Berlin and all that. 68.171.68.228 (talk) 23:03, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

I also agree, but want to point out that dominatus has to be plural accusative, which makes the clause is a simple statement "I fight tyrannies" (which also suits the context). Please note that the source quoted for the translation "Fight tyrrany!" is a simple music review giving this translation without any discussion. In particular, it does not support any claims that this is imperative indeed the intended meaning that has been translated wrongly into latin. Rather, I would suggest to treat this back-translation of the reviewer as being wrong and take the original "attero dominatus" as the starting point of any discussion. Which leaves us with "I fight tyrannies", in my opinion. --MB D (talk) 08:09, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Addition: The interpretation of attero dominatus as "I fight tryrannies" is also supported by the subsequent "denique interimo" which is also in the first person indicative and simply means "Finally, I kill". --MB D (talk) 08:09, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

The translation was changed to your proposed "I fight tyrannies" in January, by an IP user, perhaps that was you? Then it was changed to something else entirely, "wasteful domination" in June. I have seen no substance at all for the last claim so when reviving the article from being a redirect today, I've gone back to "I fight tyrannies". The problem is we still don't have a source for the (presumed) correct translation, and in my opinion the opening part of the sentence, which refers to the opinion of a music reviewer on what the title is intended to mean, is also not ideal. As far as sourcing the translation goes, I'm not sure if there's a wiki policy for this, but the chance of finding a reputable, independent source translating the specific phrase seems relatively small. At the same time, offering some insight into the Latin title of an album is clearly helpful to readers, and not unlikely a key piece of info sought after. What's the best way to handle this?Laanders (talk) 14:30, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:17022.jpg

Image:17022.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 03:55, 12 February 2008 (UTC)