See attached image. I don't think the plurals should look like that but I don't know what they should look like either.
omnii, omnises, omnis' ?
EDIT: DONE. See below for 1.0a5 examples.
Lancea is Latin for lance. Latin inflection rules are complicated. But based on my research, this seems to be nominative first declension, so adjective endings should generally match the noun: "Lancea torquana | Lanceae torquanae" Of course, that's only if it's the subject of the sentence. As an object, it would be "Lanceam torquanam | Lanceas torquanas", and there are a few other cases... Maybe just don't use Latin?
"torquanis" is genitive ("of Tor Quan"), so the plural should be "torquanium" (3rd declension). [Yes, I had to look it up.]
Anyways, I added appropriate plurals. Thank you!
p.s.: "Maybe just don't use Latin?" Where's the fun in that!?
Ah, right, it's not an adjective, it's a genitive noun modifying another noun.
Well, the problem is that the item name strings and itmGetName don't support names being different in different grammatical cases, so there's no way to compose correct sentences with Latin names.
If there are living languages that Transcendence might be translated into that have these kinds of inflection rules, it might be worth supporting. But it would be a lot of work to specify the case in every call, and translators might want to rearrange the sentence in a way that changes the case. Maybe there could special versions of wildcards that call some function on a piece of data (such as an item) passed to the translate function with different arguments, so translators could change how a word is translated without touching the code?
E.g. "%Item|(nominative plural)% can be used..."
I'm fairly sure the first three need appropriate plurals.
Not sure about the last three.
ignis draconis
defensor positronis
telum carnophagus
vindex geni
acutus velo
plasmaphorus jaxi
Enjoy!
Also uncertain regarding the preferred method for reporting these.
Reopening this ticket or starting a new one?
The existing tags may make it confusing.
Do you have a preference?
Fixed all six in 1.8 Beta 3 (VotG Alpha 6). Thanks!
I don't have a strong preference on reopening vs. new tickets. In general I would re-open only if there is important context in the original record. But whatever is most convenient for you is fine with me.