quōmodo ___ in aliīs linguīs appellātur?

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

Is it better to say:

"Quōmodo tabernāculum in aliīs linguīs appellātur?"

or

"Quōmodo tabernāculum in aliīs linguīs dīcitur?"

(or some other better phrasing?)

(with possible short answers, for example:
anglice: tent
russice: пала́тка)

Also, I am not sure if I should put the word in question ('tabernāculum', in this case) in quotation marks because it can be argued that I am asking how a specific object or idea (represented by a word) is called in other languages. What do you think?

[bedwere]

Both are fine, I guess. Quotation marks are a modern invention, but maybe they help the students. The same could be said of many other punctuation symbols.

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

Thank you! What if the word in question is a person's name? For example:

"Quōmodo Iācōbus in aliīs linguīs appellātur?"/ "Quōmodo Iācōbus in aliīs linguīs dīcitur?"

(With possible short answers:
anglice: James
russice: Яков)

Is it better in this case to use 'appellātur' instead of 'dīcitur'? Or there is no difference?

[bedwere]

You should take all my answers "cum grānō salis." But appello:

appellare gives a new predicate to the subject, while nominare only designates it by name, without a qualifying word;

So maybe dicitur is safer. In any case, I recommend checking Smith & Hall: English-Latin dictionary and then double-checking with Lewis & Short.

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

Wouldn't a corresponding word in another language give a word being translated a new predicate?

Also I remembered the title of this book from 1252 about Mongols:
Historia Mongolōrum quōs nōs Tartarōs appellāmus.

What do you think?

[Laurentius Mons]

In this context, I believe it should be "aliis linguis", not "in aliis linguis".

Have a look at this sentence by Tiro, cited by Aulus Gellius: "Pluere autem Graeca lingua ὕειν dicitur." (Noctes Atticae 13.9)

[Siegfried Zaytsev]

Thank you, Laurentius Mons, for the reference.