Rewarding the best answers of the second half of 2017

Question

The voting period has ended. Thanks for everyone taking part, and congratulations to cnread, Draconis, brianpck, and Tom Cotton!

---

What were the best answers of the second quarter (July–December) of 2017? Nominate your favorites and vote on other people's suggestions! To nominate an answer, simply post it an answer to this question with a link and brief description of the answer. You can nominate as many answers as you want.

The nominated answers must have been originally posted in one of these six months. To get you started, here is a search for all answers from this period with positive score. The answer doesn't have to be accepted, and it doesn't matter if it has already received a bounty.

Everyone is invited to nominate and vote! After about three weeks (February 3, but I make no promise about the exact time), the three nominations with the highest scores on this meta post will be declared the winners. The three winning answers will be rewarded with bounties of 100 reputation points each, from the personal reputation stashes of the moderators. (If the scores are tied, we will reward at least two three¹ answers and give out at least 300 reputation in some way.)

Of course, anyone with 75 or more reputation is free to reward any answer they like at any time. Consider this contest also as an opportunity to highlight some hidden gems that received few votes but are excellent in quality.

Previous similar events: Best of 2016, Best of first quarter of 2017, Best of second quarter of 2017. Based on an earlier chat discussion, we will probably continue these events annually, not quarterly.

---

¹ I made a copy-and-paste error and wrote "two" instead of "three". We will reward at least three answers, no matter what.

Answer 1

I'd like to nominate cnread's answer to the question "different levels of friends".

It's a clear and full answer, with lots of quotations to illustrate the vocabulary. Moreover, the excerpts are well-chosen, highlighting the comparative aspect of the terminology, thereby adding context and nuance to their meaning.

Answer 2

The answer by Draconis to the question why sequundus > secundus but not equus > ecus was a missing piece in a puzzle I had long held in my head. After the explanation of sound changes and spelling analogies it all started making sense. (There is also an unanswered follow-up question, in case anyone is knowledgeable on the topic.)

Answer 3

I would like to nominate brianpck's answer to the question "are there classical examples of the imperative patere?".

I like how this not only answers the question but along the way also gives excellent pointers on how one might do a corpus search generally. It's the answer that keeps on giving!

Answer 4

I nominate Tom Cotton's answer to the question about comparing omnes, cuncti, and universi. It is short and simple, but that's what makes it valuable: I have not seen the differences and nuances explained in such a concise and clear way elsewhere, and now I feel I grasp it.

Answer 5

A late entry, but I really like Penelope's answer to the question, Are there any Roman/Latin equivalents of the English interjections um, huh, uh, etc.?

Great use of ancient sources to provide a variety of options!