I think that Latin is not a “dead” language, but an evolved one: it lives in all current roman languages, in our international scientific vocabulary and in a very big lot of common expressions we usually say, when we talk or write, like “de facto”, “ipso facto”, “de re”, “in re”, “in iure”, “a priori”, “a posteriori”, “a diuinis”, “ab initio”, “ex aequo”, “ad hoc”, “ad hominem”, “ad absurdum”, “ante meridiem” (a.m.), “post meridiem” (p.m.), “condicio sine qua non”, “mea culpa”, “nihil obstat”, etc., etc.

I infer that using Latin in your title, you want to give a taste of authority to your paper or perhaps a kind of “grauitas”, it is, a certain degree of seriousness. Therefore, I suggest you to change a little bit the English title proposed by J. Burke, adding a more or less common expression in Latin: “The linguistic representation of prejudice ante et post rem cognitam”. I think that everybody will be able to understand the title, without using Latin dictionaries.

"Correct" is relative. My grandfather's dissertation was "De consonantibus quae laryngophoni vocantur, praecipue quod ad linguam antiquam Graecam attinet". As IE laryngeal theory didn't exist until long after Latin was a dead language, there is no way that this title can be "correct". Have you taken Latin composition? Anyway, the Latin title should be all Latin or the Latin portion clearly demarcated from the rest, so as to make the inflection/conjugation of lexemes accurate.

Latin continued to be used in scholarship long after it ceased being a language that people spoke natively, so it wasn't totally dead. Andrew's grandfather's Latin puts virtual quotation marks around the word "laryngophoni", and scholars would have understood that it was a neologism. Unfortunately, your Latin title doesn't make sense. What is the missing end of the word ante-? Caesar uses posteaquam certiores but certiores is an adjective and so it needs a noun; in Caesar it is nuntii, messengers/news/information, but there isn't a noun in your title. Whatever Latin you might cook up, it will be unfamiliar to scholars as there is no common Latin expression for the situation. Could I suggest something like "The linguistic representation of prejudice before and after knowledge of the facts"?

Thanks to both of you for your attention.

Then, I prefer to replace the Latin part with English words.

I would go with the English words a you state you prefer. Despite being a dead language, Latin (as I'm sure you know) has been in continual use since the fall of the Roman Empire (whereas Greek required rediscovery, and the help from Arabic texts that were translations of otherwise lost Greek texts, among other issues). I don't know about you, but given the time since I was tested on composition and the lack of practice, I have a lot more faith in my ability to read Latin than to render it (a task that is in general more difficult). This, combined with what seems to me to be the unnecessary inclusion of "the Latin part" when "English words" would due just fine, makes me think that your decision is a good one (not that my opinion matters, obviously, but if we pretend it does I think your use of Mr. Burke's excellent suggestion is the way to go).

Yes. I wanted to have a more prestigious title like __ He defended his dissertation summa cum laude __ (with highest honor). I know that phrase like cum laude, magna cum laude, and summa cum laude have found their place in academic circles. But my invented title seems to make no sense. So I'll use the English title as suggested by Mr. Burke.

Thank you!

Thank you!

Shouldn't that be more like: Preiudicium et linguisticae eius repraesentationes antequam postquamque receptionem certiorum de re nuntiorum? Not that I think any journal editor should accept neo-latin article titles ...

I think the right latin terms for your purpose and the intended antithesis are the  expressions 'a priori' and 'a posteriori'... so commonly used in scientific writing as 'summa cum laude'. 

Non tamen sum in anglica lingua adeo expertus ut tibi totam sententiam suggerere audeam.

Ave et vale

thank you very much!

I think that Latin is not a “dead” language, but an evolved one: it lives in all current roman languages, in our international scientific vocabulary and in a very big lot of common expressions we usually say, when we talk or write, like “de facto”, “ipso facto”, “de re”, “in re”, “in iure”, “a priori”, “a posteriori”, “a diuinis”, “ab initio”, “ex aequo”, “ad hoc”, “ad hominem”, “ad absurdum”, “ante meridiem” (a.m.), “post meridiem” (p.m.), “condicio sine qua non”, “mea culpa”, “nihil obstat”, etc., etc.

I infer that using Latin in your title, you want to give a taste of authority to your paper or perhaps a kind of “grauitas”, it is, a certain degree of seriousness. Therefore, I suggest you to change a little bit the English title proposed by J. Burke, adding a more or less common expression in Latin: “The linguistic representation of prejudice ante et post rem cognitam”. I think that everybody will be able to understand the title, without using Latin dictionaries.

Thank you Pedro!