--- Christian Thalmann wrote:

> Although I get the feeling that Jovian is still far above my league
> (being pretty much an ignorant at Latin), I've fashioned a preliminary
> translation of the Pater Noster into Jovian.
> I'm not too fond of the look of the written text (it looks complicated
> and plagiarized from Latin =P), but it sound better when spoken out
> loud.

Well, as I wrote earlier, I like the look of the language, although in this
case you are right: it looks perhaps a bit too much like Latin. That must be
because you apply most sound changes to the pronunciation only, while most of
the old Latin orthography remains intact.

> As always, feedback is much welcomed.  =P

There is one thing that I sort of disagree with. The first line reads: "Noter
pazer in coelo", but this is a deviation of the original text, that I have
never seen before. The sentence in Latin is: "Pater noster qui es in coelis"
(Our Father, who art in heaven).
Is there any particular reason for replacing the subordinate sentence by just
two words: "in coelo"?


"Originality is the art of concealing your source." - Franklin P. Jones

Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts