Print

Print


Je 10.47 ptm 2007.03.19, Dave MacLEOD skribis
>I like that idea but I think slightly less-known romance languages
>would be better for two of them because it's much more likely the
>reader wouldn't have seen them before. Galego or Sardinian might be
>good.

The question would be: are Gallego and Sardinian as at-sight readable 
as e.g. Italian? Spanish and French certainly are not (which is why I 
didn't include them).

>2007/3/20, Donald J. HARLOW <[log in to unmask]>:
>>
>>While we are making this test, let's add to Occidental, Interlingua,
>>the original Novial and Medilingua three other languages: Portuguese,
>>Italian and Catalan. For myself, I generally find Portuguese and
>>Italian as easily readable _a prime vista_ as Interlingua (Occidental
>>is perhaps a bit easier), and my friend Ionel once told me he had the
>>same experience with Catalan. It would be interesting to find out
>>whether Occidental and Interlingua (and other neo-Romance planned
>>languages) offer any real advantages over their Romance precursors in
>>terms of immediate comprehensibility. (*)
>>
>>---
>>
>>(*) In terms of active learnability, of course, there are advantages,
>>most notably in the relatively streamlined grammars of the planned
>>languages. There doesn't seem to be a lot of advantage in the
>>learnability of the vocabularies of any of them, however.
>>
>>
>>
>>-- Don HARLOW
>>http://www.webcom.com/~donh/don/don.html
>>Opinions (in English): http://www.harlows.org/don/opinions/
>>Esperanto (in English): http://www.harlows.org/don/esperanto/
>>Literaturo (Esperante): http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/Literaturo
>
>
>--
>http://wiki.galbijim.com

-- Don HARLOW
http://www.webcom.com/~donh/don/don.html
Opinions (in English): http://www.harlows.org/don/opinions/
Esperanto (in English): http://www.harlows.org/don/esperanto/
Literaturo (Esperante): http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/Literaturo