Print

Print


> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Bartlett

> Easily readable for those who have some familiarity with Latin
and/or
> Romance languages or any of many, many, many other similar
projects. 
> After all this long time, I wonder why people go to the
trouble of
> creating new languages along the same lines.  The more I think
about
> it, the more I like Latino sine Flexione as a simplification
of the
> major language of the heritage of western civilization.  (I
fully
> admit, however, that it is not a "worldlang" as some have been
using
> the term here.)  Perhaps I should also dust off my copy of
Richardius
> Dominicus's "SPL: an International Language Based on
Simplified
> Latin."  (Admittedly, the better known LsF has better
prospects than
> SPL.)

I like LsF for the creation that it is, but wouldn't advocate
its use as an auxlang.  Latin is still a dead language and I
think it's better to think in modern terms for an auxlang.  A
simplified proto-modern-Romance would make much more sense.
Maybe use the LsF structure, but relex to a pan-Romance
vocabulary.