Print

Print


My intention is that Sim-Arabic is ENTIRELY a written language; not a
spoken one. Essentially, it is for translations from literary Arabic.

On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 10:13 AM, Roger Mills <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> --- On *Sun, 2/3/13, R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>* wrote:
>
> (snips)
>
> Two immediate reactions:
> - I really do not like Romanized systems that use a mix of
> upper and lower case; it maybe OK for Klingon, but generally
> I find it off-putting.  The advantages and disadvantages of
> diacritics versus digraphs has often been debated on this
> list. But I would prefer either solution to that of a mixed
>   case system.
>
> RM That was my reaction too. When I have time, I'll try to make some
> specific suggestions.
> --------------------------------------------------------
> - as you can see from my TAKE, if I'm going to simplify a
> language I like to get rid of all inflexions, if possible.
> IMO the so-called "Latino sine flexione" has retained too
> many!  But that is a personal preference, I know.
>
> RM I don't object to a "few" inflections.... I'd have to examine the
> materials more closely, however.  Offhand, I'm not at all sure it's
> necessary to retain the masc/fem differences in the tenses, but that, I
> know, is one of Arabic's features.....
>
> Do I gather (perhaps incorrectly?) that your intention is that Sim-Arabic
> should be primarily a _literary_ rather than a spoken language????
>
>