Print

Print


Paul Bartlett skrev 2014-02-07 18:50:
> On Fri, 07 Feb 2014 08:17:16 
> -0500, Stephen Rice 
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> On 2/3/14, Paul Bartlett 
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 23:12:20 
>>> -0500, Stephen Rice 
>>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote
>>>
>>> [excerpted for brevity]:
>
>>> I have never had the 
>>> opportunity to show extended 
>>> texts of LsF to a "real"
>>> Latinist. It might be 
>>> interesting. Maybe, maybe not 
>>> see LsF as
>>> bastardized, just simplified.
>>
>> I'm reasonably certain Latinists 
>> would view LsF as you do Inlis, and
>> for similar reasons: Why learn 
>> bad Latin? Just learn the regular
>> language!
>
> I grant that this is a 
> possibility. :)
>
>> I'm leaning strongly at this 
>> point toward Latinate 
>> Interlingua rather
>> than LsF. I was going to do a 
>> comparison of the two using the 
>> opening
>> of _Evangelii Gaudium_, but when 
>> I checked the Latin section of the
>> Vatican Website, I couldn't find 
>> the document. So I tried English:
>
>> http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/apost_exhortations/index_en.htm 
>>
>>
>> Notice what's missing: a Latin 
>> version!
>
> Odd, perhaps (or perhaps, not so 
> odd). Now that you mention it, I 
> just did a search myself, 
> including using a search 
> metaengine (Dogpile, that I have 
> better results with sometimes 
> than with Google) and banging on 
> the Vatican website, and I could 
> not find the Latin text anywhere, 
> either, *.va or other.
>
>> About the only advantage to
>> LsF would be the Pope's Latin 
>> tweets, and if they are 
>> essentially the
>> same as his tweets in other 
>> languages, the advantage would be
>> negligible. I've considered 
>> using Interlingua with an 
>> emphasis on its
>> Italo-Latin vocabulary: "also" 
>> would probably be "anque" rather 
>> than
>> "etiam," and certainly not 
>> "tamben." "But" would probably 
>> be "ma"
>> rather than "sed." And so on:
>
> However, the "Italo-Latin 
> vocabulary" would actually be 
> *less* of "Latinate Interlingua," 
> at least to me. Also, there could 
> be significant resistance from 
> those interlinguaists who persist 
> (much to my personal distaste) in 
> trying to make I-gua over into 
> Yet Another Romance Language :@ .
>
>> [...]
>
>> I'm considering a Website with 
>> the tagline "Le Latino Moderne 
>> pro le
>> Ecclesia Eterne," which seems 
>> reasonably elegant.
>
> Yes, I would agree. I no longer 
> receive "Panorama in Interlingua" 
> in the paper version (just 
> online), but as I recall, the 
> mailing envelope used to refer to 
> Interlingua as "Le Latino 
> Moderne." (I suppose this was 
> before David Stark's Latino 
> Moderne, and I don't know whether 
> anyone is still even trying to 
> use the latter.)
>
I found this url for Latino Moderne 
for whatever it is worth:
http://www.oocities.org/athens/3150/latinomoderne.html#nouns

Your interlingua is very similar to 
that of Panorama, which I prefer to 
the mor Romance varieties.

Kjell R