On 22/03/2014 12:01, BPJ wrote: > To begin with it's certainly "linguificium" Yes. > if not "glossopoësiam". "Ficatum" means 'stuffed with > figs' y'know! :) > Since everything Greek is fair game in Latin I feel > glossopoea/glossopoësis/-sia, glossopoëta and > glossopoema to be felicitous terms. If a Greek-derived form is preferred, I would argue for _glossopoeia_. http://www.carolandray.plus.com/Glosso/Glossopoeia.html#derivation [snip] > "Bene ueniti" doesn't sound right, or at least not > Classical, though I'm too far from my books to look it up > ATM It's not right in any sort of Latin! Mainly because _veniti_ (or _ueniti_) ain't Latin. ============================================================ On 22/03/2014 12:18, François Rémond wrote: > I would think it is syntaxically correct, No, it isn't. There are several syntactic errors. [snip] > More idiomatically, One could say something like : > > - bene veniti estis --> bene venistis (a form of > greeting attested in medieval latin charts) The perfect participle of _venire_ is, in fact, VENTUM - and, as the verb is intransitive, the perfect participle may be used *only* impersonal constructions, e.g. ad castrum ventum est - they/people/we [etc.] came to the camp. If you want to use "you are welcome" i.e. You have come well/ vous êtes bien venus - the indeed it is 'bene venistis'. I have no doubt it does occur as a greeting in Medieval Latin. The Classical Latin is _salvete_. [snip] > - I'm not sure the comma would be sufficiently > significant in latin grammar in the sentence > "linguificatum, orationem per interrete...", to mean > "Conlangery *which is* the Podcast...". Comma is OK. [snip] > - For the last part of of the sentence, I think the > natural latin form would be more synthetic : Why not try > something like " et de creatoribus eorum" instead of " > et de hominibus qui eum creant" ? _hominibus qui ..._ is not natural. It sounds as though you want to single out only humans who create languages :) The idiomatic Latin is simply: eis qui ... But _eum_ is completely wrong. It's singular masculine; _lingua_ (language) is feminine, and we want the plural. the pronoun should be _eas_. ============================================================ On 22/03/2014 13:10, Siva Kalyan wrote: > My attempt: > > Tē salvēre jubēmus, quī ad nostrās ōrātiōnēs dē fictūrā > linguārum eārumque fictōribus auscultandum vēnistī. > > Literally: "We bid you to be healthy, (you) who have > come to listen to our speeches about the invention of > languages and about their (i.e. the languages') > inventors." This is nice, and is not obviously Latin "translationese" :) But in the _ad+gerund(ive) construction, we need the gerundive here as the verb is transitive, so: .... quī ad nostrās ōrātiōnēs ... auscultandās. _Tē salvēre jubēmus_ could, of course, be simply _salve_ :) It should be noted that in Siva's version "you" is singular. Peter's version implies he wants "you" to be plural. If so then amend it thus: Vōs salvēre jubēmus/ Salvētē, quī ad nostrās ōrātiōnēs dē fictūrā linguārum eārumque fictōribus auscultandās vēnistis. -- Ray ================================== http://www.carolandray.plus.com ================================== "Ein Kopf, der auf seine eigene Kosten denkt, wird immer Eingriffe in die Sprache thun." [J.G. Hamann, 1760] "A mind that thinks at its own expense will always interfere with language".