On 23/03/2014 11:22, BPJ wrote: > 2014-03-23 11:16, Pete Bleackley skrev: >> But does "salvete ad linguificalia" make sense? > > Nope, not by my hunches. Linguificia (n.pl.) possibly. > But I'd defer that to Ray! :-) Neither makes sense. Although _salvē_ (plural: salvēte) is used in many contexts where we would use "welcome" in English, it is grammatically the imperative of the the _salvēre_ "to be well, to be in good health." Adding any phrase with _ad_ + acc. is not going to make much sense. If you want to do that then I guess you could use the verb _accipere_ which can, among other things, mean "to welcome", e.g. tē ad lingificiālia accipimus - "we welcome you to conlangery [things].' > Latin didn't really use -ical- that much -- it's English This is NOT an example of a Latin use of -ical-; it's a typo for _linguificialia_. It is perfectly well-formed by Latin standards. I gave the parallel in an earlier email. artifex (gen.: artificis) [m. or f.] = artist, artificer. artificium [n.] = the occupation or practice of an artifex. artificiālis [adj.] of or pertaining to _artificiam_. artificiālia [n.pl.] things conformable to _artificium_. [snip] > > What about a Latinate conlang? > > Benvineud alla Conlengheríe, la transmissiaunete saur > eun lingh chenstreutx e saulli gint chi li fatxáunen. > > [bɪnvɪˈnyd ˌaɽˡə ˌkɔnlɪŋgɪˈɾiə lə ˌtʁãzmɪsjawˈnɛtɪ > ˌsawɾ yn liŋg kɪ̃stˈʁytʃ ɪ ˌsawɽˡɪ ˈdʒint kɪ lɪ > faˈtʃawnɪn] Yet another Romconlang :) > BENE *UENUTOS/-AS AD-ILLA *CONLINGUERIA, ILLA > *TRANSMISSIONITTA SUPER *UNAS LINGUAS CONSTRUCTAS ET > SUPER-ILLAS GENTES QUAS ILLAS *FACTIONANT Dog Latin - woof, woof! > Romlangs -- even natlang ones ;-) -- are quite removed > from Latin They are. > but its way easier to be a modern and speak about modern > things in them! As you can see the literal Latin > 'translation' isn't anything close to Latin! I imagine the Vatican will have a Latin word for 'podcast' should Pope Francis wish to mention them in an encyclical. Tho I notice modern Italian uses the English word :) ======================================================== On 23/03/2014 14:31, Pete Bleackley wrote: > Taking a different tack with my fourth attempt. > > salvete. haec sunt acta linguificalia, quae disceptant > de linguis exstructis eisque qui eas creant. > OK - but stick the missing -i- in _linguificialia_ ;) -- 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".