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 ( 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 [] things conformable to _artificium_.

> 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    :)


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_  ;)

"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".