Taking a different tack with my fourth attempt. salvete. haec sunt acta linguificalia, quae disceptant de linguis exstructis eisque qui eas creant. -- Pete The Fantastical Devices of Pete The Mad Scientist - http://fantasticaldevices.blogspot.com -----Original Message----- From: Siva Kalyan <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 11:14 Subject: Re: Correct my Latin It seems a bit odd to have a plural noun (linguificialia—note spelling) coreferential with a singular noun (disseminatio). Also, I take it you’re trying to say, “Welcome to (the poscast named) ‘Conlangery'”, rather than, “Welcome to (the practice of) conlangery”; in which case you would minimally need a generic noun which can be modified by the proper name; something like, “bene venistis ad catenam auditionum “De rebus linguificialibus”…”. Sent with Mail Pilot On 23 Mar 2014 21:29:43, Pete Bleackley <[log in to unmask]> wrote: 3rd draft, reinstating 2nd person plural, using Ray's suggestion for "conlangery", and using a slightly better (but still rather Lexicon Latinitatis Recentis sounding) translation for "podcast" bene venistis ad linguificalia, disseminationem per interrete de linguis extructis eisque qui eas creant. It may be possible to drop "per interrete" and just use "disseminatio" as a looser but more elegant translation of "podcast". -- Pete The Fantastical Devices of Pete The Mad Scientist - http://fantasticaldevices.blogspot.com -----Original Message----- From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Sent: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 7:36 Subject: Re: Correct my Latin On 22/03/2014 20:28, Siva Kalyan wrote: > I would still go with Ray's correction of my attempt (at > the end of his e-mail below): Salvētē, quī ad nostrās > ōrātiōnēs dē fictūrā linguārum eārumque fictōribus > auscultandās vēnistis. I depend what sort of Latin you want, I guess. The version above could pass for Classical Latin, but: " bene venisti ad linguificium, orationem per interrete de linguis exstructis eisque qui eas creant" ... is distinctly non-Classical in feel, tho it is grammatically correct. "orationem per interrete" is a 'man in the moon' construction which is eschewed in the Classical language. i.e. prepositional phrases are always adverbial. The use of such phrases adjectivally is a mark of late and Medieval Latin. > I have nothing to add to his comments on the original > version, except that it seems a bit odd to "welcome > someone to conlanging" (while it is meaningful, it's not > what's intended here). A possible (if unwieldy) > translation of "Conlangery" could be, "Ācroāsēs dē artē > linguās fingendī", literally, "Lectures on the art of > creating languages". Tho _ācroāsēs_ threw me at first; it's actually a Greek borrowing and not very common in the Classical language; also, of course, "ācroāsēs dē artē ..." is a 'man in the moon' construction :) I must admit, I didn't spot the difference between 'conlanging' and 'conlangery' at first. As there is no English morpheme -ery, I assume it is "conlanger + -y", and that it is the third of the -y suffix meanings listed in my dictionary, i.e. "forming nouns denoting a quality, state, action or entity." "ad linguificium" means 'to conlanging.' Let's rethink. In Classical Latin we have _artificium_ "skill serviceable in the attainment of any object, ingenuity, art, dexterity, artifice, cunning" etc. The person who practices _artificium_ is an _artifex_ (genitive: _artificis_). From this was derived an adjective _artificiālis_ "of or pertaining to _artificium_. The neuter plural of this is used by Quintillian as a noun to mean "things conformable with _artificium_." So, following these examples, we would have: linguificium [neuter sing. noun] = conlanging linguifex (gen.: linguificis) [noun, masc. or fem.] = conlanger linguificiālis [adjective] = of or pertaining to conlanging. linguificiālia [neuter plural noun] = 'conlangery' So, following Peter's version (where, I notice, "you" has now become singular), we could have: "bene venisti ad linguificialia .... > Also, a podcast couldn't be an "oratio", because it's > not just a *single* speech, but rather a *series* of > speeches (i.e. "oratio" is more likely to refer to a > single episode). True. ========================================================== On 22/03/2014 21:07, Wesley Parish wrote:> "ars linguae faciendum" would fit very well Yikes!! ... and be totally ungrammatical! ======================================================= On 22/03/2014 21:09, Wesley Parish wrote: > I personally would use 'saluete' because "bene venisti" > still sounds out of place to me. As I have observed in an earlier email: _saluēte/ salvēte_ is Classical (and common enough in later & Medieval Latin) _bene uenisti/ bene venisti_ is Medieval (which is why I haven't used any macrons). Also, the first is plural "you", the second is singular "you"). It depends what sort of Latin you want (and how many people you are adressing). As podcasts were unknown to the ancient world, it a moot point :) ======================================================== On 22/03/2014 21:20, Siva Kalyan wrote: > As I've said, it would be "ars linguās fingendī". With genitive of the *gerund* _fingendī_ and _linguās_ as the direct object of _fingendī_. But a gerund with a direct object is normally avoided in Classical Latin; that language preferring to use the *gerundive* (a passive adjective), i.e. ars linguārum fingendārum. But while Caesar was quite happy to write things like _ars linguārum fingendārum_, Cicero seems to have put greater emphasis on rhythm and sound of the language (he was an orator) and would certainly have gone for _ars linguās fingendī_ to avoid the repetition of -ārum, which he considered ugly. But IMHO neither _ars linguārum fingendārum_ nor _ars linguās fingendī_ is needed here. -- 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".