Thank you to everybody who's contributed so far. Second draft is

bene venisti ad linguificium, orationem per interete de linguis exstructis eisque qui eas creant.

Further comments?

The Fantastical Devices of Pete The Mad Scientist -

-----Original Message-----
From: R A Brown <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 14:33
Subject: Re: Correct my Latin

On 22/03/2014 12:01, BPJ wrote:
> To begin with it's certainly "linguificium"


> 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


> "Bene ueniti" doesn't sound right, or at least not
> Classical, though I'm too far from my books to look it up

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.

> 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_.


> - 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.

> - 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.

"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".