Latin Nov: Difference between revisions

From FrathWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{stub}}
The idea here is an IAL of Latin without hard grammar, but with this achieved by axing all the endings, not by choosing certain ones - thus "lupus" doesn't become "lupu" or "lupo" in every position but "lup". This approach is really inspired by what's happened in the Germanic languages and also French (and Catalan to a lesser extent), and increasingly in Spanish etc. I see it as what will probably be the ultimate fate of the endings in many modern Romance languages anyway. So, to the chase:
The idea here is an IAL of Latin without hard grammar, but with this achieved by axing all the endings, not by choosing certain ones - thus "lupus" doesn't become "lupu" or "lupo" in every position but "lup". This approach is really inspired by what's happened in the Germanic languages and also French (and Catalan to a lesser extent), and increasingly in Spanish etc. I see it as what will probably be the ultimate fate of the endings in many modern Romance languages anyway. So, to the chase:


Line 25: Line 26:


''Salu! Nom mi est Caecil. Eg in Rom viv. Qvod est nom tu?''
''Salu! Nom mi est Caecil. Eg in Rom viv. Qvod est nom tu?''
[[Category: Conlangs]]
[[Category: Auxlangs]]
{{Auxlangs}}

Latest revision as of 22:39, 16 November 2011

This article is a stub. If you can contribute to its content, feel free to do so.

The idea here is an IAL of Latin without hard grammar, but with this achieved by axing all the endings, not by choosing certain ones - thus "lupus" doesn't become "lupu" or "lupo" in every position but "lup". This approach is really inspired by what's happened in the Germanic languages and also French (and Catalan to a lesser extent), and increasingly in Spanish etc. I see it as what will probably be the ultimate fate of the endings in many modern Romance languages anyway. So, to the chase:

Pronouns

I=eg Me=me You sing.=tu, te It=ill He=ille She=illa

We/Us=nós You pl.=vós They=ills/os/as

Pronunciation/Orthography

Classical latin. Double consonants and long vowels are optional in both writing a speaking. "v" and "j" for the semivowels are probably actually quite a good idea, but whatever.

Other stuff

Most of the endings are axed full stop, but problems occur with semi-vowels. "lingua"->"ling", "aqua"-"ac" are just about OK, but what happens to "seruus"? Most recognisable would be "serv" of course. Maybe semivowels can be written as <v> and <j> and kept in stems altogether - "lingv", "aqv", "serv" thus.

Example

Salu! Nom mi est Caecil. Eg in Rom viv. Qvod est nom tu?

This article is part of a series on International Auxiliary Languages.

Romance-based Auxlangs: Aercant * Atlango * Interlingua * Latin Nov * Novial * Occidental (Interlingue) * Panroman * Romanal
Germanic-based Auxlangs: Folksprak * Nordien
Slavic Auxlangs: Novoslovnica
Turkic Auxlangs: Jalpi Turkic
African Auxlangs: Afrihili
Mixed-Origin Auxlangs: Esperanto * Adjuvilo * Ido * Ayola * Medial Europan * Bolak * Kotava * North American * Pantos-dimou-glossa * Pasetok * Sasxsek * Universalglot * Volapük
A priori auxlangs: -