Latin as the universal European language

[Veles]

Kinda ironic that what you linked is mediaeval pop-trash.

Well, perhaps church-mocking students' songs aren't the highest order of poetry, still compared to modern stuff, in my opinion, it's like Shakespear vs. Snooki, really.

[this one is my ringtone actually performed by other artist with better Latin, though]

Link to video.

Link to video.

 

[Traitorfish]

Well, perhaps church-mocking students' songs aren't the highest order of poetry, still compared to modern stuff, in my opinion, it's like Shakespear vs. Snooki, really.

Shakespeare wasn't exactly high art either. Hence all the dirty jokes.

 

[Veles]

Well, I dunno, there's something classy about him still. Perhaps merely the fact that he's old and quoted.

In principle, English as the current temporary lingua franca is fine by me. You will have to simplify the spelling, though.

Also, native English speakers will have to understand and accept that the averaged out Vulgar English so to speak, will be roughly the kind of English I speak, with messed up articles and word order. And proper Russian-Spanish "r". Also, no "th", nobody can pronounce it properly except the English and the Greeks.

 

[Pangur Bán]

I suppose that might be pushing it, yeah. I was thinking of the proposals I've seen floating around to construct a standardised Scots with an orthography derived from Middle Scots, but you're right that it's over-stating it to make the claim until somebody actually does it.

Of course, Quackers' logic would also tell us that Middle Scots was a dialect of English, so at least it works on some level...

How's this?
ιρ, μειτ! μιρ, α ουαν ει τοκ τει ιου! αμ φει γλεζγα, αν δις ιζ μα πατερ ριτεν δουν.

 

[Pangur Bán]

BTW,for the variety in Scottish pronunciation, this song is good:

Link to video.
It proceeds from Inverness to Aberdeen, Laurencekirk (Mearns), Forfar (Angus), Dundee, Fife, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, Galloway, Argyll, Lochaber, Wester Ross, Skye, stopping before the Outer Hebrides.

When listening to that song it becomes quite obvious that Glasgow English is as much Irish in quality as Scottish.

 

[Leoreth]

It's pointless to subjugate every European culture to some standard; if we want a universal language, it's better to invent brain transmitters that can relay information between people without requiring a vocal component, i.e. telepathy.

Yeah, and we can stop talking about economics as well and simply invent replicating technology

In principle, English as the current temporary lingua franca is fine by me. You will have to simplify the spelling, though.

What's difficult with English spelling? It could use some standardization, but simplification?

 

[Veles]

What's difficult with English spelling? It could use some standardization, but simplification?

I used to struggle with tough - though - through - thought - taught. Too old Germanic for normal people to pronounce properly and to remember which is which.

It should be more phonetic (one distinsctive charachter - one sound), just like the divine Russian language, in which Cherubims and Seraphims sing their hymns in the gardens of Edem.

...Europe is essentially a Slavic continent with Germanic and Romance edges

The internet is officially won by you, sir

 

[Leoreth]

I used to struggle with tough - though - through - thought - taught. Too old Germanic for normal people to pronounce properly and to remember which is which.

It should be more phonetic (one distinsctive charachter - one sound).

I see your point, but that's hardly possible when you have, like, 14 vowel sounds or something like that. Though I agree that "ou" and "gh" together with "ea" are the worst digraphs in English.

 

[squadbroken]

Why trade the language of one old, dead empire for the language of an even older and deader one?

 

[Winner]

Didn't even have to use google translator to understand it, by the way Czech alphabet does appear much "lighter" than Polish, but still, imo, diactrical signs should be avoided. The differences between the sounds of "s" and "š" or "с" and "Č" is to much to be represented by a mere ~ at the top, there should be a separate character.

No, it actually makes more sense to use these signs, because the sounds are close to each other. It's all just a matter of being used to it. I don't doubt Cyrillic works fine as well, but the problem with it is that most of the Western world uses the Latin characters. And though English speakers may squirm and squint dubious:
) at words like "říšský" or "křičíš", they can at least try and read it. Latin alphabet is quite universal and with a few modifications it can serve pretty much any language. The system we have in Czech is also pretty good, except the "ů" sign (as in "dům" - house) which is just terribly redundant. If the Poles adopted it, they'd save many trees a year

In Cyrillic your sentence would be:

Čeština funguje docela dobře s naprostým minimem diakritických znamének.
Чештина фунгуе доцела добже с напростым минимем диактритичкых знаменек.

Ours takes less space

@Winner
The elements of a national identity are a little like the financial industry. They reflect reality by creating it.
If an artificial Slovakian language with artificial differences helps the Slovaks to have the relationship to their nation they want, let them have it. I get its current ridiculous appearance, but the artificial of today is the natural of tomorrow.

I am not taking it from them I am simply commenting on how categories like "language" are far from clear cut. Slovak in its "high" form was constituted during the late 19th and the early 20th centuries IIRC, before that it wasn't even recognized as a separate language. In contemporary Czech texts it's called the "tongue of Hungarian Slavs".

Of course, when you codify the language into a standard that is then taught in schools and enforced in the media, you effectively disrupt the natural transitions from one language to another that have existed for centuries. You collapse what used to be a rainbow into just two colours.

And judging from what's happening now, I think the two languages are getting closer to each other again, instead of moving apart. Especially the Slovaks are eager to gobble up Czech culture, so I am not afraid we'll stop understanding each other any time soon.

So you would be fine with Czech being officially renamed in Slovakian?

You don't get what I am trying to say - neither language is a dialect of the other. Both could be seen as dialects of one language that can't be called neither Slovak nor Czech, in the same way you can't call chimps a race of humans or vice versa. I'd call it "modern Moravian" or something like that. Of course nobody would take it seriously, we've all been indoctrinated in the nationalist paradigm ("each nation has to have its own language, and if it doesn't exist, let's imagine it" ). Just look at the Serbs and the Croats, and how they are trying to break one language into two for purely political reasons.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Well, I don't see any inherent value in a "natural transition". I get that "natural" in this context is liked to be taken as some kind of holy source of identity, but that to me seems like what "natural" actually means - arbitrary. Which must not be bad, but not good, either.

"Modern Moravian" seems to be one possible good compromise
I got what you were saying the first time, but I wanted to point out that the blame lies not only with Slovakia, but also the Czech Republic, for like you rightfully wouldn't want the language to be called Slovakian, they wouldn't like Czech. Also, according to the wiki page this artificial split dates back to Czechoslovakia?

 

[Winner]

Well, I don't see any inherent value in a "natural transition". I get that "natural" in this context is liked to be taken as some kind of holy source of identity, but that to me seems like what "natural" actually means - arbitrary. Which must not be bad, but not good, either.

By natural I mean "as it was before language became a subject of nationalist meddling". Dialect continuum, such used to exist all over Europe where languages gradually transitioned into other languages.

Also, according to the wiki page this artificial split dates back to Czechoslovakia?

Which split? Czechoslovakia was bilingual, both Czech and Slovak were used interchangeably and nobody really paid much attention to it.

 

[Veles]

I see your point, but that's hardly possible when you have, like, 14 vowel sounds or something like that. Though I agree that "ou" and "gh" together with "ea" are the worst digraphs in English.

14 isn't that much, you can use diactrical signs.

The way it is now, it's more resembling pictographic writing system than alphabet, because the way "thought" is written has very little to do with how it actually sounds; you just memorize the way it looks and sounds, rather than actually reading letters. That's just as good as using a hieroglyph for it. The French and the Irish are even cooler dudes in this regard Sure it looks interesting and allows for better understanding of etymology, but still, that's not the initial idea behind the concept of alphabet.

Anyway, with modern trend of simplifing and dumbing everything down, and considering the peculiarities of English phonetics (unpronouncable for the rest of the world), one day we might end up with taf - tou - sru - fot - tot for tough - though - through - thought - taught, or something like that for global English.

Seriously, I'd rather have Latin, whatever hassle that implies

 

[Leoreth]

14 isn't that much, you can use diactrical signs.

Diacritical signs suck. There, I said it. I actually like the English way of solving things by clever use of digraphs and silent additional syllables (or whatever it's properly called, I'm referring to the -e that makes the difference between Tom and Tome). All that English "needs" is some consistence.

The way it is now, it's more resembling pictographic writing system than alphabet, because the way "thought" is written has very little to do with how it actually sounds; you just memorize the way it looks and sounds, rather than actually reading letters. That's just as good as using a hieroglyph for it. The French and the Irish are even cooler dudes in this regard Sure it looks interesting and allows for better understanding of etymology, but still, that's not the initial idea behind the concept of alphabet.

That's hyperbole. Most of the time it's quite clear how a word should be pronouned, and even in difficult cases like "ou" or "gh" there's only two alternatives that are easy to tell apart. It's telling that I'm able to correctly read French (according to one of my friends who studies it), despite the fact that I don't speak it at all. It's really not that hard.

Now Irish is a whole other beast, I grant you that

Anyway, with modern trend of simplifing and dumbing everything down, and considering the peculiarities of English phonetics (unpronouncable for the rest of the world), one day we might end up with taf - tou - sru - fot - tot for tough - though - through - thought - taught, or something like that for global English.

Wow, you don't seem to get the difference between dental plosive, voiceless dental fricative and the voiceless alveolar sibilant (plus, the voiceless labiodental fricative, apparently). I propose tuff, dhow, throu, thot and taut, keeping the current vowel and consonant transcriptions.

Seriously, I'd rather have Latin, whatever hassle that implies

Another problem with Latin that's related to what we're talking about: everyone pronounces it differently. I've heard English speakers interpret every vowel as if they were English words (it hurt in the ears). In German it's common to read "c" before e and i as /ts/ etc.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

I'd quite like for Latin to become an official language, but only if we can stick to classical pronunciations rather than the way it is more commonly butchered.

If I were to make up a new language based on Latin, I would want to make sure that every case ending is unique. We should not be trying to get rid of conjugation or declension, but rather using them for added clarity.


I'm not a fan of diacritical marks, but I really don't like silent syllables or digraphs. There is nothing wrong with adding extra letters. If we stick with English, we should at least bring back the letter Thorn (Þ, þ).

 

[Veles]

I actually like the English way of solving things by clever use of digraphs and silent additional syllables (or whatever it's properly called, I'm referring to the -e that makes the difference between Tom and Tome).

That might be a clever way out, but it is the opposite direction of addressing the issue of not being phonetic.

...dental plosive, voiceless dental fricative and the voiceless alveolar sibilant

Umm.. Oh, you're reading a fireball spell here, rite?

It's not that I don't get the difference (my pronounciation is rather decent, according to those Yank lads in the PR dep at work). It's just that, 't' and 'h' sound combinations is a very specifically Germanic thing, and we, for example, just don't pronounce it like that normally, and wouldn't bother actually. If it's a global language, it should be averaged out phonology-wise. That's like asking everyone to pronouce that funny Welsh 'fthf' sound.

Spoiler :

Link to video.

I've heard English speakers interpret every vowel as if they were English words (it hurt in the ears).

I know, right? It can be rather loly sometimes

 

[say1988]

taf - tou - sru - fot - tot for tough - though - through - thought - taught, or something like that for global English.

You realise that the "th" in "though" and the "t" in "tough" are nothing alike?

I assume you like this.
Yes, it is very, very old, but relevent.

 

[Veles]

You realise that the "th" in "though" and the "t" in "tough" are nothing alike?

I assume you like this.
Yes, it is very, very old, but relevent.

That's according to the phonetics you are used to. According to average Russian pronounciation, "though" would be 'dou' or 'zou', because 'th' is just non-existant.

 

[Veles]

...words like "říšský" or "křičíš", they can at least try and read it.

Aha Care to ask for volonteers on this board? My experience is: people wanna learn some Polish, they take a book, open it, see something like "szcz", close it, put it back on the shelf, and NEVER open it again

Latin alphabet is quite universal and with a few modifications it can serve pretty much any language.

Ever been appalled by the transcription of some Slavic names from Cyrillic to Latin? Khrushev, Yushchenko, Zhirinovsky, Khabensky... They are unreadable.

The system we have in Czech is also pretty good, except the "ů" sign (as in "dům" - house) which is just terribly redundant.

Yeah, you better put it back to Ikea.

Ours takes less space

That's solely because 'и' is wider than 'i'.



Shall we compromise?

 

[Winner]

Diacritical signs suck. There, I said it. I actually like the English way of solving things by clever use of digraphs and silent additional syllables (or whatever it's properly called, I'm referring to the -e that makes the difference between Tom and Tome). All that English "needs" is some consistence.

English is such a mongrel language that it would be hard to achieve. I agree it doesn't need diacritical signs (mainly because English pronunciation is rather distant from English spelling), but in other languages diacritical signs are absolutely essential.

Wow, you don't seem to get the difference between dental plosive, voiceless dental fricative and the voiceless alveolar sibilant (plus, the voiceless labiodental fricative, apparently). I propose tuff, dhow, throu, thot and taut, keeping the current vowel and consonant transcriptions.

Ah, this brings up fond memories of the courses in phonetics I had to do...

I've heard English speakers interpret every vowel as if they were English words (it hurt in the ears).

Amen to that. I always laugh when in American TV series characters are reciting Latin, and it sound almost as English.

Aha Care to ask for volonteers on this board? My experience is: people wanna learn some Polish, they take a book, open it, see something like "szcz", close it, put it back on the shelf, and NEVER open it again

But my reaction would be the same if it was full of these funny Cyrillic characters

Look, it's simple: the ˇ sign makes a consonant "softer", the ´ makes vowels longer. The weird ů is the same as ú, so it's pronounced as long u. Unfortunately we keep that one for some stupid historical reasons (there used to be phonemic contrast between the two ages ago).

Ever been appalled by the transcription of some Slavic names from Cyrillic to Latin? Khrushev, Yushchenko, Zhirinovsky, Khabensky... They are unreadable.

Chruščov, Juščenko, Žirinovský(ij?), Chabenský(ij?). It's not the alphabets fault that the English speakers are totally incapable of pronouncing names in other languages

As for the sound the English transcribe as "Kh", we write is as "ch" and even list it as a letter in our alphabet. Yes, we don't have a diacritical sign for it, I give you that.

Shall we compromise?

Gods no, no new set of signs. I am sticking to Latin alphabet with suitable modifications to capture the sounds