jjbowks | Re: First Comments about EuroPidgin
Hey George!
Good to hear from you again!
I very much agree with the things you've
said in response to Viktoro. I agree
wholeheartedly that the k vs. c situation
is no problem at all and that if a person
from slavic or germanic background wishes
to write LFN with a k so much the better
for him, as long as it is understood that
c and k are both acceptable ways of writing
the same sound in LFN.
Also with the S vs. Z. I think that the
idea would be to maximize recognition but
at the same time facilitate spelling and
learning. There's much to be said for
fonetik spelling in combatting illiteracy
I feel. Although the arguments for a
historical spelling do have merit, that
is retaining the ph and th to hearken back
to their Greek roots. But Modern Spanish,
Italian, and Portuguese seem to get along
fine with a very phonetic system. So that
how I feel about that...
In regards to the verbal infinitive endings,
the pattern of dropping the -r gives maximum
recognition of the roots I think. If one
were to use some Novialesque -ar ending
such as "vidar" the resulting look ends
up distanced from it's roots and becomes
less understandable, I fee. So again, I
applaud your resolve to stick with the
pattern. Where it gets tricky is the derivatives
and specially in the Latin verbs which have
stem changes, vid- > vis-, prend- > pres- etc.
I must say I'm enjoying this new list and
I am quite happy to see you take part in
it. Thanks, Bjorn too ( I must apologize,
too, I think I just called him Bjorg in
another post, oops:)
Con salutes,
Jay B.
--- In europidgin@y..., George Boeree <cgboeree@a...> wrote:
> Hello, Viktoro!
There is always a degree to which one feels attached to something
you took many years to build, but I have determined to "let my baby
go" in the context of this group. I look forward to hearing all
your comments and criticism -- but I will also feel free to explain
my rationale in picking certain features of the language:
I used c rather than k because the words retain more of their
original look, and so are a bit easier to identify for those who
know some romance language. However, there would be no confusion at
all if writers felt free to use k instead of c, as long as they did
so consistently. I like the idea of a certain degree of flexibility
and individuality.
In pronounciation, too, there is nothing wrong with some variation,
as long as it stays within certain bounds so that others can
understand. To pronounce j as in French or as in English, for
example, only gives each speaker a colorful local "accent" without
making them any less understandable.
Your second idea is perhaps based on a misunderstanding: The ending
for infinitives (not for verbs in general) is -r, and not -ar, -er,
or -ir. There are no specific endings for nouns, adjectives, verbs,
etc., as there are in Esperanto. That is what allows one to use a
verb as a noun, or an adjective as a noun, as we do in English as
well as in many other languages.
I would like to thank Bjorn Madsen publically for starting this
group. Without this beginning, neither "Lingua Franca Nova"
nor "EuroPidgin" has any chance of achieving an impact!
Best wishes,
George Boeree
Viktoro wrote: