🚀 go-pugleaf

armann@algonet.se (Jan Armann) wrote:

[snip]

>Io es de accordo re le affection del individuos a lor lingua maternal
>e io anque crede que un proposition pro un sol lingua intermediar pro
>EU serea causar un opposition enorme. Ma qual es le alternativos?

>Nunc EU ha 11 linguas differente. Pro un session 110 interpretes es
>necessari pro tener tote particpantes in connexion directe in lor
>lingua maternal. Tarde EU forsan va includer ancora alcun linguas e le
>problemas va augmenta seriosemente. Le situation presente es jam
>idiotic e multo costose.
Yes, you are right. It's foolish. (It's a source of employment though
;-)

>Proque non seliger per exemplo anglese como le lingua commun? Germano
>es plus grande e le franceses nunquam vole acceptar lo. In un debatto
>dur con un anglese native tu nunquam pote vincer - sia tu cognoscentia
>del anglese benissime.
That is the point: People will be screaming if German was the language
chosen. I think it would make them feel like having been conquered by
Germany - an idea that no one would like. But I believe no one except
the French would accept French either. Probably most (non-romance?)
nations would say: "No. French is too difficult, we have all learnt
English, so if there *has* to be a common langueage, let's speak
English." Which the French - of course - could not accept. 

>Io ha legite re le nove orthographia del lingua german. Il es
>stupefacente que tal minor modificationes pote causar tal opposition.
Yes. Opponents to the spelling reform say it's too costly
("aufwaendig" - from 1997 on) to have just these minor modifications.
But then they are outraged about those minor modifications.
More modifications were planned but turned down, like using minuscules
for example.
Had there been wider changes, opponents had screamed: "You can't do
that! It's no longer our language."
So which way you decide: It's wrong.

>Il se tracta de excambiar le duple 's' a 'ss'. 
It's a little more than that. 
And the "Eszett" is not replaces by "ss" in any case, but only after
short vowels. So from 1997 on, it's 
"Fusz" (Eszett of course, I just cannot write it here) and "Fuesze"
but 
"Kuss - Kuesse"
"Biss - Bisse"
"Masz - Masze"
Many of the changes only mean that there are options. You can write it
as it was always written or you can write it in another way. 
Language and spelling has always changed. AFAIK Martin Luther spelt
words differently in his bible translation, and Kaiser Wilhelm spelt
them differently as well. After the last spelling reform in 1902, he
refused to use the new spelling, and letters addressed to him had to
be written in the old spelling. :-)


>Ich kann das nicht
>verstehen.
Ich auch nicht. 

>Un parve observation. Nos interlinguaistas non regarda interlingua
>como un lingua 'construite' ma 'extrahite' (ex le vocabularios commun
>de origine latin/grec) ma il es non troppo importante.
Sounds reasonable. That's probably why it's understandable to me. 

>Responsas e commentarios es benvenite in interlingua, anglese, germano
>o le linguas scandinave.
Sorry, I can't answer in interlingua or any Scandinavian language, and
I didn't choose German as English is the dominating language here and
thus probably understandable to everyone. 

>Io desira Melanie un Bon Natal e un Bon Anno Nove!
Danke! Ich wuensche Dir - und den anderen Usern - ebenfalls frohe
Weihnachten und einen guten Rutsch!

Regards,
Melannie