What about Latino Sine Flexione (aka Peano’s Interlingua)?!
I wanted to get some other points of view about LSF. If you know nothing about it I’ll write some info at the end.
I’m not interested in the race between Esperanto and the other auxlangs, I just think of LSF as a fun exercise. What struck me the most is the approach Peano came up with, i.e. taking away features from an existing language instead of building from the ground up like the other conlangs that came before, and the result is pretty natural.
At the time it came out in 1903 it seems like it impressed a lot of people, whereas recent opinions seem mostly negative to me.
If you wanna try it I made a course on Memrise: https://www.memrise.com/course/1825193/interlingua-de-peano-latino-sine-flexione/
And then let me know if you think I’m wrong.
For those who know nothing about LSF: The name (Latin without inflexion) says a lot about it. It came out of the mind of an italian mathematician (Giuseppe Peano) and is a predecessor of the more famous IALA’s Interlingua. It needs more study than the later interlingua but it’s satisfying nonethless imho.
Peano published it with an article in 1903, which actually started in Latin and slowly glided into Interlingua (as he called it) dropping the inflexions as he explained why they weren’t necessary.
This doesn’t mean that it has no inflexions whatsoever, there are a few suffixes. Although they shouldn’t be used if you can do without them.
At Wikisource there are two books by Peano entirely written in LSF, and they make up for an interesting read if you ask me https://wikisource.org/wiki/Vocabulario_commune_ad_latino-italiano-français-English-deutsch_pro_usu_de_interlinguistas/ https://wikisource.org/wiki/100_exemplo_de_Interlingua
And then let me know if you think I'm wrong.
Wrong about what?
It's a good idea and has advantages over Esperanto, as far as simplicity goes (I guess, not being an expert on either). Here, BTW, is the original introduction of he language, in which Peano deconstructed Latin into Latina sine Flexione as he wrote about it. If you search on
Peano in the forums you'll find some discussions.
Interlingua as a search term will provide more responses but not all about Latina sine Flexione.
Latin is an even better idea, as it already has more than 2000 years' worth of literature, and it is not all that hard to learn.
[Added] Very cool that you created a course on Memrise.
Thank you, though it’s a very small course and focuses only on sentences. anyway, "it is not all that hard to learn" really?! I remember feeling that confident—right when I finished Carpelanam and zsocipuszmak’s course—but then I tried to read Cicero
Cool beans! LsF is one of my favorite IALs. I can see it being an excellent medium for learning the international standard vocabulary of science, medicine, academia, etc.
I think I mention LSF in this week's video. I've always liked the idea, but my general conclusion is "they're all the same."
It makes a lot more sense than Esperanto IMHO. At least if you know Latino Sine Flexione you could use to read Latin texts (for the most part). Presumably you could be able to figure out by yourself what those complicated endings really mean once you know the vocabulary.
On that end, let me tell you: It wouldn’t work! It’s not just that they are complicated. I guess that most of the trouble—at least for me—is due to the fact the a lot of those endings overlap with some other. There is no one-on-one correspondence between the suffixes and their meanings. And, even if the wasn’t the case, a language is not just its vocabulary.
BUT that does work if applied to other romance languages!
I think it would be better to learn directly classical Latin. In a sense, we all speak some form of Latin, so Latin would be a good step forward to know the authentic origin of the Romance languages. Anyway, if Latino Sine Flexione were in Duolingo and if it were as easy as Esperanto, I would be willing to do the tree.
I disagree. Let me list my reasons:
1) "authentic origin"? Classical Latin is more an aunt than a mother to the romance languages, you should look for vulgar Latin;
2) "better"? As I said, I’m not interested in any race between languages. Nobody compels you to choose just one of the two, unless you have a very specific definition of "better";
3) for example, even though Latin is rewarding on its own thanks to its literature, if your goal is to better understand modern romance languages then my guess is that an interlingua (either one) would be a better match, because Grammar matters and Latin is on an entirely different category!
I know it’s counterintuitive but the differences between their grammars make the interlinguas much more fitting to be a bridge between the romance languages than Latin ever could
Actually I don't need any special help for Romance languages as I am a native Spanish speaker, so I still would prefer classical Latin for the possibility of reading ancient texts and knowing more about the etymology of words. Vulgar latin sounds tempting, but I don't know if it is actually taught nowadays. Anyway, if Duolingo could offer 10 interlinguas + Latin, for me it would be much better than only Latin...
LsF (Latino sine Flexione, or as it's also called Interlingua de Peano) is one of my favorite auxlangs, it is phonetic, it's got simple grammar and the vocabulary is very recognizable to those involved in the fields of science, law, and medicine. For a more modern feel in an IAL while keeping some of the many pluses of LsF, I think for me that would be Interlingua of the International Auxiliary Language Association, published in 1951 -- It's definitely tops in this regard: http://www.interlingua.com it's quite easy to learn and very comprehensible at first sight for anyone already acquainted with any one of it's source languages.