simple universal rights translation

Here goes - totally not fancy vocabulary, but simple latin roots. I'm even uncertain if it's fully grammatically correct :P

Omne homine es nata libera et pare in dignitate et jures. Sunt praedita cum ratione et conscientia et debe agere inter se anima fraternitati.

Thoughts on simplifying verbs

So verbs will no longer require conjugations, instead preceded by simple subject markers:

me, te, e, nos, vos, illos - habe, habui, ama, amavi, dice, dixi, vide, vidi

Verbs will have two forms - a progressive and a perfect. Somehow, verbs derived from Greek will have the aorist from as their 'perfect.'

But i'll keep a simple conjugation schema to be used at times:

1st singular: For progressive verb forms, replace last syllable with -o if verb ends with -a or -e or add -o if the word ends in -i. For perfect forms, just leave alone (why so, though? would amavio instead of amavi be such an odd form? Habuio? Rexio?)

2nd sing.: Just add -s

3rd sing.: Just add -t

1st plural.: Just add -mus

2nd plural.: Just add -tis

3rd plural.: Just add -nt or -ent if the verb ends in -i.

Imperative: Just use progressive form alone

Infinitive: Just add -re

Progressive participle: Just add -nte or -ente if the verb ends in -i

Gerund: Just add -nda or -endo if the verb ends in -i (I'm not sure about the function of the gerund form yet though)

The 1st singular rule is a bit confusing I guess. It would change some verb forms: "I have" will be "habo" rather than "habeo," and "I must" will be "debo" rather than "debeo." Hopefully though this simplification will obscure a few verbs of the second conjugation, it won't entirely get it the way of comprehension of classical latin.

As for the verb "es" and that verb alone, I still suggest irregular forms: sum, es, est, sumus, estis, and sunt. But only if necessary.

The only nominative pronoun forms I would suggest are "ego" and "tu" if necessary, otherwise "me" and "te" work well, I think.

Writings

I should use this blog just to put up thoughts whenever I like, and writings:

From e.e. cummings poem

Hodie ego

ho morivi

viva sum

iterum

"i who have died am alive again today"

The nominative ego and the verb sum from me es are optional (I'll maintain the verb form for es however irregular, as an option).

The verb "to die" will be mori, morivi, mortua. In Latin it's deponent (I die is morior), but this language will attempt to make all deponent verbs into the closest active forms (so "to speak" will be loque or something like it).

Homonyms

Ab ore ad ore potami - From the-mountain to the-mouth of-the-river.

DE, reges reges mundi - Could also be DE, Te rege reges de mundo or God, You rule the-kings of the-world.

Viro es viro - Man is pestilence (haha, for the misandrist type)

New translation

From Q30:21

Et ex Ei signos es genese de caelos et gea et variatione de vestra glossas et colores - ecce, in illo es signos ad scientes.

word for word:

And from His signs is the-creation of the-heavens and the-earth and the-variation of your languages and colors - Behold, in that are signs to the-knowing.

pronounced:

e ex ei singnos es genes de cailos e gea e wariation de westra glossas e color's - ecce, in illo es singnos ad scientes.

no need for the sunt anymore. The plural verb is redundant.

Language details on new paradigm

Nouns

Derived regularly as previously mentioned.

There will be no gender for any noun.

Nouns do not have to inflect based on number: "three books" will be tre libro and tre libros would be sorta redundant. "books" will be plure libro or libros only if the context requires it.

There will be no required noun cases, only optional ones: add -m or -n to specify when a word is accusative; change a single word to a genitive form (add -i to -u and -e of short words; change -o and long word -e to -i, change -a to -ae. So now there's no -is which could be confusing) only when there are short phrases.

Adjectives

There will be no gender: all adjectives will either end in -e or -a: "good boy" will simply be bona puero

There will be no inflection based on number: "short names" will simply be breve nomine(s) rather than brevia nomines.

Nouns formed by adjectives are simply specified by changing a -a to -o or leaving an adjective ending with -e alone: "the good" is bono and the "knowing one" is still sciente.

Verbs

Conjugation is only optional.

I'll maintain two verb forms - progressive and perfect - and one passive adjective: the forms for "to read" will be lege, lexi, lecta.

I read the book - me lege libro (formally lego libro)

I have read the book - me lexi libro or me habe lecta libro

The book was read - libro fui lecta.

Progressive verbs used without subjects will be the imperative form.

Verbs can be made into infinitives by adding -re or into present participles by adding -(e)nte.

Pronunciation

No pronouncing the final -e. Nomine will be pronounced "nomin"

No pronouncing a final -t. Et will be pronounced "e"

Combining the above two rules, no pronouncing a final -te. Somate or veritate will be pronounced soma or werita. The only distinction is that the final syllable (in bold) is stressed.

Update

I've disregarded this block for two years, but not my thoughts on the language. Those thoughts are slowly evolving in the tug-of-war between the goals of the language. But what exactly are those goals?

Is the language supposed to be simple and easy of use?

I feel the best way to do this is by limiting the grammar to a minimum. But that may make it a lot harder to approach classical Latin and Greek, which both have considerable grammar rules.

Is the language supposed to serve as a tool to "get by" in classical Latin and Greek?

There'll be a large vocabulary, but the multitudes of homonyms and synonyms can be dizzying.

There may be the need for some basic grammar, but that makes the language more difficult to understand and learn.

Words must have forms that are rigidly held to, even though they may sound bad to me. Why should we have to pronounce the last syllable of words that end in -e?

Can I modify the language to live up to my own aesthetic pleasures?

What if I make some letters silent when pronounced. What about shortening words by not pronouncing the last -e in words. What about not pronouncing the last -t in words like et or aut or ut. What about not pronouncing the final -te such that words like somate or veritate would be pronounced like soma or verita?

So here's where I stand right now.

I like having a large vocabulary, and I think the homonyms and synonyms that arise from the derivational words lead to beautiful complexities.

I'm beginning to see even simple grammar requirements, such as 1) conjugation of verbs, 2) having adjectives agree in gender or number, or 3) having nominative noun forms, can be a major hold up. I would rather do away with those requirements. But I want to give people the option to do simple changes if completely regular.

I'll hold to the classical pronunciation of words, but will have regular exception rules, such as not pronouncing the final -e sound, not ending a word on a -t sound. Thus the written form will be maintained, while the spoken form will be a little different, which is okay, because no one will be speaking the language anyway :D