Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: no:t@r pa:D@r iNkAjlA (with audio)

From:Jan van Steenbergen <ijzeren_jan@...>
Date:Sunday, September 1, 2002, 8:39
 --- Christian Thalmann wrote:

> Although I get the feeling that Jovian is still far above my league > (being pretty much an ignorant at Latin), I've fashioned a preliminary > translation of the Pater Noster into Jovian. > > I'm not too fond of the look of the written text (it looks complicated > and plagiarized from Latin =P), but it sound better when spoken out > loud.
Well, as I wrote earlier, I like the look of the language, although in this case you are right: it looks perhaps a bit too much like Latin. That must be because you apply most sound changes to the pronunciation only, while most of the old Latin orthography remains intact.
> > > As always, feedback is much welcomed. =P
There is one thing that I sort of disagree with. The first line reads: "Noter pazer in coelo", but this is a deviation of the original text, that I have never seen before. The sentence in Latin is: "Pater noster qui es in coelis" (Our Father, who art in heaven). Is there any particular reason for replacing the subordinate sentence by just two words: "in coelo"? Jan ===== "Originality is the art of concealing your source." - Franklin P. Jones __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts


Joe <joe@...>