Re: [Ietf-languages] Language subtag registration form

I think "Interlingua de APL" and "Interlingua de Peano" should be added as
alternate descriptions.  Those names distinguish it from the later and more
popular Interlingua de IALA, whose subtag is 'ia'.  You could translate
these descriptions as "Interlingua (Academy for Interlingua)" and
"Interlingua (Peano)".  But since nobody calls it "Latin Without
Inflections", we might as well stick to endonyms that are actually in use.

Peano certainly intended it to be easy to read if you knew Latin or a major
Romance language, so I think calling it a dialect of Latin is fair.  In any
case, if we made it a separate language it would take a year to get past
the 639 RA, and if they rejected it we'd have to think about whether we
want to use our never-used power to add a language subtag on our own.

I think "la-peano" is very clear as a tag, though the Romans would
certainly have a fit about the language and maybe make us write "Romani,
ite domum" (instead of "Romanos, i ad domo") on the wall a hundred times.
("I" is irritatingly short for a Latin verb, which is why it has all kinds
of suppletive forms in the Romance languages taken from more reasonable
verbs.  Perhaps Peano should have special-cased it.)

On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 10:20 AM Doug Ewell <doug@ewellic.org> wrote:

> I personally believe the changes from actual Latin to Latino Sine Flexione
> are too great to consider the latter merely a variant of the former.. But
> others can pick up that debate.
>
> The form itself seems fine, except that the Description field should be
> capitalized, and "inflections" is a somewhat more common English spelling
>
> --
> Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-languages mailing list
> Ietf-languages@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-languages
>