Discussion Wikipedia:Portal del communitate

De Wikipedia, le encyclopedia libere
Saltar a: navigation, cercar

Discussion Portal del Communitate (EN: Community Portal Discussion)[modificar fonte]

(Flag of the United Kingdom.svgEN) This is the discussion page for the community about the Community Portal of Interlingua Wikipedia.

(EN) For general discussion on any subject, please use Wikipedia:Taverna. This page is mainly for the community projects, and the community portal.

(EN) This page is also for people who are new to Interlingua Community or Interlingua and want to know more about the Interlingua Community.

Flag of the United Kingdom.svg (EN) People who are new and wish learn Interlingua are encouraged to use English Flag of the United Kingdom.svg in this page.

(IA) Isto es un pagina de discussion pro le communitate super le Portal del Communitate de Interlingua.

(IA) Pro discussion general super alicun subject, pro favor usar Wikipedia:Taverna. Isto pagina es principalmente pro le projectos de communitate, e le portal de communitate.

(IA) Isto pagina es tamben pro gente que es novice a Communitate de Interlingua o a Interlingua.

Gente que es novice e vole apprender Interlingua es incoragiate a usar Anglese Flag of the United Kingdom.svg in isto pagina.

--- PaceFlama 04:04, 14 decembre 2009 (UTC)


Interlingua[modificar fonte]

Hi, I am new to Interlingua. I read in the English article about Interlingua that this language has the most international vocabulary:

"In 1967, the powerful ISO (International Organization for Standardization), which normalizes terminology, voted almost unanimously to adopt Interlingua as the basis for its dictionaries."([1]).

This fact, which is important, among others, does not appear in Interlingua article in Interlingua language.

My question is:

What happened with ISO vote to use Interlingua vocabulary as the base for its international vocabulary dictionaries? Was it applied? What were the facts that happened after that decision?

Do we really need Interlingua as international language? Why do you personally use this language?

Can you present 3 facts why a person that is not English native would learn Interlingua? And 3 facts why Interlingua is better than English? And 3 facts why English is better than Interlingua?

I need your opinion on this. Thanks.

Thank you, Mushi 20:23, 26 novembre 2009 (UTC)

Le question super le votation del ISO es interessante; io non cognosce le continuation de iste historia, ma si io trova un responsa a tu question, io te lo facera saper.
Non me place le question de qual lingua es plus “bon”. Io prefere responder a un altere question: qual rationes o motivos existe pro usar interlingua, e quales existe pro usar anglese? Mi responsas es incomplete, proque tu me limitava a tres punctos... io poterea scriber un tote libro super isto. :-)
Motivos pro usar interlingua como lingua auxiliar international:

Interlingua has the most international vocabulary (voted by ISO in 1967)[modificar fonte]

  • 1. Interlingua es le unification in un lingua concrete del “vocabulario scientific international” commun a quasi tote le linguas de Europa e del mundo. Dunque, interlingua offere un function propedeutic pro cognoscer melio le vocabulario intellectual del proprie lingua materne. Secundo un methodo consistente e reproducibile, cata vocabulo de interlingua ha essite derivate de un certe numero de linguas natural existente, reducite a un prototypo comprensibile per medio de recercas etymologic, e regularisate in familias derivational. [1] Cognoscer interlingua significa cognoscer non solmente le signification, ma tamben le composition del parolas international presente in le proprie lingua materne. [2] [3]
(1.) Because Interlingua has the international vocabulary (scientific and more than that), why is it not used in international organizations, or in European Union organizations? (Mushi)
Isto es un longe historia super le qual on pote scriber un libro, ma mi responsa curte es: (1) nos nunquam disponeva del medios financiari pro un promotion apte; (2) le grande organisationes non prende seriosemente un cosa sin promotion professional, sin brochures lustrose e sin budget de centos de milles de euros; (3) nos interlinguistas non sape como facer marketing effective e non es motivate de facer lo; e (4) le societate in general ha prejudicio pro anglese e contra linguas percipite como “artificial”. In mi opinion, IALA faceva un grande error per promover interlingua principalmente como lingua scripte, negligente lo completemente como lingua parlate. Nulle lingua pote viver sin esser parlate. In scripto, es difficile convincer le gente; ma quando io parlava interlingua a iste conferentia in Portugal, le audientia immediatemente lo acceptava como natural. – Martijn 22:23, 27 novembre 2009 (UTC)

Interlingua is understandable at first read (listen)[modificar fonte]

  • 2. Interlingua es comprensibile a prime vista (e a prime audita!) a centos de milliones de locutures de linguas neolatin. Un portugese non comprende italiano e un romaniano non comprende espaniol, ma tote le “neolatinophonos” comprende instantaneemente le factor commun, concretisate in interlingua. Considerante que le cognoscentia del anglese non es ben diffundite in iste populationes, interlingua pote esser un excellente alternativa. (Personalmente io provava iste concepto primo in novembre de 2008: io pronunciava un discurso a un conferentia super autismo in le citate de Porto, Portugal, totalmente in interlingua, sin preparar le audientia; io les surprendeva. Secundo le consenso general, interlingua se comprendeva plus facilemente que le anglese parlate per mi amica e co-orator. [4] Le organisator nos re-invitava in junio 2009, e iste vice nos dava un serie de sex seminarios durante duo dies, toto in interlingua.)
(2.) Because Interlingua can be understood at first read/listen and because it is an old language (it has more than 50 years) why people don't know about it? For instance, Esperanto is known, it is a bit older and maybe first real international language, but still Interlingua is quasi unknown. Why? Is it gonna be the same in the future, is there any chance that interlingua will become more known, as one valid option for Constructed International Language? (Mushi)
Vide mi responsa al puncto 1, hic supra... le rationes es le mesme. Io crede que internet da nove opportunitates al promotion de interlingua, ma primo, il es essential disveloppar un communitate de personas qui parla interlingua activemente e non solo lo scribe como hobby. Le communitate existe, ma es micre. Con un communitate plus grande, le requisite medios financiari e professional pote esser attrahite. – Martijn 22:23, 27 novembre 2009 (UTC)
Io oblidava adder que 58 annos de facto non es del toto vetere pro un lingua human. Altere linguas que nos parla ha seculos, forsan un millennio. Interlingua ha a pena comenciate. – Martijn 06:22, 29 novembre 2009 (UTC)

Interlingua is very easy to learn, it has the easiest grammar[modificar fonte]

  • 3. Interlingua es multo facile de apprender e de usar activemente, multo plus facile que anglese o qualcunque altere lingua national. Le grammatica es regular e minimal. Le vocabulario es systematic, concrete e ben definite; il non es necessari preoccupar se de subtilitates idiomatic o cultural. A personas ben educate, le majoritate del vocabulario es ja familiar ex le linguage formal/intellectual del proprie lingua national; e vice versa, a personas sin education formal, apprender interlingua porta le beneficio additional de acquirer le cognoscentia del “parolas difficile” del proprie lingua. Novicios que assiste al curso pro comenciantes a un conferentia de interlingua generalmente parla interlingua passabilemente post un septimana de immersion. Interlingua es un investimento favorabile: on recipe le supra-mentionate beneficios pro effortio relativemente minimal.
(3.) I agree the grammar of Interlingua is easier than English grammar and easier then all the other (at least European) languages. But talking about vocabulary, Romanian is easier to learn. This is because Romanian is 99.9% a phonetic or phonemic language. This means direct link between spoken and written with no exceptions. No double letters, no phonetic sounds that can be written with the same grapheme (like "ph" and "f", or "si" and "ci", or "se" and ce" in Interlingua), no different pronunciations of different graphemes because of the context. Especially the double letters is a drawback for a constructed language, because you expect more from a constructed language. Double letters are not used in Spanish as well and they are a problem when writing a word, because one has to memorize what words need doubles, for reading there is no problem, because in reading the double is simply ignored. But why this overhead in a constructed language? IMHO, there is a big mistake for a constructed language to be more complicated in vocabulary writing then a native language. (Mushi)
Mi responsa in puntos:
  • ‘Si’ e ‘ci’, ‘se’ e ‘ce’ de facto se pronuncia de maniera distincte (si, tsi, se, tse). ‘Ce’ totevia non es un parola de interlingua.
  • Como io ja explicava, interlingua non es un lingua construite, ma un lingua derivate. Isto es un differentia fundamental. Es un error judicar interlingua secundo criterios applicabile a un lingua construite como esperanto.
  • Io contesta firmemente que le vocabulario del romaniano es plus facile de apprender que illo de interlingua. Como omne lingua national, le romaniano include multe parolas non international, e on perde le avantage del familiaritate prior. Le vocabulos, incluse illos que es international, ha assumite formas evoluite. Lor origine, composition e connexiones familial ha essite obscurate: il generalmente non es possibile derivar un parola regularmente del altere como in interlingua 'integr-e', 'dis-integr-ar', 'integr-itate', 're-integr-abile', etc. – totes basate in un mesme radice. In linguas national, tal connexiones es generalmente perdite, p.ex. un espaniol non pote vider facilemente que 'integridad' es le qualitate de esser 'entero'.
Romanian language vocabulary writing is easier to learn than Interlingua for anybody. There is no need for spelling in Romanian, all the words have direct writing from the sounds, Romanian being a phonetic language like Esperanto and LFN is. Writing/Reading in Romanian is much more easier then English, and is easier than Interlingua. This is because English is very hard on the link from spoken to written, but Interlingua is closer to a phonetic language (still having exeptions like: double letters, how to write sound "f" using "ph" or "f"?, how to write "tsi" using "ti" or "ci"?). Not many exceptions in Interlingua, compared to English, though. Interlingua is close to a phonetic language. The Interlingua language was constructed to be simple, having a simple grammar (even simpler then English, so it was not used the rule of majority when the grammar was constructed, why then the rule of majority when the "phoneticism" of the vocabulary was constructed?). For a constructed language, even constructed from vocabulary of existing languages, to have exceptions and not being a phonetic language is unbearable. And not only for native speakers of phonetic languages, but for everybody, because nobody wants complications, and to memorize all the exceptions. Hey, but I'm not here to criticize Interlingua, it is still better for an International language than English (and easier to understand at first sight than Esperanto). Regarding Romanian in the previous example:
Lng Substantivo Infinitivo Participio Subst. derivate Maestro del action Habilitate de action Habilitate de action repetative Infinitivo opposite
IA integr-e integr-ar integr-ate integr-itate integr-ator integr-abile re-integr-abile dis-integr-ar
EN integer to integr-ate integr-ated integr-itate integr-ator integr-abile re-integr-abile to des-integr-ate
RO intreg a integr-a integr-at integr-itate integr-ator integr-abil re-integr-abil a dez-integr-a
RO aspirat a aspira aspir-at aspir-atie aspir-ator aspir-abil re-aspir-abil a dez-aspir-a
RO loc a locu-i locu-it loc-atie locu-itor locu-ibil re-locu-ibil a dez-locui
RO cant/cantec a cant-a cant-at cant-are cant-ator cant-abil re-cant-abil a dez-canta
RO vizita a vizit-a vizit-at vizit-are vizit-ator vizit-abil re-vizit-abil a dez-vizita
RO construire a constru-i constru-it constru-ctie constru-ctor constru-ibil re-constru-ibil a demola (dezconstrui)
RO fapt a face fac-ut fac-ere fac-ator fac-ubil re-fac-ubil a des-face
RO profesare a profes-a profes-at profes-are profes-or profes-abil re-profes-abil a dez-profesa
RO imbracaminte a imbrac-a imbrac-at imbrac-are imbrac-ator imbrac-abil re-imbrac-abil a dez-braca
RO fabrica a fabric-a fabric-at fabric-atie fabric-ator fabric-abil re-fabric-abil a dez-fabrica
RO inspirare a inspir-a inspir-at inspir-atie inspir-ator inspir-abil re-inspir-abil a dez-inspira
If you look at the first 3 (RO) rows you can see the Romanian language is much more regular and genuine in word formation based on its root word than English. For instance "aspirator" in English is "vacuum cleaner" or "sucker", with no relation to the verb "to aspirate". In other words there is no "aspirater", there is no "aspiratable". The second example is even more meagningful, and there are many examples like this. (RO) "loc" translates to (EN) "place / location", (RO) "a locui" translates to (EN) "to live", (RO) "locuitor" translates to (EN) "inhabitant", (RO) "locuibil" translates to (EN) "habitable / livable" so:
(RO) "loc - a locui - locuitor - locuibil"
(EN) "place - to live - inhabitant - habitable"
(RO) "fabrica - a fabrica - fabricator - fabricabil"
(EN) "factory - to make - maker - makable"
(RO) "fapt - a face - facator - facubil"
(EN) "fact - to do - maker - doable"
As one can see, in English, there is not always a derivation from the root word and it is not as regular as in Romanian. Mushi 00:20, 1 decembre 2009 (UTC)
  • Como regula, interlingua conserva omne aspecto historic del orthographia que es conservate in al minus duo linguas de origine. Le orthographia de interlingua es dunque “conservative”, proxime al latino medieval, proque isto es le origine commun del quales le linguas de origine de interlingua se deriva: linguas como anglese, germano e francese es equalmente conservative. Isto resulta in un orthographia naturalmente familiar al majoritate de su usatores potential. Facer alteremente rende le lingua minus facile de scriber e de leger pro grande gruppos de personas.
  • Le elimination de ph, y, etc. de facto elimina information utile pro le pronunciation: iste litteras indica un parola de origine grec, pro le qual vale generalmente un altere accento tonic que on expecta in un parola de origine latin.
  • Le elimination de consonantes duple pote similarmente obscurar parolas composite o prefixos assimilate (p.ex. assimilar = ad- + simile + -ar). Isto impedi le function propedeutic de interlingua: es plus difficile comprender le composition de parolas, e le formation libere de nove parolas.
  • Le grammaticas traditional pote dicer que le consonantes duple pote esser ignorate in le pronunciation, ma io certemente non los ignora. Pro me e multe alteres, le presentia de un consonante duple reduce le longitude del vocal precedente. Isto pro me es le pronunciation natural, e reduce le numero de homophonos in le lingua. In le interlingua vivente a conferentias, parolas como ano e anno, casa e cassa, papa e pappa se pronuncia de maniera distincte.
  • Pro personas qui insiste que le consonantes duple es troppo difficile de usar, le 'ortografia colateral' existe, que face de interlingua un lingua phonetic como tu lo prefere (e modifica tamben le pronunciation). In le practica, isto es solo un question pro amatores de debattos linguistic: tote le interlinguistas active prefere le orthographia standard, incluse le locutores de linguas con orthographia plus phonetic. Proque pensa tu que isto es?
  • Io nota que le consonantes duple in anglese non pare presentar problemas a te; tu scribe sin errores orthographic. Nonobstante, le anglese ha le relation inter orthographia e pronunciation le plus irregular de tote le linguas europee! Isto totevia non ha impedite su dominantia como lingua auxiliar international, lo que me pare provar que iste question es de pauc importantia pro le acceptation de un lingua international.
Martijn 22:23, 27 novembre 2009 (UTC)
  1. Gopsill, F. P. (1990). International languages: a matter for Interlingua. Sheffield, England: British Interlingua Society. ISBN 0-9511695-6-4. OCLC 27813762. 


Learn Interlingua[modificar fonte]

Just heard of this language tonight but I think I need to learn it!

------------- (data del precedente commentario es: 22 julio 2009, 206.55.187.178)
Hi / Hola, if you want to learn Interlingua you can use the site
www.interlingua.com or you can use the help page (help="adjuta")
Adjuta:Referentias_pro_apprender_interlingua. --------- PaceFlama 04:23, 19 augusto 2009 (UTC)


Community Projects for the Community Portal in Interlingua[modificar fonte]

Hi, Does anybody have any idea for community projects to be listed in the Community Portal? In my opinion one project I think of:

Create an Interlingua Portal[modificar fonte]

Create an Interlingua dictionary[modificar fonte]

Can we create an Interlingua dictionary on sourceforge.net or googlecode like this one? http://mozilla-arg.sourceforge.net/

  • Mushi 22:41, 4 decembre 2009 (UTC)

Create a page to list the Wikipedia Templates and explain their purpose and usage[modificar fonte]

Lista de patronos (List of templates)

Hi, is there a list of templates somewhere? I'd like to find one just by writing "patrono" (or maybe "template") in the search field. Wakuran 12:18, 26 martio 2009 (UTC)

Hi Wakuran,
A list of templates/patronos is here (in categories, but the list does not include all the templates, because many templates do not include a category inside their definition page):
* Categoria:Patronos
* Categoria:Patronos_infobox
* Categoria:Patronos_de_navigation --------- PaceFlama 04:23, 19 augusto 2009 (UTC)
  • Any other project idea?

Discussion Page for the Community Portal[modificar fonte]

(EN) Please leave this discussion page about Intelingua Community and its projects here and do not move it. :-)

(IA) Pro favor non mover isto pagina. --- PaceFlama 04:04, 14 decembre 2009 (UTC)

Grande numero de nove articulos?[modificar fonte]

Io ha vidite que durante le passate duo menses le numero del articulos in le Wikipedia in interlingua ha crescite de circa 5.600 a plus que 9.000. Como isto es possibile? Naturalmente io me multe gaudia de iste crescimento rapide. /Scriptor

Io crede que es por le Botes --Flag of Santiago de Cali.svg Remux - Io nunquam oblidara que io inamorar me de le plus belle flor Ĉu mi povas helpi vin en io?Esperanto star.png 23:58, 6 januario 2012 (UTC)

Io Non potes salvaguadar le articula[modificar fonte]

Me adjuva per favore.--Jondel (discussion) 15:07, 28 julio 2016 (UTC)