From: ADAM KASANOF <akasanof /c`e/ beta.delphi.com>         There are a few pages on Peano's Latine Sine Flexione (Interlingua) in "The Loom of Language," by Bodmer and Hogben, available in paperback from Norton, ISBN 0-393-30034-X.  Here's a short summary from that book: basically, Peano made the stem of all nouns from the ablative form:" campo," "arte," "carne," etc.  The stem of verbs comes from the imperative, the infinitive without "re," so you get "scribe" from "scribere," "audi" from "audire," etc.         "Vox populi, vox dei" of Latin becomes "voce de populo, voce de deo" in Peano's version.  There are no verb persons or number: "me habe" = I have, "te habe = "you have," "nos habe"="we have."  There are no genders, no definite or indefinite articles.  There is an optional plural in "s"' : "patre habe filios"  =  " the  father has sons," but you can also say "three sons" = "tres filio."           There are no mandatory verb tenses: "heri me es in London" = "yesterday, I was in London," while "hodie illos es in Paris" = "today they are in Paris," and "cras te es in New York" = "tomorrow you will be in New York."  Where neded, "e" can express a past time, "i" (from "ire") a future one, as in "me i bibe," = "I am going to drink," and "me e bibe," = "I drank."          Pronouns aren't inflected for case: "me" = "I" or "me," "illo" = "he" or "him."         Peano wrote in the early 1900's, and in 1915 published "Vocabulario Commune" containing 14,000 words.         There are short references to Interlingua in some of Mario Pei's books, and there have been work's on Interlingua since Peano's time, though I'm not familiar with them.  I believe the main library at Columbia (where I went to school) has one.          Hope this helps.          Adam   ****************************************************************************  From: Jim Seger <JKSeger /c`e/ aol.com>: Subject: LsF Summary  Ken:     Here is the summary of LsF I posted a year ago.  Currently I don't have the time to pursue auxlang subjects but hope to get back into it before too much longer.  I would be most pleased, Ken, if you would be kind enough to repost this summary.     Regarding James Chandler's questions, I am not aware of any active movements for naturalistic IALs other than Interlingua.  That does not mean, however, that "this language now has invested in it all the hopes of the naturalist movement." Regardless of how many people are using Peano's LsF, I am convinced it is by far the most superior of the naturalistic IALs.        Jim Seger     (An aside to Latin teachers: I suggest that teaching LsF, besides providing learners with an outstanding international language, will also serve to attract many of them to explore Latin itself.  Having a good grasp of Latin's vocabulary, they can devote themselves exclusively to learning its reputedly "formidable" grammar and syntax).  ****************************************************************************  From: JKSeger /c`e/ AOL.COM Subject: CONLANG: Latino sine Flexione, an introduction  Here is a brief introduction to Latino sine Flexione.  Primary sources are:  1.  G. Peano, "Key to and Primer of Interlingua," E. P. Dutton & Co., 1931 2.  any good Latin dictionary, e.g., Cassell's. 3.  A. Gode, "Interlingua-English Dictionary," IALA, Frederick Ungar Publ. Co., 1951    (The original name of Peano's language was Latino sine Flexione; it is used here         instead of Interlingua to avoid confusion with IALA's language of the same name).     For communication among most educated peoples of the world today, Latin has the best possible vocabulary.  Such people already know or can make reasonable guesses from general knowledge as to the meaning of many Latin words.  So says Giuseppe Peano, the famous Italian mathematician.  However, Latin's inflexions and syntax are overly complex and a stumbling block to speakers of modern analytic languages.  Thus, he says, let us strip Latin of its "ponderous burden of inflexions" to obtain the ideal constructed language.     Vocabulary:  Latino Sine Flexione (LSF) adopts all Latin words, Greek words naturalized through Latin, and all commonly used international words, e.g., hotel, hospital, communismo, radar, telephono, microscopio, etc.  New words are formed from LsF in the same way they are formed from Latin and Greek roots.  Also, words may be adopted from any language if they are in international use, e.g., safari, tequila, kaput, fakir, hors d'oeuvres, etc.     Pronunciation: LsF is like Italian except that: C is the K in English skill; CH is the k in English kill; G is as in English gill; H is as in English hill; J is as in German jung; V is like the W in English wine (or alternately in German Wein); Y is like the U as in French tu; AE is like the AI in English aisle; OE is like the OI in English boil.     Word order is typically SVO and is similar to English and the modern romance languages.  Adjectives may immediately precede or follow the noun modified.  Adverbs similarly stand next to the verb modified.  Definite and indefinite articles (the, a, an) are not used.      Cases: There are no case inflections.  The genitive of possession is noted using "de". Thus, "manu de puella" means "the girl's hand".  The dative is indicated by "ad" when necessary for clarity.  We express "give our book to her" as "da nostro libro ad illa" or "da (ad) illa nostro libro".  The accusative is noted by word order, placing the direct object after the verb.  Thus, we say "The woman sees the girl" as "femina vide puella".  However, for emphasis or contrast, the direct object may come first if the meaning is clear.  Thus, we may say "it is the girl, not the boy, whom the mother sees" as "es puella, non puero, qui matre vide".       Nouns:  Singular nouns are formed from the Latin ablative singular.  The singular may be used in place of the plural, e.g., tres puella.  Use of a plural form is optional and is formed from the Latin accusative plural.                  Singular:                                 Plural: 	  Latin               LsF                 Latin                  LsF 	  puella              puella              puellae                puellas 	  populus             populo              populi                 populos 	  liber               libro               libri                  libros 	  donum               dono                dona                   dona  	  rex                 rege                reges                  reges 	  manus               manu                manus                  manus 	  dies                die                 dies                   dies      Adjectives & Adverbs: Adjectives are formed from the Latin neuter ablative singular, and adverbs are formed from these adjectives by changing the final vowel to e.  Thus:         LATIN                         LsF Adj.               LsF Adv.         magnus, a, um                  magno                  magne         liber, a, um                   libero                 libere         pulcher, ra, rum               pulchro                pulchre         fortis, is, e                  forti                  forte         acer, ris, re                  acri                   acre         potens                         potenti                potente     Optionally, adverbs may keep the same form as adjectives or may be expressed by a periphrase, e.g., "in modo diligente", "cum mente diligente", etc.    The comparative is formed by placing "plus" before the adjective or adverb.  Thus, "plus pulchro" means "more beautiful".  "Plus pulchre" means "more beautifully".    The superlative is formed similarly by the word "maximo".  Thus, "maximo forti"  means "strongest".  "Maximo forte" means "most strongly".    An alternate superlative is formed by inserting "issim" before the final vowel of the adjective or adverb.  Thus, "fortissime" means "most strongly" but has the connotation of merely being very strong but not necessarily the strongest of all.     Verbs:  Dropping the "re" ending from the Latin infinitive forms the LsF imperative, prohibitive and present tense.     Imperative:   labora!    Prohibitive:  non labora! The present tense is identical to the imperative and makes use of personal pronouns to replace Latin's verbal endings for indicating person and number.      Present Tense:        me labora                  nos labora       te labora                  vos labora       illo, illa labora          illos, illas labora  The present tense is to be used whenever possible to express other verbal tenses. For example, "I will work tomorrow" becomes simply "Cras me labora."  "I worked yesterday" becomes "Heri me labora." Whenever use of the present tense is inadequate, LsF provides periphrastic verbal constructions that are similar in form to English.  The periphrastic past tense uses the auxiliary verb habere and the verbal past participle:    Past Tense:       me habe laborato             nos habe laborato       te habe laborato             vos habe laborato       illo, illa habe laborato     illos, illas habe laborato  A future tense may be formed using the auxiliary "i" or "va" or "vol".  For example,     "me vol labora" means "I will work". Present active participle: formed from the Latin in the ablative case.  For example,      "laborante" means "working". Progressive verbal aspect: formed using the verb "es" and the present active participle.     Present:   "illa es scribente" means "she is writing"     Past:      "illa era scribente" means "she was writing"     Future:    "illa vol es scribente" means "she will be writing" Passive Voice: formed using the verb "es" and the past participle.  For example,      "vos es servato" means "you are served"; "vos era servato" means "you were served", etc. Other verbal aspects such as the imperfect and continuative require circumlocutions, e.g.:      "illo soleba dicere" means "he used to say"     "illos persiste id agere" means "they keep on doing it" The conditional and subjunctive follow the indicative forms, e.g.:     "si hoc pulvere es strychnino, canes jam es mortuo" means      "if this powder were strichnine, the dogs would already be dead".  Finally, Peano accepts these irregular verb forms: dic, duc, es, fac, fer, ir, vol.     Sample LsF Paragraph:   LSF es lingua artificiale que omne persona pote scribe et dice facilemente.  Suo vocabulario non es formato ad arbitrio, sed contine vocabulos hodie in usu in vario linguas.  Pro iste ratione illo habe maximo praecisione de expressione et es vivente organismo.  Illo es analytico et libero ab mortuo pondere de grammatica.  Illo es facto pro facilitate de communicatione internationale in scientia, technologia, commercio et administratione.                Jim Seger  ****************************************************************************  From: JKSeger /c`e/ AOL.COM Subject: CONLANG: Latino sine Flexione (LsF)  Francisco Loaiza wrote: > I have some questions about LSF:  > Since my Italian is not all that great, how about the pronuntiation of <t>? > Is it <ts> like in medieval Latin, or more like English <t>?  Modern Italian <t> is pronounced like English <t> in <still>, not the  aspirated English <t> in <till>.  > Do you pronounce double letters as such or as a single one? E.g. <bello>  > as <bel-lo> or <beh-lo>?  Peano doesn't address double letters. However, Italian pronounces double  letters as double, not as a sign to shorten the preceding vowel.  > Is the general rule that you take the <ablative> singular of the Latin  > noun and make it the singular form and then add <s> for the plural?  This would yield the same result in all cases expect for nouns from the  third declension where the stem changes, e.g., <rex, reges>.  > Are <es> and <era> the only two forms of <to be> needed?  To my knowledge Peano didn't provide a complete list of irregular forms. I have come across the forms <fui> and <esse>.   >> Other verbal aspects such as the imperfect and continuative require >> circumlocutions, e.g.: >>     "illo soleba dicere" means "he used to say" >>     "illos persiste id agere" means "they keep on doing it"  > Are there more of these extra verbal forms or is <soleba> the only other > auxiliary form needed?  LsF is not limited to these two circumlocutions.  Others are permissible  provided they can be readily understood by analyzing each word separately.    >> The conditional and subjunctive follow the indicative forms, e.g.: >>     "si hoc pulvere es strychnino, canes jam es mortuo" means >>     "if this powder were strichnine, the dogs would already be dead".  > Is <si hoc pulvere <era> strychnino. . . . .> another valid subjunctive > formation? (If this powder had been. . . . > )  Yes, it is.  > me age multas gratias Mr. Seger, et spera meas questiones non es nimis > difficiles :-) >            Francisco  Mr. Loaiza, vestro questiones non es nimis difficile usque ad praesentia. At cras? :-)              Jim Seger ------- following not sent. Seriously, I am not overly concerned with being able to answer all your  future questions.  The reason is not that I know all the answers (which  I don't) but rather that LsF users consider it a growing language  accepts departures from its rules so long  as the meaning is clear.  Thus, your phrase <meas questiones> was clear  to me even though LsF's rules would produce <meo questiones>. Of course, the onus is on the writer to make sure the meaning is clear to the  intended audience.    ****************************************************************************  From: JKSeger /c`e/ AOL.COM Subject: Re: CONLANG: Latino sine Flexione (LsF)  Edmund Grimley-Evans commented on this exchange: >>> Is the general rule that you take the <ablative> singular of the Latin  >>> noun and make it the singular form and then add <s> for the plural?  >> This would yield the same result in all cases expect for nouns from the  >> third declension where the stem changes, e.g., <rex, reges>.  > I thought the LsF singular was the ablative singular and the plural  > was the accusative plural form, so you don't get the same result with >   - second declension neuter nouns: dono, dona >   - third declension neuter nouns: animali, animalia; opere, opera >   - fourth declension neuter nouns: genu, genua  Yes, Edmund, you are certainly correct.  One may not simply add an "s"  in LsF to form the plural of Latin neuter nouns.       Jim Seger  ****************************************************************************  From: JKSeger /c`e/ aol.com Subject: Re: CONLANG: re: LsF  I.  Ken Caviness wrote:  >> One may not simply add an "s"  >> in LsF to form the plural of Latin neuter nouns.  > I wonder why Peano did it this way, and why his successors haven't  > found a way to simplify this.  As long as he was stripping Latin of  > its "ponderous burden of inflexions", might as well take out one  > more irregularity that doesn't contribute to the meaning.  But maybe  > this is why the plural is optional?  Peano didn't want to introduce any forms foreign to Latin.  >> Peano accepts these irregular verb forms: dic, duc, es, fac, fer, ir, vol.  > What are the meanings of these verb forms, and in what way are they  > irregular?  As well as I can judge, these "irregular" forms come from the following:    1.  dic, duc, fac, fer are the imperative forms in Latin of dicere, ducere, facere,         and ferre.  Peano uses them for both the imperative and present tense.    2.  es derives from "esse", the Latin verb "to be."  It is actually the second         person singular form, i.e., "tu es" means "you are" in Latin, but Peano          extends its use to cover all persons and number.    3.  vol comes from Latin "volo" meaning "I will, wish, am willing," formed in         Latin irregularly from the infinitive "velle."    4.  ir comes from the Latin infinitive "ire" meaning "to go."  I can't figure out        why Peano chose "ir" rather than "i" which Latin forms regularly from its        infinitive.  Did he feel that "i" is too bare a form to retain a distinct sound         when used in the present tense?  Try saying over and over, "me i"        meaning "I go."  It sounds mushy and indistinct after a while, right?  But         this is just a guess on my part.  > I see a mention of your post on the Latin list concerning LsF.  Is that  > the same material you sent here to the conlang list?   Both posts contain the same information.  > LsF interests me, especially since Latin is on my "to learn" list.   > (No dates set yet, though!)  It sounds like it would be a great way  > to drill Latin vocabulary.  I of course enthusiastically agree!  However, whoever wishes eventually to be able to read, write or speak Latin should realize that simply recognizing words is not enough; s/he will need to know other things as well.  For example, suppose the student sees this Latin sentence:          "tempestas magna mare turbat."   Does it mean "the great storm troubles the sea" or "the storm troubles the great sea?"  The reader in this case must know the gender of the nouns: tempestas is feminine, and mare is neuter; the adjective magna is feminine and so must modify tempestas.  To modify mare, it would have to be magnum.  Verbs pose similar requirements.  But, in any case, learning the vocabulary is a huge step toward knowing Latin or any language for that matter.   II.  Edmund Grimley-Evans commented on this exchange: >> Whatever effort a student puts into LsF is never wasted if s/he turns  >> eventually to learning Latin for the words are in fact unadulterated  >> Latin without any admixture of foreign elements.  LsF wouldn't be caught  >> dead using "lingvo" rather than "lingua."    > I thought you said before that "international" words such as "hotel"  > and "hors d'oeuvre" were used in LsF, and I was going to ask how such  > words are to be pronounced ...     I can't find a reference where Peano explains how to pronounce words from languages other than Latin.  My guess is that we should first try to pronounce such words as if they were LsF words.  Words such as "fakir" are easy as they contain only phonemes already  existing in LsF.  (However, "fakir" varies from LsF in that the  accent falls on the last syllable).  On the other hand, the word  "Hors d'oeurves" is clearly harder in that the French vowel sound  in "oeurve" has no counterpart in LsF.  Perhaps it should remain a  matter of personal choice whether one ultimately renders the word as  pronounced in its native language or one limits oneself to uttering  only phonemes existent in LsF.  Frankly, I prefer the former.         Jim Seger    ****************************************************************************