Latin Variants

[Doug Ewell]

Michael Everson wrote:

> Well, then, you’ve got a problem. Either a text is defined by being a
> linguistic entity, or it’s defined by the date it was written.

Variant subtags identify a linguistic variety, regardless of the actual 
surroundings in which the content was created.

I speak en-US, so if I travel to the UK or Germany and speak as I 
normally do, I would still be speaking en-US. I would not suddenly be 
speaking en-GB or en-DE.

Similarly (I hope), if 'classlat' is defined to represent some variety 
of Latin and 'neolat' another, and someone writes a Latin text today 
using the "classical" conventions, that text should not be called 
'neolat' simply because of when it was written.

> I’m not convinced yet that this is going in the right direction. How
> will la-GB-neolat differ from la-SE-neolat?

How does la-GB differ from la-SE in the first place?

--
Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸