cowan at mercury.ccil.org
Mon Feb 29 04:29:55 CET 2016
Doug Ewell scripsit:
> 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 agree, but the conventions are more or less dictated by date.
So Mediaeval Latin is Latin written in the style generally used between
the fall of the Western Roman Empire and the revival of classical learning
in the West, but it is possible to write in that style after or (more
controversially) before that time as well.
> How does la-GB differ from la-SE in the first place?
Probably not much (except in pronunciation, which did come in national
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan cowan at ccil.org
Most languages are dramatically underdescribed, and at least one is
dramatically overdescribed. Still other languages are simultaneously
overdescribed and underdescribed. Welsh pertains to the third category.
More information about the Ietf-languages