Talk:Novial/The Little Prince

Dedication I already translated the dedication. I copied my translation from the Novial Group. Salutos. Valodnieks 10:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have put your 2 translations on their own pages. Same with my translation of chapter 20. Nov ialiste 11:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * We should coordinate who starts with which chapter. So we will proceed faster. Valodnieks 22:55, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, put your name under a few which you intend to translate.
 * I have already nearly completed a translation chapter 1 so I shall post that next.
 * I think that it is okay if some have more than one translation. We will need to carefully examine each to eliminate actual errors, and then consider which is the best choice of words and style. Nov ialiste 15:50, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Point of Grammar: the infinitive marker.
There remains one important problem with Novial 28/30 in terms of its internal consistency and relative to later texts by Jespersen.

In An International Language the infinitive marker is the word "tu" before the infinitive.

Also in AIL it is pemitted to shorten the plural of "lum", "lumes" to simply "lus". Although not stated, regularity would demand the same of words like "tum" etc.

Furthermore Novial Lexike contains many such alternatives in the singular. The following are some examples from NL:

debatu(m), derivatu(m), desertu(m), extraktetu(m), fabrikatu(m), faktu(m), falsu(m), filialu(m), finalu(m), fluidu(m), fortu(m), fosatu(m), fosilu(m), fotografatu(m), grasu(m), heredatu(m), improvisatu(m), institutu(m), kantatu(m), kavu(m), kombusteblu(m), komunikatu(m), komunikendu(m), konglomeratu(m), kontenatu(m), kontributu(m), kopiatu(m), kreatu(m), liquidu(m), majoru(m)

and many more.

Many are from adjectives or past particlples.

In later writings Jespersen used these shortened forms often. In one later essay addressing suggestions and criticisms, he noted that the form "tu" for "tum" clashes with the infinitive marker "tu" which is not acceptable. At the time he dropped an infinitive marker altogether which is possible but reduces flexibility of style and possible easy comprehensibility. He also simultaneously stopped using the verbal noun ending "-o" owing to criticism that it lacked naturalism (!), while complaining that many Spanish and Italian verbal nouns display that ending. All in all I think he was unhappy with these changes but bowing in order "not to seem like a dictator" as he said.

The infinitive marker "tu" is therefore problematic. We discussed this some time ago at the Novial Discussion Group. I suggested that instead of "tu" that the already existing preposition "a" could be used as this is common before infinitives in the Romance languages and in translation corresponds to the English "to" and to the German "zu" which are also common before infinitives in those languages.

Another possibility would be to use the Scandinavian infinitive marker "at", but that would involve introducing a new grammatical word into the language.

In conclusion I propose that the preposition "a" be used as an infinitive marker (although, of course, often no such marker is necessary and I tend to use none unless it seems ambiguous). As far as I remember the Novial Discussion Group agreed with that.

Nov ialiste 16:54, 26 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The 1997-98 Novial Revision group decided to use the Scandinavian "at" and I personally see no problem with "introducing a new grammatical word into the language." Why is this a difficulty? -- BRG 14:57, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Copyright concerns
I am concerned about this - I believe Le Petit Prince is still in copyright. That would mean that posting large sections of texts and translating it would be infringing of that copyright. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:04, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It looks like it's in copyright still in France, but appears out of copyright in the US and Canada. Now, IANAL, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think we're ok. Historybuff 01:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If that is true, then that is good. Do you happen to have a source about the copyright? Ottava Rima (talk) 03:19, 28 February 2010 (UTC)