Talk:Interlingue

message: The pronunciation guide says "th - same as English". But English has both voiced th (as in this) and unvoiced th (as in thin), so it's not clear what is meant here. --Zundark 18:14, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's my fault, I meant the voiceless one.Cameron Nedland 01:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Is there a reason there's no translation given into english of the example text? ACookr (talk) 18:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Example text 

message: The article needs a section on Occidental's grammar.  Also, it might not be out of place to compare it with Esperanto and with Interlingua, its main competitors. --Jim Henry (talk) 19:19, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar? 

message: ¿No sería /kw/? Creía que /q/ era uvular. TMU (talk) 03:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  qu - same as English. IPA: /qw/ 

message: The article says that Occidental is based on European Indo-European languages - but surely it is worth mentioning that it is primarily based on Romance languages? There is very little Germanic influence by comparison, and as far as I know no (or virtually no) direct Slavic, Greek, Baltic etc. influence.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.185.117.127 (talk) 05:17, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, are actually Greek and Latin vowels related with more consonanted languages (unlike some Anatolic and Levantine), or it was a(n) Herculean effort? LOL, "Occidental" for China? There were Ottomans, battles for meters, gunpowder, compass, Andaluzian like (admirals) open sea pioneers, flu epidemics and pirates, what a luck...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.10.158.149 (talk) 15:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Romance languages 

message: "Occidental... faded into insignificance following the appearance in the early 1950s of a competing naturalistic project, Interlingua" The source for this in Googlebooks is by "Wikipedians". I'm not sure if that is an acceptable source but the Googlebook cites another source.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naytz (talk • contribs) 16:59, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  sourcing 

message: If the language is officially called Interlingue now, also in Unicode, as well as on Wikipedia itself. Shouldn't Interlingue language be the main page and Occidental language be the redirect? A lot of pages currently links to Occidental over Interlingue due to the infoboxes and navboxes using Occidental over Interlingue at the moment.
Pages where the name of the language is used in an article, outside of infoboxes/navboxes are pages like List of Estonians, De Wahl's rule, Intal language (the two latter mentions Occidental, but only links to Interlingue).
Liggliluff (talk) 16:37, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Occidental, later Interlingue" 

message: The old issues of Cosmoglotta have been available for a number of years now, and after reading through them a number of times I feel like I finally have an understanding of just what Occidental did from its inception until the 1950s. But it would be nice to have them elsewhere besides Scribd and Blogger to reference. I've been considering uploading them to Wikisource. Any thoughts on that? Mithridates (talk) 04:41, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: As a general rule, works must be much older to be PD. US is pre-1924, and the EU is life+70 (so nothing from the 1950s for a few years). So they won't be eligible for uploading for a long while.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:20, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi , thanks for the message, I have good news actually: I received permission from the Interlingue-Union (the organization that still owns and publishes Cosmoglotta) in the meantime to type up any and all issues. Direct quote: "Yes on posse tippar li plu nov nrós de Cosmoglotta por far les trovabil in li internet por quicunc volent vider les" (Yes, you can type the newer issues of Cosmoglotta to make them findable on the internet for anyone who wishes to see them) along with a thanks for the works I've been doing. Now since I've been using the modern orthography and correcting typos if there are any, I have been putting them up on a separate wiki in the meantime. I'll continue to put them up there (easier that way) but the Interlingue-Union is in favour of putting them anywhere and everywhere so others will be able to bring them to Wikisource if they so wish. Mithridates (talk) 09:31, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's great. But for Wikisource, they need to go to Commons:Commons:Email_templates/Consent and fill an appropriate message. Wikimedia needs a clear message that's direct from the owner and with a clear free license; not merely "to make them findable", but to reprint and produce derivative works from them.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:34, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I suspected as much (thanks for the info too). That plus wanting to type them all in the modern orthography is why I'm doing them all elsewhere. Mithridates (talk) 13:05, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referencing Cosmoglotta