Talk:Lingua Franca Nova

message: __TOC__
The Conjugation Table: It seems really pointless to me. All verbs conjugate the same no matter whether it ends in "ar", "er", or "ir". Also, the conjugations are given in text above it.
Your thoughts?
I quite agree.  I'm sure whoever put it there was well intentioned, but it gives the impression that lfn actually has three different classes of verbs and a full range of inflexions, which is, of course, not true.  I removed it, but did separate the present/past/future sentences to make the simplicity more obvious.
I also removed the "our father" that seems to have been added by the same well-intentioned person.  I don't think it is wise to compare lfn with esperanto or interlingua.  It needs to stand on its own.
George Boeree
Why did you remove the our father?--Jondel 04:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

message: The section on pronunciation also contains some orthographic information (such as using k for c.) Should there be a seperate section for orthography? Or, perhaps, should the pronunciation section simply be retitled "Pronunciation and Orthography"? --24.23.48.248 09:25, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Orthography section? 

message: Do any of you guys think that LFN has enuf speakers to warrant a Wikipedia?Cameron Nedland 13:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's why they have their own at http://lfn.esef.net/index.php/Paje_Prima . Once there the wiki there is complete, and there are more speakers, LFN might earn itself a place in the official Wikipedia.--Kinghajj 01:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uicipedia/Yикиπедиа 

message: This article says the language is not copyrighted. I didn't even think a language could be copyrighted. Does anyone have a link which gives more information about this? Guyjohnston
:Loglan was claimed to be copyrighted... AnonMoos 16:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright of language 

message: I've been trying to make a new account at the non-Wikipedia LFN wiki for a few hours now, and I can't understand how to do so.
I click "Crea un conta o sinia per entra" and try to login, because that's my only choice.
Then it says "use the form below to make a new account" and there is no form. 
Page of reference: 
Please help. Chuffable 02:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi - I left a message on the LFN group regarding this. There was quite a bit of spam for a while and the wiki was changed to only allow registered users to edit. I tried changing the login settings myself but I'm not all that proficient in MediaWiki. I'll write on your talk page when it's fixed. Mithridates 04:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Still nothing after two weeks. Is this at all a priority to you fellows? Chuffable 21:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  HELP making new account 

message: I have to agree with Schaefer - this article badly needs respectable secondary sources that prove this language's notability. Most importantly, there needs to be proof of past or present usage. A wiki and a mailing list by themselves are self-referential and thus not an acceptable proof of notability.
Don't get me wrong: This language is really nice - it is pleasant to read and easy to learn and understand. It is also surprisingly easy to read in Cyrillic - the author did a great job adapting a Romance-based language to the Cyrillic alphabet. Its flag is very nice, too.
But without proper references this shouldn't be on Wikipedia. Please add references. Otherwise it should be deleted. Sorry. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 09:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems to me that having an ISO language code should be sufficient to keep LFN here. Kevins (talk) 16:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I also assume that adding references to the several constructed languages portals that point back to LFN would help "legitimize" it? That should be easy for an LFN advocate to add to the article. If LFN is going to be removed, there are a ton of other constructed language pages that should also be candidate for removal. Kevins (talk) 16:24, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Please bring further deletion-related discussion on the deletion discussion page. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 08:12, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion discussion 

message: Quoting the article:
#Stress is on the vowel before the last consonant or, if that is not possible, on the first vowel.  For example la casa de me tio ("my uncle's house") is pronounced "la CA-sa de me TI-o."
#To make a noun plural, add -s if the noun ends in a vowel, or -es if the noun ends in a consonant. It never alters the original stress of the word.
2 contradicts 1: casas 'houses' is pronounced "CA-sas", not "ca-SAS" as would follow from 1. The statement of stress should be corrected to reflect that it applies only to the base form of the word. Thnidu (talk) 19:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: How about this: Stress is on the vowel before the last consonant or, if that is not possible, on the first vowel. For example, la casa de me tio ("my uncle's house") is pronounced "la CA-sa de me TI-o." Plural vowels have the same stress as their singular counterparts. For example, la casas es bela ("the houses are beautiful") is pronounced "la CA-sas es BE-la." --24.10.63.237 (talk) 06:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It now reads The one exception is the plural in -s or -es, which does not alter the original stress.That covers it. Thnidu (talk) 02:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  stress rule 

message: I did indeed make many edits of the article.  They have never been promotional.  Rather, they have been small additions of npov information or attempts to make the page easier to read.  If this is considered a breech of conflict-of-interest rules, I invite anyone to alter any edits they find offensive in that regard. Cgboeree (talk) 21:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of interest 

message: I have some minor problems with the romanization (or should I be saying the page's sounds matching to the Greek letters?). For instance "B/β" sounds more like a "v" than a "b". Another thing is "Χ/χ" is on the board twice. I fixed the miniscule Hi and was not challenged about it, now I was wondering if I could be given permission to fix the table.
Kostantino888Z (talk) 23:20, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Greek Romanization

message: Any universal or local meanings of the rainbow ? (I'm not from the States (where the language was invented, it seems) so I'm not sure if it's not some local cultural reference to it. 24.203.68.10 (talk) 06:24, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Why the rainbow?

message: I think this article is far too long. It almost contains the entire LFN reference grammar, and is currently about the longest entry on any language (let alone an auxlang - see e.g. the articles on Esperanto and Interlingua). If it were called "LFN grammar", ok, but this is supposed to be an article on the language, not a complete drill-down. I would therefore boldly suggest to do a major clean-up, and also add sections on comparing it to Esperanto and Interlingua (the most well-known and the most well-known Romance auxlang, respectively) and perhaps also to its major source languages, and have some "Reception" and/or "Critisism" section etc. Currently, the article is very unencyclopedic. Jalwikip (talk) 15:38, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Far too long 

message: Would not only it be extremely hard for speakers of Portuguese and Catalan to never do vowel reduction (e.g. even though unstressed and not strongly nasalized  isn't really hard, I can't naturally make my  not become about as raised as , be it English, Spanish, French or Japanese, especially in the case of the central or open vowel and if it is stressed)? IMO even Spanish speakers would think it to be extremely boring to use  instead of  in the case of the word e ("and") thoroughly.
Something you can't also expect from native speakers of said languages is to people not lenite voiced bilabial, dental and velar stops to fricatives or approximants in their respective positions (it is so natural, intuitive and imperceptible that Brazilians don't know they have it, even though I can easily hear that they do the bilabial and dental cases in unstressed position). Also you can't expect complete lack of palatalization of coda sibilants in Portugal, of dental stops in Brazil, and of both in Rio de Janeiro in a language they would admit as auxiliary and naturalistic rather than foreign (especially the last two ones, that palatalize English, Spanish...). I think it should be made clear if the phonology is tolerant to individual speech characteristics that come out of the speakers' native languages, or is it more dictative on the issue like Esperanto, especially if LFN's creator spoke about it. Lguipontes (talk) 23:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phonology 

message: Can anyone add a paragraph or even a sentence to say why this was invented when Interlingua already existed?  Or why someone would choose to learn LFN over Interlingua?  Thanks. Great floors (talk) 19:41, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  How is it different to Interlingua? 

message: Seems like a bad source for total speakers... DemonDays64 (talk) 19:16, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Truth is, numbers of speakers of constructed languages are always a tricky subject. For natural languages, the numbers given usually refer to native speakers only, as in most cases it is pretty much impossible to say how many L2, L3 etc. speakers there are. Constructed languages don't have L1 speakers (the only exception is Esperanto, but even Esperanto has no monolingual speakers), which is quite natural, since it's the kind of language that people learn by choice. Of course, members of a Facebook group are not necessarily speakers, but at least they belong to a community of active and passive users, and that's basically the only hard data we have. As long as it is explicitly mentioned what the number actually refers to, I can see no harm in mentioning it. —IJzeren Jan  Uszkiełtu? 21:54, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Facebook users? 

message: There has been great reluctance to set up Wikipedias for artificial languages other than Esperanto (a Toki Pona Wikipedia slipped through in the early days, but was then removed), so I'm curious how this particular language got its own Wikipedia... AnonMoos (talk) 18:42, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It got its article because someone went to the trouble of creating it. I suppose it was kept because it was sufficiently well done and no one saw an adequate reason to remove it. I would suppose that the Toki Pona article, for example, wasn't equally well sourced. -Roy McCoy (talk) 20:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: No, no, I'm not talking about this article, I'm talking about the Lingua Franca Nova Wikipedia https://lfn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paje_xef ...  The standards for having a Wikipedia set up are much more stringent than having an article on English Wikipedia... AnonMoos (talk) 21:22, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It's reasonably simple: if the language has a valid ISO 639-3 code and there is sufficient activity on the Incubator, that's proof enough that a Wikipedia edition in it is viable. Whether the language is artificial or not is of little consequence here. Besides, it is not true that Esperanto is the only constructed language with a Wikipedia. There's Wikipedias in Interlingua, Ido, Volapük, Interlingue, Novial, Lojban and Kotava as well. —IJzeren Jan  Uszkiel/tu? 22:58, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Lingua Franca Nova seems to be the most recently created and least "established" of any of those.  There must have been a fairly drastic change of policy since the last time I was monitoring new Wikipedia creation (which was admittedly close to ten years ago) to allow the LFN Wikipedia to be created... AnonMoos (talk) 11:33, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  How did this get its own Wikipedia??