Welcome to Wittenberg!

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - Marcel Eðo Pairescu Tafial

Pages: [1] 2
The Cosa / 56th Cosă -- Month of Recess Discussion Thread
« on: September 01, 2021, 06:36:05 AM »
Dear colleagues, please come to order.

This is a Month of Recess. As such, the timetable for this month is as follows:

Date DätsTopic TopicSpeakers Parleirs
1 - 30Recess

No debates are expected to occur this month. However, Members may use this thread to raise points of order and similar affairs.

The Cosă will properly reconvene on the First of October.

The Cosa / 56th Cosă -- August Clark Discussion Thread
« on: August 01, 2021, 09:55:14 AM »
Dear colleagues, please come to order.

I hereby open this month's session of the Cosă. The timetable is as follows:

Date DätsTopic TopicSpeakers Parleirs
01 - 1156RZ1: The Talossa Shall Choose Its King Amendment
56RZ1: L'Amendamaintsch "Talossa Çoiçarha Ça Regeu"
Miestră Schivă, FREEDEMS
HRM John I
12 - 2156RZ2: The Talossan Criminal Law Reform Bill #1
56RZ2: El Proxhet dal Reformaziun del Drept Penal Talossan n:reu 1
Miestră Schivă, FREEDEMS
22 - 31Recess

The first subject on the agenda is RZ1. Once everyone on the Speakers list had had their turn, the remaining MCs will be able to speak about RZ1 in any order they like. You still have the chance to register your speech in this thread, mind you, and I encourage everyone who wishes to speak this month to do so.

Note that this is not a voting thread. The actual voting will take place as usual in the SoS's Voting Thread which is not yet available at the time that I write this, but that shouldn't be an issue.

The Cosa / Order of Business for the August 2021 Clark
« on: July 20, 2021, 06:15:07 PM »
Esteemed Members of the Cosă, dear colleagues,

I intend to open a thread on this board concurrent with the August 2021 Clark, in which Members will be able to debate bills on the Clark in question. As such, that thread will be open from the 1st until the 21st of August. As there is no real procedure for this (yet), I call all Party leaders and other Members of this House to help establish the Order of Business for the coming Clark.

Here are some of my thoughts:
- Bills will be discussed in the order they appear in in the Clark. Only one Bill shall be discussed at a time.
- Party leaders may request Free Time in this thread. During Free Time, the Cosă may debate things that are not part of the Clark.
- Members of the Cosă who wish to speak on a bill or during Free Time are invited to announce it in this thread. If the Member who Clarked a given bill or requested Free Time wishes to speak, they will be first to do so in the discussion thread, otherwise the first Member to speak shall be picked from the same party or, failing that, from the same side of the Cosă (Goverment or Opposition). They will then be followed by a member of the opposing side of the Cosă and so on, until the list of Members is exhausted. At that point, Members will be able to freely give speeches if they wish to do so, until the next point on the agenda is brought up by the Túischac'h.
- Party leaders may request Terpelaziuns or Question Time in this thread. These will be organised as per Lexh H.2, except that no separate threads shall be created for each question.
- Members will be able to raise Points of Order at any time during the debate.

I am aware that this procedure may be alien to Members of this House. My predecessor, the Honorable S:reu Rôibeardescù, tried to establish something similar to this during the last Cosă but was met with apathy at best. It is my true opinion that the Cosă should, nay -- must, not become a deserted forum board, but rather do what a Parliament is supposed to do: parlar!

So, feel free to announce your intention to speak in the upcoming Clark, request Free Time or Question Time, or let me know about how this process could be improved or streamlined in this thread. Your feedback is not just appreciated but of utmost importance!

EDIT: The August Clark has started.

Maritiimi-Maxhestic / Parishes and Townships
« on: May 07, 2021, 07:42:34 PM »
Based on this thread, I made a quick provisional map of our province. The parishes are not official and subject to change, and the only canton with townships so far is Vilatx Freiric. Also everything is unnamed.

This is the link.

Please suggest parish and township borders, as well as names for them!

Wittenberg / Peerage questions
« on: May 07, 2021, 05:41:48 PM »
Ever since Lord Danivescu's was appointed Baron of Vilatx Freiric, I figured future Talossan language materials should teach the titles of peerage, which is why I started researching them a bit. My research left me more confused than before, so I'll ask some questions here hoping that someone else can explain all of this (and then hopefully update the TalossaWiki article afterwards).

1) It is said that Dukes get provinces, Counts get cantons (except in Florenciă where they get parishes), and Barons get townships. How then could Lord Davinescu become the Baron of a canton?
2) Is there even a list or map of parishes and townships for every province? As far as I can tell, the only province with fully delineated parishes and townships is Vuode, while Benito has only defined its parishes (called "sexteirs"), and Florenciă has one named but otherwise underdefined parish called Thord (Lord Hooligan's county).

Thanks in advance.

EDIT: Please understand that I am not trying to undermine Lord Davinescu's peerage in any way. Who knows, maybe this could be rectified by making him a Count instead?

El Glheþ Talossan / Re: 6th Clark - April 2021
« on: April 28, 2021, 01:24:10 PM »
As someone who is not (yet) a Membreu del Ziu, I will post the following message on the El Glheþ Talossan board instead.

Sextéu Clark da Simca-Quintéu Cosa

Noi refuçént noastra sancziun à’cest RZ21 es RZ24 es perventüră exerciçént l’impidamaintsch rexhital.

Noi aprovént acest RZ22 es RZ23.  Lor recorda starp l'annuntzia dels legeux.

—  Ian Regeu

It is always great to see the national language used in official correspondence, which is why I wrote the "El Estat" document for the then-Regent-now-Baron back then in the first place, but I must demand that, if the language is to be used, that it should be used properly. This passage contains some errors which are so basic that they are beyond embarrassing, especially for someone who is said to not only have studied the language but have been a catalyst for the controversial 2007 Arestada, if I understand the TalossaWiki correctly. Here is a quick rundown.

Sextéu Clark da Simca-Quintéu Cosa
This literally means "Sixth Clark of Five-Fifth{wrong gender} Cosa".
The correct translation is Sextéu Clark dal Simeinçe-Quintéă Cosă.

Noi refuçént noastra sancziun à’cest RZ21 es RZ24 es perventüră exerciçént l’impidamaintsch rexhital.
Literally "We refuse{wrong stress} our* sanction to this RZ21 and RZ24 and herewith exercise{wrong stress} the royal veto."
Regular verbs in the first and third person plural (noi, os, as, ça *-ent) are never stressed on the final syllable. I also have an issue with the inconsistent use of Ă; it should be either noastra ... perventüra or noastră ... perventüră (or noastrâ ... perventürâ but that is neither here nor there).
Thus, the correct translation is Noi refuçent noastră sancziun àð RZ21 es RZ24 es perventüră exerciçent l’impidamaintsch rexhital.

Noi aprovént acest RZ22 es RZ23.  Lor recorda starp l'annuntzia dels legeux.
Literally "We approve{wrong stress} this RZ22 and RZ23. Record them* among the digest* of (the) laws."
I checked the Scúrzniâ Gramáticâ, talossan.com and the draft of the 2017 Gid Compläts, and I have come to realise that the use of "lor" there is ambiguous. All of these documents explain that "ça" is the neuter plural, i.e. "they" when talking about inanimate objects, and that the object form of "ça" is "en", but the logical consequence that therefore "them" when talking about inanimate objects is "en" in Talossan is never explicitly stated. I for one would say that using "lor" here is wrong, but I am not sure.
The Talossan word for annals is "adnalăs". "annuntziă" is digest, or at least the phrase "Annuntziă dels Legeux" is consistently translated as "Digest of Laws" on TalossaWiki despite "annuntziă" missing from the dictionary. I do not mind the reference to the Digest, but if you aim for an accurate translation, you ought to use "adnalăs" instead.
In any case, the way I would translate it is Noi aprovent RZ22 es RZ23.  Recordetz-en starp las adnalăs dels legeux.

Should any questions arise, please let me know.

Wittenberg / Announcing the Parti Tafialistà
« on: April 10, 2021, 10:43:16 AM »
I registered this party a while ago, but I figured it'd only be fair to announce its existence to the wider public as well.
My new party will stand for nothing and will refrain from political ads of any kind, since I'll win seats whether you vote for me or not. One vote is more than enough to get in.

On that note, see you in the Cosă.

Wittenberg / Talossan Language Translation Services
« on: February 02, 2021, 07:54:42 PM »
The Government offered to pay me up to $225 dollars for making a cultural magazine in Talossan back in November — it was part of the draft budget of this Cosă — because they hoped money would be enough of a motivation. I rejected the offer because 1) I'm not a journalist and 2) I dont need the money, I can do it for free, I have done it for free in the past (see Zoneu Auþorisat). Ever since then though, not one person actually came up to me to request my services, even though the Government would literally pay them real United States currency to do so. I don't get it.

So I'll reiterate:
if you need some text or article translated into Talossan, just ask me.
I don't demand payment assuming you don't get paid either.

Wittenberg / Re: [FINANCE] Draft Budget coming November 1
« on: November 02, 2020, 09:03:27 AM »
It is not the government's intention in this case to set up a competing magazine.  In fact, the honoraria money is intended to commission Talossan language articles (with translations) for La S'chinteia.  My assumption here in these honoraria is that "if you won't do it for love, will you do it for lucre?"

I would already be doing that for free if I knew how to write articles, but I dont, so I dont. Money wouldnt change that.

El Glheþ Talossan / Översteir 1.1.0
« on: October 12, 2020, 06:10:32 PM »
Attention all Ladintschen and Ladintschen-to-be: the New Översteir has just gotten a big new update!

It now automatically inflect nouns and adjectives for number and gender so you don't have to go through the complicated pluralisation rules all by yourself (trust me, setting it up was the stuff of nightmares, and I still feel bad for subjecting Lüc to them...)

Another new nifty feature is having the choice between using the New Översteir in English or Talossan, it's all translated and fully functional (except the update info that I'm in the middle of translating as I type this).

There are a few other changes as well so if you want to know what else is new, or which features are planned for future releases (like pronunciation guides, fancy!), follow the link above and read the aforementioned update info.

I'd like to thank Lüc da Schir as always for his excellent work, for which he still doesnt credit himself properly for some reason. Without his continued efforts, this project literally wouldn't exist. You think I could just write a new Översteir from scratch??

Please let me know if you find any bugs or errors (as they're probably my fault) or if you have a comment you'd like me to see. Use the Bug Report / Word Suggestion form for that, it's linked at the New Översteir. Also keep in mind that these comments and bug reports are completely anonymous, so if you want me to get back to you, include contact details of some kind in your report. I've actually gotten a translation request for an app through that form and to this day I have no idea who sent it.

Anyway, that is all. Enjoy the New Översteir 1.1.0!

El Glheþ Talossan / Syllabification?
« on: October 12, 2020, 11:36:36 AM »
The issue of syllabification came up when Lüc wanted to add it as a feature to the New Översteir. Does anyone know if there are rules for it somewhere (aside from those that deal with vowel clusters)?

El Glheþ Talossan / [ISSUE] More stress rule fun
« on: September 20, 2020, 06:57:43 AM »
I'm finding myself in a bit of a situation.

Take a look at the stress rule for a second. For the sake of transparency, I marked everything that wasnt already a rule under the CÚG in orange.
If no syllable has a stress mark, the primary stress of the word falls on the final syllable that has a vowel with an umlaut, trema or ring (ä, å, ë, ï, ö, ü) or which is followed by a consonant, after ignoring the endings -s, -en(s), -ent(s), -er(s), -esch(en), -eu(x), -ica(s), -ică(s), -ic(i), -(esch)laiset(s), -lor, -mint(s), -p(h)äts and -sqåb(s) in case it has one of those. In the context of this rule, semivocalic ‹i› and ‹u› as well as ‹e› following ‹a› are counted as consonants.

Irregular stress is marked with an accute accent (´). If the irregular stress falls on a word-final vowel, it is marked with a grave accent (`). Vowels that already have a diacritic cannot receive a stress mark (see 1.5.).

In words where the stress rule fails to determine stress, it falls on the first syllable: mici [ˈmiʧi], ricăs [ˈrikəs].

Now, knowing this stress rule, where would you put the stress in posteic "back door"? Just going by how the rule is phrased, it should be posteic , but theyre actually supposed to be posteic (compare the pre-2007 spelling postéic).

What should we do about that? Should there be another exception in the stressrule for words that end in vowel + -ic(a/ă/i) or should we respell these words according to the existing rule?

Or perhaps, we should look into coming up with a new and more straightforward stress rule altogether? Please let me know, stuff like this needs immediate fixing.

(EDIT: removed references to -lor words)

I have just now discovered a series of mistakes in the Treisour (the Big File with all the words in it) regarding verbs that are irregularly stressed in the infinitive (think úçar).

These verbs were marked {vs} in the original 1996 Treisour tag system, a system which was carried over from the physical book, to the Glheþineir, and finally both the old and new versions of the Översteir. Now, there appear to be a couple of verbs that have this tag but apparently lack irregular stress:

ACQUAINT aquuntar
AGREE TO DISAGREE laßar boglhar
APPEND apeindar
ASSUME POWER preindar el pevar
BACK DOWN bäcar daun
BEAT (DEFEAT) vintschar
BEND tirnar
BREAK THRU schpartallojmar
BRING UP, RAISE apoartar upp
BUMP (INTO) bimpar
CRAM (FOR EXAM) crämar
DEFEND zefençar
DROP OUT OF dropar aut da (note however that DISCARD dropar is not tagged {vs})
FILL OUT (FORM) complätsar
FLIRT flirtar
OPEN åpnar
REMIND remeindar
SCREW UP screuar över (again, SCREW screuar is not tagged {vs})
SING cantar
SWITCH chinxhar
UNSCREW unscreuar
VETO vetoïçar

It is my understanding that these verbs are oversights and thus should be corrected. It is worth noting that a lot of these verbs either have a vowel with a diacritic (ä, ö, å) or used to have one (former î words). Some of them were even explicitly stressmarked in the original Treisour ("screuar" was spelled scríuar consistently) or in the Scurznia Gramatica which came out around the same time (laßar was spelled láßar on p. 57)

Correcting these entries is a matter of seconds. Though I wanted to make sure no one has any problems with me changing them.

Does anyone object to having them stressmarked (again)?

El Glheþ Talossan / Gender-neutral Talossan
« on: May 21, 2020, 11:52:59 AM »
While I'm working on a new version of the Grammar (i swear miestră its coming), I wanted to raise the issue of gender neutrality in the Talossan language. I figured since we have two non-binary prospectives we might want to find ways to make Talossan more inclusive.

Gender marking is already way less prevalent in Talossan than in other Romance languages (most adjectives are epicene, -escu with participles etc), but el Glheþ still lacks gender-neutral third person pronouns for instance, and the English way of just using the 3rd person plural doesnt work since -- surprise! -- the plural forms are gendered as well. What would you suggest we should do?

@Miestrâ Schiva, UrN

Estimats membreux dal SIGN,
this is the thread where we discuss the inclusion of new words into the Treisour This is how it works: The suggestions are taken directly from the Översteir suggestion box. I post them here, and then we have a vote on whether or not to include them into the Treisour. The changes are then effective immediately.

To start off, here are the first two suggestions that I received:

Talossan word: Micar
English translation: To mick
Part of speech: Verb
Context (e.g. citations for use, word origin, etc.): You know

Present Participlemichind(s)
Past Participlemicat(s), micadă(s), michescu (-schti)
Presentmichéumicásmicamichent (micameux)michetzmichent
Pastmicheveumichevásmichevamichevent (michevameux)michevetzmichevent
Futuremicarhéumicarhásmicarhamicarhent (micarhameux)micarhetzmicarhent
Conditionalmicadréumicadrásmicadramicadrent (micadrameux)micadretzmicadrent

ADDED (April 12, 2020 21:22)

Talossan word: Gordò
English translation: Gordon
Part of speech: Noun (masculine)
Context (e.g. citations for use, word origin, etc.): Glüc's nickname is Gordon.

ADDED AS "Gourdò" (April 12, 2020 21:22)

Pages: [1] 2