Talk:Roman alphabet: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Ro Thorpe No edit summary |
imported>Domergue Sumien (→Move) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:Agreed - [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 19:43, 27 June 2009 (UTC) | :Agreed - [[User:Ro Thorpe|Ro Thorpe]] 19:43, 27 June 2009 (UTC) | ||
::I have no real objection. Let's move to "Roman alphabet". But the term "Latin alphabet" should be accepted as a synonym. Some international languages, especially the Romance languages, use preferently terms such as ''alfabet latin, alfabet llatí, alfabeto latín, alfabeto latino, alphabet latin'', etc. (something like ''alfabet roman'' sounds odd for Latins).--[[User:Domergue Sumien|Domergue Sumien]] 19:03, 3 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:03, 3 October 2010
Move
I think this should be moved to Roman alphabet - strictly speaking, the Latin alphabet is the one used to write Latin (equivalent to 'English alphabet'). Linguists such as Cook and Bassetti (Second Language Writing Systems) use 'Roman alphabet', i.e. a single script with many language-dependent orthographies (rules). John Stephenson 19:11, 27 August 2008 (CDT)
- Agreed - Ro Thorpe 19:43, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- I have no real objection. Let's move to "Roman alphabet". But the term "Latin alphabet" should be accepted as a synonym. Some international languages, especially the Romance languages, use preferently terms such as alfabet latin, alfabet llatí, alfabeto latín, alfabeto latino, alphabet latin, etc. (something like alfabet roman sounds odd for Latins).--Domergue Sumien 19:03, 3 October 2010 (UTC)