Talk:Solresol

Example

Am I the only who thinks that it wouldbe intresting to hear some basic phrases sung? 91.153.52.17 21:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

How is Solresol spoken? I are there defacto ways? is pitch absolute or relative?

(Reply to above) I think pitch is relative, since it's based on solfege (i.e. key doesn't matter). Kind of like, instead of "a b c# d" you might just have "do re mi fa" instead. Don't think it's actually "spoken" much anymore, though... Weien 08:18, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

---

Eco 1993 gives 1827, not 1817, as the date for the beginning of Solresol's creation. The only early book I can find mention of was published in 1866, but Eco says Soudre "worked forty-five years perfecting his language", won a 10K franc prize in 1855, and a gold medal at the London Exposition in 1862 - so obviously he had been publicizing the language for some years before the book was published. Does anyone know where the date 1817 comes from, or if it's just a typo? If the language was "finished" in 1866, that "45 years" implies he started about 1821. --Jim Henry 21:18, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I am one of the really rare persons to have the book from 1866. I did read that different small editions did maked. But really small. The reason can be, that Sudre did try all the time a/ to perfect his language and b/ to find a real good buyer (the Army!). And he did dead before he did have success! His wife did publish the language after he died. It is possible that she did have problems to find money to edit the complete work (it is an very expensiv matter because of the printing of musical notes!) and that can be the reason of the divers little editions. - oui 18:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

1866?

Gajewski's book says that Sudre died in 1862. How could he possibly publish anything in 1866? Alex Kapranoff 15:11, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, his wife did that! The book answer the question! - oui 18:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

numbers

Is there a way to say, write, whatever "zero" in solresol?

I can't find "zero" specifically, but perhaps one is meant to use "Lado", which means "Nothing". —Preceding unsigned comment added by GammaAlphaRho (talk • contribs) 23:58, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Moved from body

Please look at the text in Interlingue and actualize this text! Thank you! -

- User:Oui (moved by Deltabeignet)

Classification of Ideas

• The whole thing about classification of ideas is wrong. While there is a classification of ideas, it is only limited to four syllable words. -Rex Imperator

Resource for expanding the article

I have found this Grammar. I have no time, but it has a lot of information which could be added to this article. EoinMahon (talk) 11:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

That's my translation of Gajewski's original text. I can make the translation and the original available to anyone who's interested; I'm not sure the original is still available online. Ansric (talk) 21:48, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Lexical error

This article perpetuates a "correction" that changes original "si" to "ti." (This is why "yes" was originally "si.") Sudre's and Gajewski's texts have "si" throughout. Ansric (talk) 21:41, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I noticed this too, and changed the table to read "si" instead of "ti", because in all the sources I could find on Solresol, "si" was always used. If it should be corrected, then the title of the language should be "Soreso" because we don't use "sol" anymore either - we use "so" instead. Unfortunately the picture can't be changed to say "si" unless someone can use an image editing tool and fix it maybe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GammaAlphaRho (talk • contribs) 23:33, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Sarus link?

The link to Sarus (language) is a redirect to an animator with not context or explanation. Either we need to explain that relationship, or remove this link, it would seem. 128.170.224.10 (talk) 17:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)