Peano’s Interlingua

Something about Peano’s Interlingua which is also called Latino sine flexione. It was heavily criticized by Langelot Hogben. According to Hogben the biggest shortages were a lack of articles and a chance of mixing up verbs with nouns. It is true that nouns has 5 different endings and verbs could have been derived in more explicit way but why linguists did built up the whole new artificial Latin based language instead of revising Peano’s Interlingua.

Peano’ principles of formatting inflexible Latin:


Latin nominative Latin genitive Latino English
1st rosa ros|ae => a rosa rose
2nd laurus laur|i => o lauro laurel
3rd pax pac|is => e pace peace
4th casus cas|us => u casu case
5th series seri|ei => e serie series


  • basic form: ama (loves)
  • infinitive: amare (to love)
  • past participle: amato (loved)
  • present participle: amante (loving)


Number Singular Plural  
1st person me nos  
2nd person te vos  
3rd person Illo (male), illa (female), id (neutral) illos  
Rexlive se se  

Adjectives and adverbs

The rule of building adjectives and adverbs is so obscure that it is best to browse the Peano’s wordlist at:

Then let’s play with the idea that Peano’s Interlingua has the articles. There are no genders in his language so we have to invent only an indefinite and definite article. I thought first that they could be “un” and “la” but la is problematic because Italian articulated prepositions demand that all the articles are linked to prepositions. In Spanish that happens only with de + el and a + el and in Gode’s and Blair’s Interlingua with de + le  and a + le. That’s why I chose “un” and “le” .

Moreover I am not at home with that me-pronoun because it is also the object form in Peano’s Latino. It should be “ego” because we are dealing with simplified Latin. Unfortunately it doesn’t sound good in my ear at least. “Io” is more melodic. The same goes with “te” and we need “tu”. (Perhaps it is the case but this table is deficient.)

Ego da un rosa ad te. dare = to give; ad = to (preposition)
Tu ama rosas. amare = to love, like
Le albo rosas es bello. albo = white; bello = beautiful
Le terra postula pace. terra = earth, world; postulare = to need, demand, ask
Crea amore non bello. make love not war

Here the articles are used as in English.

What about if the verbs inflected after all

We all see that our sentences are in somewhat clumsy when we compare them with modern Romance languages. The Latin verb system is difficult but we don’t have to copy it literally. I think that we can ignore subjunctive and build up present and past perfect using to -ending and habere -verb. At this point I will skip the conditional and future because I haven’t figured anything handy for them.

Present Participle Past Participle
(Ego) habeo + -to (Ego) habebam + -to
(Tu) habes + -to (Tu) habebas + -to
(Illo) habet + -to (Illa) habebat + -to
(Nos) habemus + -to (Nos) habebamus + -to
(Vos) habetis + -to (Vos) habebatis + -to
(Illos) habent + -to (Illos) habebant + -to

Habes (tu) videto le novo domo?
Certe, (ego) habeo videto id. Id habet esseto ibi aliquamdiu.
Cum (ego) habeo venito (le) domo, super le mensa erant flores.
Matre emebat illos.
Ego habeo apportato flores etiam. Non sciebam ut matre habebat emeto illos.
Non problema!

Have you seen the new house?
Sure, I have seen it. It has been there for some time.
When I came home there were flowers on the table.
Mother bought them.
I brought also flowers. I didn’t know that mother had bought them.
No harm done!

PS There might be some mistakes in my post because I haven’t found much information on Peano’s Interlingua. I saw that some of Peano’s articles are on the Internet but it would be too much to ask that I read them through in order to find a couple of words. For example “Matre emebat illos” could be wrong because the new Interlingua has the object form for illos. It is “los”. The rest of the sentences are quite all right. Anyway, I believe that I have showed my point that Peano’s Interlingua could have been revised instead of inventing the whole new Interlingua. Somehow I feel that it would have been better to stick with Latin but what do I know. This kind of simplified Latin would be a good aid in learning the Classical Latin. On the other hand, when linguists decided to build up a new artificial language there was no Internet and English hasn’t the influence it has today, and thus there were a demand for the global language.

It’s great
When we think
© Yelling Rosa
19/11 –15

in Peano’s Interlingua with flexible verbs:

Id est grande
cum nos cogitamus
© Yelling Rosa
19/11 –15


PS Wow, this was fun 😉

About Yelling Rosa

I am retired. In my spare time I read, write, play the guitar and hike. I have published three verse books in Finnish and recorded my songs. You can listen to them on YouTube. I have translated some of my poems on Yelling Rosa's Weblog. I also like to watch movies. Olen kiinnostunut lukemisesta, kirjoittamisesta, kitaransoitosta ja luonnossa vaeltamisesta. Olen julkaissut kolme runokirjaa ja laulujani on äänitteillä. Voit lukea runojani Yelling Rosan kotisivuilta ja kuunnella laulujani YouTubessa. Olen elokuvafriikki.
This entry was posted in Interlingua, Languages, Latin, Poetry, Society, Technology. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Peano’s Interlingua

  1. davidkitz says:

    Id est grande
    cum nos comprendo.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Tania Tome M de Castro says:

    Some of the words are similar to the ones found in the Portuguese language. Of course, Portuguese is a Latin language … I liked to recognize something of my language in this post.


  3. sherazade says:

    It’s really well done and clear but…a little diffult to assimilate.


    Liked by 1 person

    • Yelling Rosa says:

      Hi Shere,
      Thanks for commenting.
      Most likely it is the reason why this Peano’s Interlingua didn’t survive. I conjugated verbs and added the articles but I do not know if it got any better. The way I introduced this language it might be an aid in learning the Classical Latin.
      Have a nice weekend ❤


  4. Serena nox sit tibi!

    Liked by 1 person

  5. sacra vos lingua est …
    lingua sit vobis sacer
    … in lingua est nobilitas…

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yelling Rosa says:

      Thank you for commenting,
      If I understood your message in a right way, you want that languages should not be changed. It is a very good principle but unrealistic, because if languages were sacred, there would be only one language in the world. Even your own language had never seen the daylight.

      To all of us it would be easier if there really were only one language, because being so we were better understood.

      I apologize if I misunderstood your idea here.

      Have a nice weekend ❤

      Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.