Talk:Basic English

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Constructed languages Mid‑importance

	Constructed languages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Constructed languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of constructed languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Constructed languagesWikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languagesTemplate:WikiProject Constructed languagesconstructed language articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

English Language Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Language, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the English language on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.English LanguageWikipedia:WikiProject English LanguageTemplate:WikiProject English LanguageEnglish Language articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

Direct comparison of the same text in regular and Basic English would be helpful

I would like to see the same text, formulated in regular and Basic English, side by side. This would be very helpful to fathom what BE is like. Thanks, Maikel (talk) 08:13, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think we agree on this. Shouldn't be too difficult. Kortoso (talk) 18:08, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Maikel: @Kortoso: Done. As in other conlangs, the Lord's Prayer. With references. --Error (talk) 11:57, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Air Force (RAF)

AFAIK, Basic English was used to teach Polish and Czech pilots. Tabletop (talk) 01:47, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Basic English. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081204112933/http://www.hltmag.co.uk:80/sep05/mart05.htm to http://www.hltmag.co.uk/sep05/mart05.htm#C5
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.rickharrison.com/language/farewell.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060818175724/http://www.langmaker.com:80/outpost/eswldeng.htm to http://www.langmaker.com/outpost/eswldeng.htm
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060818175724/http://www.langmaker.com:80/outpost/eswldeng.htm to http://www.langmaker.com/outpost/eswldeng.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rules section

The rules section seems to be trying to show the differences between it and English, yet only one example is a word not in English. This should be changed to make it clearer how the grammar of this this “language” is distinct from English. DemonDays64 (talk) 00:19, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I understand. Basic English is built from a subset of English, so in principle everything in Basic English is also English (but the reverse is not true). Do you mean that there should be examples of English sentences that are not Basic English?

I don't think the section 'Rules' is trying show differences – at least, that is not what I had in mind when I rewrote it. My intention, and I assume the intention of the earlier editors, was to summarize Ogden's description of the rules for Basic English. Cnilep (talk) 08:47, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What does BASIC stand for?

It seems there is a discrepancy between this article and its corresponding article in Simple English. This article states that BASIC is a backronym for British American Scientific International and Commercial English whereas the Simple English article states that it stands for Business Academic Scientific International Commercial English instead. kawion (￣ω￣ ) (talk) 05:31, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]