Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: Pan-glosa

Daniel MACOUIN ("Daniel MACOUIN" <lenadi_moucina@...>) on November 7, 2007

— In, “Llu=EDs Batlle” <viriketo@…> wrote:

= I don’t think Esperanto has a bad grammar. I simply think that glosa ha= s a better dictionary.

Also me! Really, I like very much the Esperanto’s s= ystem and I think that the Glosa’s vortaro is a nice thing.

I don’t prop= ose basing anything on word endings.

The endings are the basically system = in Esperanto to recognize the word-role, and we can nicely use them with fr= eedom. Glosa, without endings, need an other system to give a same liberty.= So the problem stay : how understand what word explain the action, what wo= rd is a noun, what word is a modifier…

I’d like glosa to fulfill my t= hird need, although you may not agree with it.

I am in accord with you! 1)= to can say what I want to say 2)others can understand what I want to say 3)= and nobody depreciate my style! I look for this : each expresses himself as= he can, the only condition is that the others understand. This need any ru= les, the way for learn the rules is a problem of pedagogy, important but di= fferent.


Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: Pan-glosa - Committee on language planning, FIAS. Coordination: Vergara & Hardy, PhDs.