Re: [glosalist] Re: Better grammar discussion

dear patrick and daniel i think that the things people are saying about glosa is that there are various styles of the one language. if for instance, you wanted to write poetry, you would be free with word order and grammar. if you needed to give precise instructions you would need some sort of strict grammar. both styles have their places in glosa - here are some thoughts about the more strict grammar. “yesterday, the men went to london” we can divide the sentence into “essential” section and “extra”(= “yesterday”). the essential section can be divided into “indicated” part(=”the men”) and “information” part which can also be divded into 2 “went” and “to london” the indicating part carries number - single/plural, the first part of information carries time - past present and future ( “went”=past). the second information part is more variable. I have been interested in glosa for about 30 or 40 years and often found it difficult to understand what has been written in glosa, my memory has become worse over the years so i call in the help of my computer to translate
english to glosa and back. i first sketch the english into my version of glosa
grammar and have the computer replace the “english” with glosa words.i.e. “ths man dd go to london “ “ths” is the introducing word of the phrase- “ths=a/the” plural, “th=a/the” singular”, “man” = the head word (noun - countable word). the number is carried by the introducing word/ “dd”=did so:-
“ yesterday , ths man dd go to london “
type this in and get pa-di , plu andro pa ki a #( ## london ## )#
the fuss around “london” shows that the word is not in my glosa/english dictionary

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]