Dear Oleg, Firstly about me,Haha! regrettably I’m not a lawyer! However, I = want to be a lawyer, judge, especially improver for Auxlangs! Haha! All tho= se roles are finally for the only easiest and most exact perfect communicat= ion. In my mind, Glosa and Mondlango are more advanced than other ones, but= which both need to be furthermore improved in a contrary way. Glosa needs = some improvement for even more exact expression by changing the old mechani= cs into the new ones(as I proposed before). Mondlango needs to reduce some = unnessary and irregular forms, Exp: “mias, yias, hias, xias, jias, lias, mu= as, yuas, huas, xuas, juas, luas, sias; kius, tius, ius, and nius” should b= e regularly replaced by “mio, yio, hio, xio, jio, lio, muo, yuo, huo, xuo, = juo, luo, sio, kiuo( Adj.=3Dkiua), tiuo( Adj.=3Dtiua), iuo( Adj.=3Diua), an= d niuo( Adj.=3Dniua) (“-s” forever for “plural”. kius=3Dplural of “kiu”, ti= us=3Dplural of “tiu”, etc.).

Haha! Funny! No? Maybe I should put my words = on Mondlango at the Mondlango’s forum, but not here! :D

Mr. Miller is rig= ht on his discription of Esperanto trying to be “Exact”and Glosa “the Faste= st”. My own opinions are as follows:

Esperanto’s word order can be changea= ble maximally as speakers wish, just by having a complex grammar which is a= must for that to show every word its own gramatical function. People have = to pay much attention to every complex word’s form, which really makes too = much touble in speaking and writing (Maybe also hard in hearing, I haven’t = tried before!). For me, I hate to afford its complication, even it’s exact = enough in expression!

Glosa’s word order, contrarily to Esperanto, is sta= ble, therefore it’s grammar can be simple and without parts of speech. In m= ost of the situations it can clearly show every word’s invisible part of sp= eech–the grammar function, but still has several leaks or loopholes(unclea= r expressing ways) as I indicated before. For me, Glosa’s really simple in = speaking and writing, but occasionally some situations make me puzzled in h= earing and reading! I still think Glosa has a greatest prospect! (My propos= als given as per the Glosa’s own way, theoretically should be acceptable fo= r making itself even more exact in expression. )

Mondlango (including othe= r Esperanto’s offsprings) is just between Glosa and Esperanto, quite near E= speranto in grammar but too far from the word sourcing of Esperanto and the= clever words-compounding of Glosa, as it’s quite pro-English so that some = call it the Fake English. I think Mondlango can learn even more from Closa = in words-compounding. Exp:aktwordo=3Dverbo(action-word,verb),kwalitwordo/de= skribwordo=3Dadjekto(quality-word,description-word, adjective), yerdeko=3Dd= ekado(year-ten,decade) {derives from “yercento=3Dcentury, yermilo=3Dmilleni= um”} mon-dekuno/mon-11=3Dnovembro(november){Numerals after nouns for distin= guishment from “dek/cent/mil yero(s)”–(ten,hundred,thousand years),yercent= o was centyero in the early time of MDL}, maxinhumo=3Droboto(machine-man,ro= bot),langjuro=3Dgramatiko(language-legal,grammer).In the end, basically the= current Mondlango has no confusion and also is easier in grammar, but with= a lot of English-like words which need people to memorize purely. Mondlang= o will continually go greater after it gets more improvement like I propose= d above!

There is another type of auxlang named Lojban, literally “Logical= Language”, which is quite fresh and different to the pro-native ones like = Glosa, Mondlango, Mondlango, etc. in grammar and words. I just began studyi= ng it and hard to tell whether it’s good or not, however it has given me so= me puzzles at the beginning in its words and grammar.

Finally, as I said a= t the beginning, Glosa and Mondlango are the two best auxlangs currently.

= Saluta! Li Zhenyu

— In glosalist@yahoogroups.com, “topdeboo” <topde= boo@…> wrote:

Hello, Li Zhenyu,

Thanks a lot for your clev= er and detailed explanations of the way the Glosa words are pronounced in t= hose sample files from glosa.org. Are you not a lawyer, by the way? :-) =

Sometimes, just like what happens to many languages usually, people

don’t follow the rules of the common or unpassionate standard stress= which means the stress wouldn’t be on where it ought to as in diction= aries but on the passionate syllable that people want to as their mood.=

You’ve persuaded me completely that the readers must have made those = shifts of the stressed vowels in the heat of passion, which provides them w= ith the most convincing excuse. As for myself, I’m rather an impassive pers= on, so I’ll always try to observe the regulations given in the official gui= de; judging by your remarks, I understand them correctly.

I’ve read yo= ur other posts of today, they are all very interesting. I wish I had knowle= dge of Glosa enough to assess your proposals. I can only say that at the Ru= ssian forum about Esperanto where I heard of Glosa for the first time one o= f the members gave an example of the indistinguishable (by ear) words “an b= ovi” (his ox) and “an-bovi” (male ox) as a proof of the insufficient accura= cy of Glosa. For now, I wonder if Glosa grammar allows to translate two of = your examples (from your another post) in this manner (to convey the meanin= g more precisely): his or her friends =3D plu ami de an alo de fe he o= r her friends =3D an alo plu ami de fe.

Best regards, Oleg