Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: [glosalist] Re: Glosa's Improvement and Progress (An Answer to Oleg)(Revised thrice!) :(

myaleee nimah (myaleee nimah <myaleee@...>) on April 9, 2010

Dear Zhenyu Please send me an email about your modified English! You are br= illiant!

From: Zhenyu <lizhenyu_god@h=> To: Sent: Thu, April 8, 2010 7:10:46 = PM Subject: [glosalist] Re: Glosa’s Improvement and Progress (An Answer to = Oleg)(Revised thrice!) :(

Dear Myaleee, I’m delighted to accept your in= vitation, also will go on helping you with your new auxlang based on Glosa = –Glisi’s creation as per your way. Speaking of my improvement to Glosa, if= Glosa’s author doesn’t take it, I’d like to rename it Munda-glosa. I’m int= erested in improving any language including native ones. (I ever improved E= nglish individually as Glosa and Mondlango ways. If anyone would like to vi= ew them, I’m glad to give a show here!) :D More replies will follow. Salut= a! Li Zhenyu

— In glosalist@yahoogrou, myaleee nimah <myaleee@..= . > wrote:

dear lizhenyu_god

your opinions are illuminating and in= teresting! I like also LFN(read about it in wikipedia): its words are alw= ays natural (from romance languages), grammar is the simplest I have seen, = very clear to read and write. Anyone can suggest changes (Mr Boeree the cre= ator, is there to discuss changes)! It is user-generated, like wikipedia, y= outube!




____ __= _ _______ __ From: Zhenyu <lizhenyu_god@ …> To: glosalist@yahoogr= ou Sent: Thu, April 8, 2010 5:58:17 AM Subject: [glosalist] Re: = Glosa’s Improvement and Progress (An Answer to Oleg)(Revised thrice!) :( =

Dear Oleg, Firstly about me,Haha! regrettably I’m not a lawyer! How= ever, I want to be a lawyer, judge, especially improver for Auxlangs! Haha!= All those roles are finally for the only easiest and most exact perfect co= mmunication. In my mind, Glosa and Mondlango are more advanced than other o= nes, but which both need to be furthermore improved in a contrary way. Glos= a needs some improvement for even more exact expression by changing the old= mechanics into the new ones(as I proposed before). Mondlango needs to redu= ce some unnessary and irregular forms, Exp: “mias, yias, hias, xias, jias, = lias, muas, yuas, huas, xuas, juas, luas, sias; kius, tius, ius, and nius” = should be regularly replaced by “mio, yio, hio, xio, jio, lio, muo, yuo, hu= o, xuo, juo, luo, sio, kiuo( Adj.=3Dkiua), tiuo( Adj.=3Dtiua), iuo( Adj.=3D= iua), and niuo( Adj.=3Dniua) (“-s” forever for “plural”. kius=3Dplural of “= kiu”, tius=3Dplural of “tiu”, etc.).

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

M= r. Miller is right on his discription of Esperanto trying to be “Exact”and = Glosa “the Fastest”. My own opinions are as follows:

Esperanto’s word = order can be changeable maximally as speakers wish, just by having a comple= x grammar which is a must for that to show every word its own gramatical fu= nction. People have to pay much attention to every complex word’s form, whi= ch 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 complicati= on, even it’s exact enough in expression!

Glosa’s word order, contrar= ily to Esperanto, is stable, therefore it’s grammar can be simple and witho= ut parts of speech. In most of the situations it can clearly show every wor= d’s invisible part of speech–the grammar function, but still has several l= eaks or loopholes(unclear expressing ways) as I indicated before. For me, G= losa’s really simple in speaking and writing, but occasionally some situati= ons make me puzzled in hearing and reading! I still think Glosa has a great= est prospect! (My proposals given as per the Glosa’s own way, theoretically= should be acceptable for making itself even more exact in expression. ) =

Mondlango (including other Esperanto’s offsprings) is just between Glosa= and Esperanto, quite near Esperanto in grammar but too far from the word s= ourcing of Esperanto and the clever words-compounding of Glosa, as it’s qui= te pro-English so that some call it the Fake English. I think Mondlango can= learn even more from Closa in words-compounding. Exp:aktwordo=3D verbo(act= ion- word,verb) ,kwalitwordo/ deskribwordo=3D adjekto(quality- word,descrip= tion -word, adjective), yerdeko=3Ddekado( year-ten, decade) {derives from “= yercento=3Dcentury, yermilo=3Dmillenium” } mon-dekuno/mon- 11=3Dnovembro( n= ovember) {Numerals after nouns for distinguishment from “dek/cent/mil yero(= s)”–(ten, hundred,thousand years),yercento was centyero in the early time = of MDL}, maxinhumo=3Droboto( machine-man, robot),langjuro=3D gramatiko( lan= guage- legal,grammer) .In the end, basically the current Mondlango has no c= onfusion and also is easier in grammar, but with a lot of English-like word= s which need people to memorize purely. Mondlango will continually go g= reater after it gets more improvement like I proposed above!

There is = another type of auxlang named Lojban, literally “Logical Language”, which i= s quite fresh and different to the pro-native ones like Glosa, Mondlango, M= ondlango, etc. in grammar and words. I just began studying it and hard to t= ell whether it’s good or not, however it has given me some puzzles at the b= eginning in its words and grammar.

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

Saluta! L= i Zhenyu

— In glosalist@yahoogrou, “topdeboo” <topdeboo@ = .> wrote:

Hello, Li Zhenyu,

Thanks a lot for you= r clever and detailed explanations of the way the Glosa words are pronounce= d in those sample files from 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 dictionaries 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 with the most convincing excuse. As for myself, I’m ra= ther an impassive person, so I’ll always try to observe the regulations giv= en in the official guide; judging by your remarks, I understand them correc= tly.

I’ve read your other posts of today, they are all very intere= sting. I wish I had knowledge of Glosa enough to assess your proposals. I c= an only say that at the Russian forum about Esperanto where I heard of Glos= a for the first time one of the members gave an example of the indistinguis= hable (by ear) words “an bovi” (his ox) and “an-bovi” (male ox) as a proof = of the insufficient accuracy of Glosa. For now, I wonder if Glosa grammar a= llows to translate two of your examples (from your another post) in this ma= nner (to convey the meaning more precisely): his or her friends =3D pl= u ami de an alo de fe he or her friends =3D an alo plu ami de fe.

= Best regards, Oleg

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

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

Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: [glosalist] Re: Glosa's Improvement and Progress (An Answer to Oleg)(Revised thrice!) :( - Committee on language planning, FIAS. Coordination: Vergara & Hardy, PhDs.