Ci, in pa-tem, es poli interese sti-ma-boni sugesti pro Glosa!

— In glo= salist@yahoogroups.com, “patbe91” <patbe91@…> wrote:

Hello!

I a= m new to glosa and I am strongly convinced by the basic idea of concept-= words, the affixes and much more.

I have read the ‘seminar1’ problems= . I still think that no language should be misused by trying to translat= e word by word and see if it works. Any language has its own way of expr= ession and trying to copy a european-language sentence directly into glo= sa is likely to fail.

Nevertheless, I have had quite some problems und= erstanding glosa sentences. And although writing in glosa might look eas= y at first sight, I think it is in fact difficult to avoid ambiguities. = This has already been discussed here before, and I think the fact that = most conversation here takes place in English is hinting at this probl= em. In my opinion Daniel Macouin has some good ideas to improve the lang= uage, however, as he remarks, ‘heavy’ ones. Perhaps some more English ‘b= enchmark sentences’ are needed which would be translated into standard g= losa and variants like pan-glosa, as a basis for discussing precision an= d elegance.

I like Daniel Macouin’s ideas but also propose here anothe= r solution for one of the problems.

My example sentence is:

= U paleo kali avi kanta…

Does the above mean: “The old beautiful bi= rd sings…” or “The old, beautiful bird-tune…” or “The Old sings beau= tiful bird-tunes…” is not immediately obvious, it is hidden in the sem= antics. We need to mark the noun. In fact glosa already has noun-markers= . The U is marking the noun, however I really do not understand why it i= s not placed next to the noun, like:

Paleo kali u avi kanta.

T= his would immediately signal to the reader that kanta is NOT the noun, b= ut avi is. This way, the U would serve two goals, to signal number and S= ubject of the sentence. Did I miss any reason for placing the “U” at the= beginning of the sentence, except for being similar to English?

= This was my simple suggestion. But nevertheless, Pan-Glosa has better = changes to offer.

The “ge” to mark ‘verbs of state’ =3D adjectives is= a very nice thing. We still think too much in the categories of europea= n grammar, I think.

In fact, when we say in glosa

“U avi habe = (u) ponde”, “U avi es ponde” and “U avi ponde”; A bird has a weight, a b= ird is heavy, a bird weighs…

In all three cases we mean that “a bird= has the property of weight”. All other differences are differences of E= uropean grammatical categories. And because of this, some English people= try to avoid the word “be”. A bird is not a weight! It is ambiguous and= not very elegant.

So I do not like the “es” very much and to indi= cate that ponde is a noun is not necessary. So although glosa explicitly= wants to avoid the pseudo-information which exists in these Europein-st= yle constructs, it we can write glosa like this. But at the same time it=

does not provide unambiguous ways of expressing the real content: Th= e interrelation of a noun’s properties and actions, where it lacks some = markers. On the other hand the Chinese property-marker is ‘de’ in the or= der adjective - de - noun. weight - de - avi

So I think “U avi ge pond= e” is much more elegant than glosa’s options and “noun - property marker=

• property - action marker - action” really seems a good scheme, in my = opinion.

I myself had tried to implement such a scheme by using “qa” a= s the property “qalita” marker and “ak” as the “aktio” marker before = reading Daniel’s posts:

E.g. “Tri dromo-pe qa celero e fo-sono e exces= i sudo e alti keiro ak dice qa celero e excita e fo-sono tem dromo.”

= Or also:

Celero e fo-sono e excesi sudo e alti keiro (plu) tri dromo= -pe ak dice qa celero e excita e fo-sono tem dromo.

But ge and go a= re of course equivalent.

I think pan-glosa might be:

Celero fo\s= ono excesi\sono alti\keiro tri dromo-pe go dice ge celero excita fo\sono= tem dromo.

I still contemplate if “jo” and “li” are needed.

= Jo Pan-glosa go es li u evolve de Glosa …

is more complicated than

Pan-glosa ge u evolve de Glosa …

or even shorter:

Pan-glosa= ge evolve de Glosa …

I will continue thinking about that.

P= atrick