Re: [glosalist] new to Glosa and I have questions

well i would love to, i’ve actually had thoughts about making a ‘glosa 2’ o= r ‘glosa bi’. but that’s mostly because of my ideas of alternate grammar (w= hich isn’t desperately necessary, it’s just me interested in incorporating = features i’ve seen in other languages and tried to use in my own failed aux= lang, such as the lack of obligatory tense marking and removing the rule th= at all sentences need to have a stated subject) =A0 simply using alternate = vocabulary words wouldn’t classify as another language. judging by the larg= e number of greek-based alternatives, i’m guessing someone=A0else has alrea= dy tried to remedy the problem. it makes sense to use latin as the basis fo= r the vocabulary, but latin was a highly ambiguous language, and it’s obvio= us that glosa inhereted alot of the language’s ambiguities. =A0 though hone= stly, as a linguist myself who has obsessed over the idea of auxlangs (incl= uding working on one of my own for years only to never accomplish anything)= , i seriously doubt it could function as a global interlingua, though i do= =A0agree it’s probably the best attempt i’ve seen. i’m just learning it bec= ause it’s easy and pretty. =A0 by the way, i just remembered something: fix= ing the fact that the word for ‘naked’ is also the word for ‘today’. that c= ould be easily fixed without modifying the language. there’s two main solut= ions: use a new compound word: no-vesti or no-pa-vesti to mean ‘naked’ (lit= erally ‘undressed’)instead or to simply say minus vesti (without clothes) l= ike esperanto does (technically esperanto uses the compound word senvesta, = but esperanto is a highly=A0agglutinating language where=A0virtually every = word is a compound word=A0and glosa is an isolating language where most wor= ds have no more than one morpheme). =A0 you could potentially do stuff like= this to fix every ambiguity in the language, just conjure up work-arounds = for all of them!

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