Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: [glosalist] Re: Lojban

chris duncan (chris duncan <krisdunncan@...>) on November 9, 2010

A really helpful contribution: thanks xshadowsoulx.

On 6 November 2010 02:= 59, xShadowSoulx <shadowxsoul@…> wrote:

i have personnaly st= udied lojban, and i find it to be a very bad choice for an auxlang, mostl= y because of its grammar. i also never like the phonology since it allows= alot of bizarre consonant clusters.

it is astoundingly alien and takes= up way too much memory to learn. there is no language on this planet tha= t relies solely on word order like lojban does to differentiate gramatica= l case. the only cases where you see this, this is only used for the nomi= native and maybe the direct object (as in english).

however, there is= something similar you can do that can infact work, it was something i to= yed with while working on my own auxlang. it is a concept called ‘coverbs= ‘ that do exist in alot of languages. let me give an example:

let’s say= we had two sentences:

i am going to my home and

i am going from = the store

in a language that used coverbs, there would be no prepostion= here. instead each would use a seperate verb. so these sentences would l= ook something like:

i go-to home i go-from store

here’s the int= eresting part: if we wanted to say the sentence “I am going to my home fr= om the store”, we simple combine the two sentences together like so:

= i go-to home go-from store.

i believe chinese does this, so maybe the c= hinese guy where-ever he is could detail it more.

– C. D .


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

Fast links: Interglossa » Glosa »

Re: [glosalist] Re: Lojban - Committee on language planning, FIAS. Coordination: Vergara & Hardy, PhDs.